But here’s the problem: The idea that an improving score guarantees that you’re approaching the objective is wrong. ... This situation, when the objective function is a false compass, is called deception, which is a fundamental problem in search.

Because most interesting inventions are simply the most recent fruits of chains of ideas spanning centuries, they too will necessarily depend upon a prior invention created for an entirely different purpose. In fact, stretching this line of thinking to its logical conclusion leads to a provocative hypothesis about invention in general: Almost no prerequisite to any major invention was invented with that invention in mind. ... Electricity was not discovered with computation in mind, or even with vacuum tubes in mind, and neither were vacuum tubes invented to foster building computers. We simply lack the foresight to comprehend what one discovery will later make possible.

While it seems like discussing objectives leads to one paradox after another, this idea really should make sense. Aren’t the greatest moments and epiphanies in life so often unexpected and unplanned? Serendipity can play an outsize role in life.

And while this treasure-hunting approach will not ensure reaching any particular objective, what it will do is accumulate stepping stones that lead to unfamiliar places. The treasure hunter is an opportunistic explorer—searching for anything and everything of value, without a care for what might be found. To be a treasure hunter, you have to collect as many stepping stones as you can, because you never know which one might lead somewhere valuable.