201–210 of 325 posts
Why does it matter and why would that sway from the only practical idea you had?
If you are passionate about something and find a practical use just follow that passion.
It seems to me that you're unconsciously eager to take excuses for your own inaction, but I would suggest you to be brave rather than correct on this particular itch you have.
Read a couple of books by Barbara sher: Refuse to choose [0] She calls people like us "Scanners" and claims that our diversity of interests is not a weakness, but a strength. Then goes on techniques to make this skill work for us. [0] https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1594863032/
It's only a strength if you have a strong base and a way to tie things together. Being interested in a bunch of disparate fields is not in itself useful. In fact for most people it's probably completely useless, because you're going to suck at everything. Ex: OP wants to read "textbooks to learn basic concepts" and "swim in their ideas". That doesn't equal competence. However, if you have strong expertise in a partic…
Think back to college, to your friends who actually got degrees in various specialties. How many of them actually closely read even five of the books in the curriculum, took detailed notes, and thoroughly understood the material?
A motivated autodidact can do that in a couple months (about how long I manage to stay interested in any one topic). Understanding that 20% of the knowledge in the field really does tend to make you 80% "competent." I find that I can have "competent amateur"-level conversations with specialists in a subject after just that much effort.
From there, it's all a question of whether you want to move toward expertise. Becoming an expert takes MUCH more time, energy, and effort.
What normally happens for me is that, after reaching the level of competence on a broad subject, I may come across a subspecialty or two that inspire me to reach competence on them. That's the layer deeper.
That doesn't usually happen right after the broad review. It usually happens a few cycles later, but because I engaged the material and made notes on it, I can refresh what I knew from my overview and be prepared to dive deeper.
It opens up interesting conversations (I know something about an incredible variety of things, so can usually engage someone in a conversation about something that matters to them). It allows me to connect ideas that make me seem "creative" in any one particular field.
In other words it's a very engaging, fun way to live! And not nearly as daunting a thing as it seems if you mistake building expertise with building competence.
Being a polymath is just really good fun if you let it be!
I was going to suggest writing, and I'll go one further: Do write a blog, but don't just write a blog. Write a blog, and then create a video for each blog post, and upload it to YouTube (where the eyeballs willing to consume intellectual material are). Also do livestreams. Start interviewing anyone who will take you seriously. Set a goal for who your dream interviewee is. Do this for a couple years, putting out conte…
Is it possible they're more capable/interesting/competent than you are? Sure, but in all likelihood, it's actually just the discipline to keep doing it and iterating to make it better that separates you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I fall into this group. I've so far found it to be a strength (mostly). R&D/prototype style work benefits highly from having generalists around. Most normal people just don't have a lot of breadth in terms of knowing what else is out there or what's been done outside of a narrowly defined field. 95% of the time you'll be greeted with a "huh...interesting" and no follow up, but in my experience that remaining 5% can b…
"R&D/prototype style work" That sounds great, but it also sounds rare and potentially low paid.
I'm very similar and would just give you two pieces of advice: (1) buy books compulsively and don't do your research predominantly online, and (2) make sure you write often, whether or not you publish your work or keep it to yourself. I think the latter is the most important advice for those trying to pursue an intellectual path outside of academia -- if you don't develop a habit of writing, you aren't really synthes…
> It's very easy to get a visa if you're involved in the tech industry I'm interested in more info on THAT!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I feel that you can assign a separate IQ-like score to many different components of human intelligence. I score badly on book comprehension relative to other components. I find it easier to concentrate for an hour or two on a video than a book. I'm probably slightly dyslexic or something. At university I made sure I never missed a lecture but hardly ever read a book. I did above averagely well. This is a disadvantage…
> I find it easier to concentrate for an hour or two on a video than a book. That is because video does not requires you to concentrate. Imagine a book which is required to be read in 1x or 1.25x or 1.5x or 2x only. Pretty impossible to read, isn't it? You know, some paragraphs may require several hours to be read. Video just doesn't support to be consumed at different speeds per paragraph.
I suspect this is at the root of disagreements about 'visual learners', etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It's very easy to get a visa if you're involved in the tech industry I'm interested in more info on THAT!
https://technation.io/visa/
But you think it's very easy? I wonder what I'm missing.
Other brief googling research.... it might require you to be earlier in your career (first five years?) than I am?
Some people give talks on interesting subjects, some people write blogs, some people write books, some folks start podcasts. Some people make games to explore new ideas.