> Those colleges and universities that figure out how to organize research and teach new foundations and polymathy and prepare their students to understand a world in which every system, at every scale, acts causally on others, will see their stock rise. The rest will struggle to remain relevant.<p>It is safe to say that this prediction did not come to pass. The system (pun) keeps churning idiot-savants, well-trained cogs in the giant machine that society had been reduced to.
There is so much pressure to be a specialist in today's corporate world. Specialists are like cogs in a machine - they can be swapped in and out with relative ease, compared to a generalist part/employee that does a lot of undefined, important tasks. Specialists are like puzzle pieces of a very precise shape, while generalists are like natural materials with no two sharing the same shape.<p>Tech companies consider their brain trusts like they consider their machines - a conglomeration of specialized systems with specific tasks and roles. They want us all to be square pegs that fit into their square holes. I find myself frustrated with this method of work, especially when mentors and managers suggest that we all should give in to this specialist mindset and train up in one specific area, to the detriment of other fields.<p>The world is endlessly fascinating and I want to learn about it all. I want to live in different places, learn different skills, have different chapters in my life with different focuses. I can't bear the thought that 10 years from now, my mind might be exactly the same as it is today, with no growth and no difference in thinking. I think a great way to avoid that stagnation is to think different thoughts, to change one's mind frequently, and to not get sucked into shortcuts for thinking.<p>One common shortcut prevalent in Western society currently is that profitability is a direct proxy for value, and that we must constantly maximize value/profitability. "Hustle culture" is a great example of this - is there something you enjoy in your life? Monetize it! Don't consider the fact that the pursuit of money might actually destroy your love of the hobby. It's happened to me before, and I'm very cautious now of letting this exchange of joy for money happen to my other hobbies as well.
Great piece. One of the best places cultivating this type of polymathy today is Stanford's Symbolic Systems Program. <a href="https://symsys.stanford.edu/" rel="nofollow">https://symsys.stanford.edu/</a>
> If one is looking for a single label to encompass many of the new foundations – perhaps to form a new school or department – I would suggest Systems.<p>What about good old philosophy?<p>Philosophy already has a long tradition of birthing new sciences, a long tradition of encouraging polymath thinking and a long tradition of estabilishing foundational ways of thinking.
A few books which I enjoyed that are somewhat on the subject of polymathy:<p>- The Polymath by Waqas Ahmed. This one directly discusses polymathy in history, and how our "natural state" really is of that of the polymath, not the specialist. A nice book that helped me get past some mental blocks and really embrace learning whatever it is I'm interested in, without reservations on what others may think about such "distractions".<p>- The Creative Way by Rick Rubin. This masterpiece is written by a legendary musical producer who has probably worked with one of your favorite Western musicians at some point. His Zen-inspired approach to creativity and acceptance of ideas, wherever they may come from, is an essential tool in any polymath's toolbox.<p>- How We Got to Now by Steven Johnson. I really enjoyed learning how the world-changing inventions that we take for granted were often invented by creatively gluing together wildly divergent ideas, to ultimately make something that appears deceptively simple.<p>The key takeaway for me is that anyone and everyone can be a polymath, with the correct attitude. Learning is not a skill reserved only for the most intelligent and capable - everyone is capable of learning anything they want. Some people may be more naturally skilled, but that doesn't preclude the rest of us from participating.
One of the best things going at my Uni (Cornell) in my mind is not that they have a data science major [1] but that they have a data science minor that goes with anything from literature to biology [2].<p>[1] not sure I, as an applications programmer, want to hire that person because they're too focused on writing the April 2024 sales report and not on developing the process to make the monthly sales report.<p>[2] (talk about putting your skills and knowledge on wheels!
If anyone thinks they can be educated into polymathy they've already lost.<p>Be interested enough in many things and spend 5+ cumulative years working on each of those things.
