💾 Archived View for midnight.pub › replies › 821 captured on 2024-03-21 at 16:02:07. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

I agree with everything already written, and have just two small observations to add.

The first is that, as abacushex says, polymathy is "curiosity put to work". This is well phrased. It clarifies that polymathy is a practice, not simply a perspective. Many people with singular talent are curious about lots of things but only investigate one to any notable depth. When a variety of interests are investigated deeply, when connections are made between them, this is polymathy.

It raises the question, though—curiosity about what, exactly? I know my own answer...I can't really put into words why I try to become familiar with as many things as I do, but I sense, at least, that I'm in pursuit of a more refined image of the structure of all things. I think of each pursuit as a different dot on the graph; the more of them I gather, the better I can project and estimate the overall patterns, the overall structures of the totality of my being. For example, by studying literature, you learn about literature, and can only really speak about literature on that basis; but if you study literature and painting, you can begin to speak about art more generally because of the commonalities you'll find between visual and written artistic communication. So it is with everything.

I also wanted to mention Ken Wilber's Integral Theory, since it might be of interest to aspiring polymaths. Now, be warned that a lot of the work surrounding Integral Theory can seem dogmatic, esoteric, unjustifiably metaphysical, or worse. However, the most basic elements—especially the four quadrants of the AQAL model—have been of surprising usefulness in keeping my perspectives and studies straight, and continue to open up useful parallels between them which I doubt I would have stumbled upon otherwise.

Write a reply

Replies

~uirapuru wrote (thread):

That is true, when you dabble in several fields, but not deeply or don't integrate them, you are a dilletante. Alas, I cannot claim I'm a polymath yet, only that I'm pursing this path. For many years I've felt constrained and kind of burdened whenever I spent much time in something other than my main area of study, feeling that if I did that I would be mediocre at most in all of them, now I don't feel like that anymore, but I do try to organize my pursuits. I have a tendency to get obsessed quickly with something and then forget it, but not forever, I transition between topics of interest regularly, that is what I'm trying to organize to best use my focus.

Another interest point is, what is "deep enough"? That is why I think about "working knowledge", which is the point where you can start to integrate disparate fields meaningfully. Of course you can always improve from there.

I like your way of thinking, trying to see the pattern and structure of things, and this is engrained in yourself, like the holistic being you are.