This was great for me to read, Robert! I find myself always interested many things and hard to focus on individual things for years and years. I find too many new things that take all my attention, then eventually moving to something else. I know I need to focus longer than I do to actually gain a substantial skill in it, but it’s good to have encouragement that working on many things, isn’t always bad!
I'm exactly the same Jacob. Getting from 0-80% good at something probably takes as long as getting from 81-100% good at something. Thus, I'd rather be 80% good at two things than 100% good at one thing. Good luck with your skills development and a big thanks for your comment.
A nice read, although I do have reservations about Donald Trump and his skill sets. Much of what he displays to the world, behaviour wise,is a facade. In my humble opinion.
I would! It's a wonderful read and presents an almost counter intuitive view (for many) about the education and specialization. Specialization, he argues, narrows our view of the world. The chapter about Nintendo's design philosophy is something to ruminate about.
"Lateral thinking with withered technology" is easier to spell than the Japanese designer. But spare calculator parts and long train rides did help to eventually create the NES.
Well said Rob! This is especially relevant in the age of AI when generalists can tap into expert knowledge so much easier than in the past. We’ve just got to know enough to be dangerous ;)
So many of the comments I received on this post, I'm like, "Ah, I should have thought about that and put it in the article". Very true. AI will make well versed generalists dangerous indeed. Thanks for the comment Mark.
Rob, what a great text on very relevant stuff! I believe that there are a lot of people (myself included) who are just too curious to be specialists and repress their other interests. Personally, I was always interested in many subjects and found it a thrilling alchemy to combine them. And the 3 pillars of business are definitely something everyone will find beneficial to excel at. Greetings from Vilnius.
My take on this (and the theme of my newsletter 🙂) is that we are all generalists in some way, shape or form. It’s what we do with that curiosity that propels us to the next levels…from simply curious and interested, to generalist, multi passionate/multipotentialite, polymath.
There are some that take their learning to higher levels, satisfying their curiosity and being able to teach a class on the subject - the Polymaths. Many famous historical figures are today regarded as Polymaths - da Vinci, Plato, Nietzsche, Aristotle…they excelled and made contributions in many different fields.
As you say, there is a place for the specialist in today’s world, and we need them. But if you look at them closely they will also exhibit generalist/polymathic tendencies.
Hence the full quote: "Jack of all trades master of none, though oftentimes better than master of one.”
I’ve never heard that one. But it’s great. I should have used the line in my article.
I was basically yesteryear old when I learnt that that is actually how the saying goes haha. Love reading your blogs! Keep up the writing!
Thanks Dané. I really appreciate that message. Thanks for reading. 🙏
Ironically, acquiring a unique set of generalist skills can, combined, make you a one-of-a-kind specialist.
This statement resonates, especially in today's economy. You need to know a lot about stuff and still be a specialist lol.
Very true Tinashe.
“You need to know a lot about stuff and still be a specialist”
You absolutely can! I would argue, try being different. It’s harder than you would imagine because it goes against our nature.
Jack of all trades and master of none, but more often better than a master of one.
That's the core behind why I write Polymathic Being which crosses domains and disciplines looking for new insights.
I wrote a bit more about the polymath using that jack of all trades quote when I kicked my substack off.
Thanks for the comment and contributing to the discussion Michael. This topic seems quite close to your heart. 😀
It truly is the foundation of my writing. My very first essay was "The Bane of Specialization; Defense of the Polymath."
https://www.polymathicbeing.com/p/the-bane-of-specialization-defense
This was great for me to read, Robert! I find myself always interested many things and hard to focus on individual things for years and years. I find too many new things that take all my attention, then eventually moving to something else. I know I need to focus longer than I do to actually gain a substantial skill in it, but it’s good to have encouragement that working on many things, isn’t always bad!
I'm exactly the same Jacob. Getting from 0-80% good at something probably takes as long as getting from 81-100% good at something. Thus, I'd rather be 80% good at two things than 100% good at one thing. Good luck with your skills development and a big thanks for your comment.
Good luck to you as well, Robert, thanks for the read!
A nice read, although I do have reservations about Donald Trump and his skill sets. Much of what he displays to the world, behaviour wise,is a facade. In my humble opinion.
Thanks for the comment Kevin. Appreciate your perspective on the topic. 🙏
Loved your post! Have you read the book Range? It makes a strong case for generalists and all but stops short of endorsing the liberal arts.
https://a.co/d/8PbsFJJ
…and, of course, a very big thanks for the positive note about my post. 🙏
Hey Adam - No, I haven’t, but if I recall it was on Bill Gates recommended reading list one year. Would you recommend it?
I would! It's a wonderful read and presents an almost counter intuitive view (for many) about the education and specialization. Specialization, he argues, narrows our view of the world. The chapter about Nintendo's design philosophy is something to ruminate about.
Ok cool. I’ll add it to my reading list. You have me intrigued by the Nintendo story.
"Lateral thinking with withered technology" is easier to spell than the Japanese designer. But spare calculator parts and long train rides did help to eventually create the NES.
Well said Rob! This is especially relevant in the age of AI when generalists can tap into expert knowledge so much easier than in the past. We’ve just got to know enough to be dangerous ;)
So many of the comments I received on this post, I'm like, "Ah, I should have thought about that and put it in the article". Very true. AI will make well versed generalists dangerous indeed. Thanks for the comment Mark.
Rob, what a great text on very relevant stuff! I believe that there are a lot of people (myself included) who are just too curious to be specialists and repress their other interests. Personally, I was always interested in many subjects and found it a thrilling alchemy to combine them. And the 3 pillars of business are definitely something everyone will find beneficial to excel at. Greetings from Vilnius.
That’s the first time I’ve received greetings from Vilnius. Thanks for the kind note Tomas.
The world is too big and rich to only experience one layer. Generalists > Specialists
Couldn't agree more. Thanks for reading Manuel 🙏
This article resonates with me. I enjoyed reading this, Robert.
Thanks Jeff. I appreciate your note 🙏
Nice read, Rob, and a subject close to my heart.
My take on this (and the theme of my newsletter 🙂) is that we are all generalists in some way, shape or form. It’s what we do with that curiosity that propels us to the next levels…from simply curious and interested, to generalist, multi passionate/multipotentialite, polymath.
There are some that take their learning to higher levels, satisfying their curiosity and being able to teach a class on the subject - the Polymaths. Many famous historical figures are today regarded as Polymaths - da Vinci, Plato, Nietzsche, Aristotle…they excelled and made contributions in many different fields.
As you say, there is a place for the specialist in today’s world, and we need them. But if you look at them closely they will also exhibit generalist/polymathic tendencies.
Thanks for the interesting viewpoint Andrew. I like the idea of a "polymath". I should have used that for my article.