Live data from Hacker News

A Return to Polymathy (2015) [pdf]

paulrcohen.github.io

1–10 of 82 posts

Re: A Return to Polymathy (2015) [pdf]

#5
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.

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.

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.

Re: A Return to Polymathy (2015) [pdf]

#8

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. 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 pra…

[deleted]

Re: A Return to Polymathy (2015) [pdf]

#9

Great piece. One of the best places cultivating this type of polymathy today is Stanford's Symbolic Systems Program. https://symsys.stanford.edu/

I'll also plug St. John's College. https://www.sjc.edu

Definitely. This, plus a graduate degree in a more specific field, and you end up with a very well-rounded education.

Re: A Return to Polymathy (2015) [pdf]

#10

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.

> For those without means understanding is a luxury

Saying that those without wealth are barred from genuine understanding reduces learning to a matter of money. Plenty of us with limited resources develop deep insights by way of libraries, conversations, online education, or other active seeking in the margins of what time and means permit.

That proposition also throws away personal agency by framing understanding as something that happens only if external conditions allow it, rather than admitting each person’s power to seek knowledge and push beyond circumstance.

Your second sentence feels more balanced, setting up a good question: how do we bootstrap Gene Roddenberry’s future fairly while still recognizing personal drive, differences, and merit?

Post reply on HN