Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The last days of the polymath

moreintelligentlife.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 33 posts

Re: The last days of the polymath

#21

Post by jokermatt999 »

RiderOfGiraffes wrote: post #4

Another old friend: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1038795 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=861836 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=850301 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=844229 <- Has comments

I'd just like to say "Thanks" for keeping track of all these HN submissions. It seems like almost every time there's a duplicate post, you're there to provide links to the other instances and comments. It's especially nice when there's more discussion on the articles. Just figured I'd let you know I appreciate what you do.

Re: The last days of the polymath

#22

Post by rorymarinich »

noname123 wrote: post #18
rorymarinich wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wasn't aware that listing a set of things I've done counts as impressing people. It's not like I go around just announcing accomplishments to crowds hoping they'll cheer me or toast me or blow me. We're discussing an article that opens up by mentioning one man's prowess in multiple areas. The article uses this man as a springboard to ask if there are similarly talented people today. My response was that I think the…

Don't feel defensive. I think it's great that you are putting yourself in public and getting feedback. The truth is most people think that they are the shit but yet they are so insecure to express so in public. So they feel like Unibomber on the inside but are too chicken-shit to do actually like the Unibomber. But it's important to take criticism well. Like playing music, it's jarring to hear your own voice or playi…

Oops! No! I'm sorry if it sounded like I was suggesting you were insecure. I think I misinterpreted when you said "making already insecure people feel more insecure about themselves". I worried you were referring to yourself.

If I could go back and edit my original post, I would, but the edit window closed. I legitimately didn't mean that to be dickwaving. And I tried to say that I don't think I'm a polymath. I'm too young and too stupid. Maybe one day. Anyway, I didn't write it that well and it came off as me trying to look like an Internet Superhero. My apologies.

I go to an art school right now and boy oh boy does the cockiness and one-man-against-the-universe-ing get old. I agree; the only way to really do interesting things is to constantly self-doubt and push to expand. My favorite artists/people in general are the ones who to this day insist on trying to be better than they are.

Re: The last days of the polymath

#23

Post by Rantenki »

I would speculate that the reason that the polymath seems less common is that:

1. Counter-intuitively, polymaths are now ubiquitous. The WWW as well as better information access in general has made it much easier to BECOME a polymath. Because of this, polymaths have to be so much more impressive. My local hackerspace contains several individuals who know/achieve SO MUCH in a variety of disciplines. We have baker, artist, roboticist, biohacker, hardware engineers and Dancer, juggler perl hacking political scientists. All of whom are making important contributions to their fields. However, they are lost in the noise because:

2. The pace of scientific discovery is growing at an exponential rate. This means that it is difficult to keep track of, or notice any particular discovery, regardless of who makes it.

3. And I admit, unlike the previous two, this is subjective. I think that we make more of a discovery at the edges of our knowledge than we do of a hybrid. We are all interested by a new type of particle being discovered, but when that happens, we pay more attention to the discoverers' titles as specialists, ignoring the likelihood that the particle physicist working at CERN could also be considered a solid materials/superconductors/computer engineer, as they would need to be in order to understand and utilize their test equipment.

Re: The last days of the polymath

#24

Post by RiderOfGiraffes »

jokermatt999 wrote: post #21
RiderOfGiraffes wrote: post #4

Another old friend: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1038795 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=861836 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=850301 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=844229 <- Has comments

I'd just like to say "Thanks" for keeping track of all these HN submissions. It seems like almost every time there's a duplicate post, you're there to provide links to the other instances and comments. It's especially nice when there's more discussion on the articles. Just figured I'd let you know I appreciate what you do.

Cheers!

Re: The last days of the polymath

#25

Post by dannyb »

It made for an interesting read, but I think there are too many generalizations in that type of writing. The truth is, we have just experienced and extraordinary explosion in the amount of valuable data and information that it available to almost everybody. I think that we have not yet come to grips with this and that it has caused some disciplinary boundaries to be rewritten. There will still be heroes after the revolution!

Re: The last days of the polymath

#26

Post by presidentender »

rorymarinich wrote: post #19
presidentender wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I was eighteen I'd already published a novel, directed a play, written and co-performed a song, co-created said song's music video, performed and co-wrote a Harry Potter dub, wrote multiple essays, and designed a number of web sites I hate to burst your bubble, but that does not make you a polymath. If your novel were published by a profit-minded company, sold well, and entered the public consciousness, if your…

Completely agreed! I would be astonished if anybody my age was sophisticated/mature enough to have novel thoughts about one subject, let alone multiple. Particularly not in an era when public understanding of most of the arts is 30-40 years behind what we'd call the cutting edge right now. Maybe people specializing in the Internet, because it's so immature, but even then the closest I think it comes is somebody like…

Then what was your point in responding to this post in the first place? I've just said that you're not a polymath, your friends are not polymaths, and your present courses will not lead to being polymaths. Easier access to education may well be allowing you to advance in your chosen fields quickly, but you've still chosen a narrow set of fields.