If you find this interesting, you might enjoy this old interview with the founder of the CLT, a competitor to the SAT that's intended to create incentives for schools to teach a more classical curriculum: <a href="https://www.listennotes.com/podcasts/philosophy-of/educating-for-virtue-a-FuRfgdxoADE/" rel="nofollow">https://www.listennotes.com/podcasts/philosophy-of/educating...</a>
... would be good. But it's been a decade and I think we're further from a society of polymaths now than we were then.<p>I'm lucky enough to have been able to afford a constant trickle of college classes for the last 20 years. It's awesome. I get so much more out of it than my younger full-time classmates are. But it requires a lot of sacrifice. I probably wouldn't be on this path if I had had kids, for instance.<p>So as nice as it feels to get excited about polymathy, I'd rather we take steps to make it normal.
I've been on the fence about generalists vs specialists debate for a while now. Although people love to bring up examples of outstanding geniuses like da Vinci, it seems society as a whole moves towards specialists.<p>Natural selection shows that cooperating specialists do better. So I'm not so sure how useful are these efforts to educate new generations of polymaths.
just sounds like teaching more students philosophy, but now the dominant philosophy is systems theory. which i super agree with. systems are relevant everywhere from literature to engineering.
i agree with everyone else who has said true polymathy can't be taught.
> Universities have an opportunity and an obligation to train polymaths. The opportunity comes from the emergence of new foundations that unify fields. The obligation arises because humanity’s pressing problems are not neatly confined within academic disciplines. However, the divisive organizations of academic departments and curricula make it hard for faculty and students to understand systemic problems such as climate change, biological diversity, sustainability, and poverty.
Universities might be judged harshly in future for promoting specialization and a cult of expertise
when they could have been training new generations of scholars to understand systems as systems.<p>I absolutely love the general idea the essay promotes - it is completely in line with my opinions in what academia <i>should be</i>.<p>Unfortunately, the author chooses to ignore the elephant in the room: who is going to pay for it? Students are already saddling themselves with six figures of debt in the US, in Germany it's at least tens of thousands of euros to cover costs of living, and that doesn't allow for "unproductivity" aka learning stuff not relevant to one's degree that isn't mandatory - and even worse, at least in Germany you <i>have to</i> finish your degree in a specified time or you'll get forcibly kicked out. Society doesn't give a fuck either, education budgets have been slashed for decades now, partially causing the debt issue in the US as well as the very rigorous rules in Europe. And that's noticeable in all the "liberal arts" and other non-STEM degree programs as well - a degree in these courses doesn't result in high-paying jobs, which means they're mostly rich/affluent kids that can afford it, and some of them like Slavic studies have barely any students left at all (which explains both the quality of online discussions regarding anything Eastern European and the quality of Western politics regarding these countries - the reactions to the Russian invasion were so shameful because there were barely any qualified experts to guide politicians!).<p>And to make it worse than it already is, there is a second <i>even larger</i> elephant in the room: the purpose of academia has been completely perverted over the last decades, ever since the "push for education". Many universities these days are effectively reduced to being degree mills. Employers don't care about degrees, they care about universities weeding out undesirable employee candidates (the poor, the disabled, students with mental health issues etc pp - there's been many studies done on social strata and academic achievements) so they don't violate anti-discrimination laws or risk "duds". Capitalism has perverted and weaponized academia.<p>(I could go off on a tangentially related issue - who is funding academia in the first place, "chasing grants" taking away research and education time, Germany and its infamous job insecurity for anyone employed in academia and not on a tenure/professorship track, but the comment is long and rant-y enough as it is...)
my solution to this has been do a base degree, then chip away at new areas with diplomas or graduate diplomas/certificates and enlarge my knowledge base that way. besides just reading lots of stuff.
For those without means understanding is a luxury, for many with, it is merely aesthetic. Matching drive with opportunity could unlock humanistic discovery but it is far more likely to be done artificially given the way we organize our societies.
Polymathy or Jack of all trades mentality is the new self-help. Ever since I started this journey in 2022, I've become a better writer, more fit, and motivated overall.<p>I recommend building your polymathy journey like RPG stats. Your five stats are: Strength, Intellect, Creativity, Spritituality, and Charisma. Then you tie your hobbies together with these stats. If you feel like one of your stats is low, then you practice it.<p>Reading Range and Thinking Like Leonardo Da Vinci will also teach you to think like a multidisciplinary thinker. The hardest part of this path is balancing your time, but the trade off is amazing. Even though I'm not a super-genius, I feel like I can do anything I put my mind on.