I'm all for writing for public consumption. I just wouldn't list a few precocious kids doing so as much of an accomplishment.

Re: The last days of the polymath

#27

Post by tel »

pg wrote: post #2

Specialization doesn't mean you can't have polymaths. They just have to be sparser matrices.

I disagree with the metaphor. 'Sparser matrices' implies homogeneity of effort and accomplishment. It's closer to 'sparser trees' where genuinely regaled accomplishments happen in leafs quite far from the root.

Polymaths may become something more of the lucky geniuses who have the adroitness to envision great trees, the tenacity to grow them, and the luck to not waste too much effort in directions they cannot see to fulfillment. They build branches wide and strong with the right root structure and a strong trunk. Other grow bushes or tall, skinny trees, perhaps easily blown down.

Re: The last days of the polymath

#28

Post by shadowfox »

rorymarinich wrote: post #20
Helianthus16 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I wasn't aware that listing a set of things I've done counts as impressing people this is what he said. your statement is essentially 'i think i am a polymath and so are my friends' >My response was that I think there are, and that while the current generation of Internet People is still young, there's a hell of a lot of promise there man, when did i get so old that i'm cynical of generational pride? every generatio…

> man, when did i get so old that i'm cynical of generational pride? every generation feels this way, at the edge of the new and exciting. Hahaha. Aren't they? I mean, the thirtysomethings and late twentysomethings that I know do CRAZY cool shit. I hope when I'm that old I'm as cool as them. I mean, I love my generation, but I love the generation right before me too, and I'm really looking forward to what the kids wh…

> I mean, the thirtysomethings and late twentysomethings that I know do CRAZY cool shit

Such as?

Re: The last days of the polymath

#29

Post by sciboy »

Rantenki wrote: post #23

I would speculate that the reason that the polymath seems less common is that: 1. Counter-intuitively, polymaths are now ubiquitous. The WWW as well as better information access in general has made it much easier to BECOME a polymath. Because of this, polymaths have to be so much more impressive. My local hackerspace contains several individuals who know/achieve SO MUCH in a variety of disciplines. We have baker, art…

1) I would disagree. The definition of polymath is someone who is an expert at orthogonal subjects. Your definition of expert seems to be slightly lower than mine. My definition would be someone who could give a lecture to other experts in the field with a days notice and be able to answer questions to the satisfaction of the audience.

2) If this were true it would be a short time until science itself crumbled. How then are people able to keep on top of their fields with finite time? The number of scientists isn't exponentially increasing, nor are the number of publications. It's growth, but it's not exponential as far as I can tell.

3) A polymath is someone who has knowledge in orthogonal knowledge spaces. If your field requires knowledge in other very related areas then I wouldn't consider that polymath-like activity.

Re: The last days of the polymath

#30

Post by zasz »

rorymarinich wrote: post #12
zasz wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think the article would consider any of the people you listed polymaths. One of the article's criterion for being a polymath is that you have interests in diverse fields. A musician who can play several different instruments isn't showing much in the way of diversity. Neither is James Cameron, nor Louis CK, because the examples you cited all are tied together very naturally, and I would argue that being a gre…

I might agree re: Louis CK. I wouldn't agree re: James Cameron. Set/costume design is an entirely different art form from directing; I was actually very impressed when I read about his early work designing for films before he became a director. Saying the two are similar arts would be like saying that, I don't know, working with Photoshop and Illustrator is close to being a marble sculptor. I'd also cite, say, Ricky…

Sure, set/costume design is different from directing, but they fall under the same umbrella of having an interest in making movies. James Cameron is not a polymath for the same reason someone who gets a Nobel in physics and chemistry is not a polymath. If someone gets a Nobel in literature and physics, that's being a polymath. Your music example also isn't great. I, and several other people, know how to do a wide variety of dances--square, Irish folk dancing, salsa, waltz, hip hop, lyrical, and so on. It does not make us polymaths. The differences within a discipline are pretty big, true, but the difference between disciplines supersedes those. Someone who programs and dances is jumping a much greater distance than someone who goes from ballet to hip hop.

You seem like a talented and energetic person, so kudos to you, and this discussion is ultimately about semantics, which is uninteresting. I still think you misunderstand what breed of intellectual the article is talking about, though.

Post reply on HN