Knowing a lot about a little, or a little about a lot?
- Ozymandias
- Posts: 108
- Joined: December 5th, 2016, 1:02 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Loren Eiseley
Knowing a lot about a little, or a little about a lot?
That is, is it better to be well-versed in many subjects, enough to hold conversation about them and partake in them in your everyday life, or is it better to invest most of your thought in one subject and become an expert in it, at the expense of remaining ignorant of the other walks of life?
The former is not to exclude your profession. I should say "to know a little about a lot" in regards to subjects other than your profession.
For example, I am an artist/ designer and student by occupation, but I often find myself actively seeking to learn about many other things while I could be learning more about art and becoming better at my own vocation. The con of that state is that I'm that much less proficient at what I give to society. The pro is that I know enough rudimentary information about seemingly random areas of life to find small successes. Let's say I learn a lot about geology. I will be able to identify rocks and draw meaning about the land I'm in at a given moment. One such practical application of that is what's called a fault scarp. When tectonic activity shifts the ground, it can make slopes ranging from a couple meters to a few hundred meters in height, which are called fault scarps. They are seismically unstable and can cause damage to structure foundations. Homes are often built on fault scarps, unbeknownst to the buyers, thus giving them a raw deal. One well-versed but not expert in geology could catch this before falling into a shifty realtor's trap.
That is one example of why it is good to know random things.
But to know those little useful things, you must sift through a lot of information, much of which you will forget, and most of which will never come in handy. Instead, one might invest completely in one's own vocation, and leave the other subjects of expertise to other people, so that the world runs smoothly as everyone knows everything about his/her own contribution to their society.
So is it better to know a lot about a little, or a little about a lot?
- Venividivici
- New Trial Member
- Posts: 7
- Joined: March 17th, 2016, 10:21 pm
Re: Knowing a lot about a little, or a little about a lot?
-
- Posts: 2466
- Joined: December 8th, 2016, 7:08 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Socrates
Re: Knowing a lot about a little, or a little about a lot?
More important I would say is learning how to learn and learning what you don't know.
- Rr6
- Posts: 1034
- Joined: April 5th, 2015, 2:20 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: R. Bucky Fuller
Re: Knowing a lot about a little, or a little about a lot?
Specialization{ professional scientist jack-of--one trade, master of one } versus generalization{ layperson scientist jack-of-all-trades, master of none }Ozymandias wrote:Simple question: is it better to know a lot about a little, or a little about a lot?
"Better" is the key word there and may vary in every individuals case. And what any knowledge may lead too has to also be considered.
I'm a jack-of-all-trades type of person including the sciences{ biology, cosmology, quantum mechanics, etc }.
My list includes, auto mechanic, cowboy, farmer, lumber jack, factory jobs of a variety including food production, retail stores, E.M.T license in two states, carpentry, electrician, plumber, painter, truck driver, door-to-door solicitor, forklift driver.
Never been professional cook or dishwasher in restaurant type environment.
r6
-
- Posts: 290
- Joined: March 3rd, 2017, 1:49 pm
Re: Knowing a lot about a little, or a little about a lot?
-
- Posts: 3119
- Joined: November 26th, 2011, 8:10 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Terry Pratchett
Re: Knowing a lot about a little, or a little about a lot?
If you hope to be concert master of a world-class philharmonic orchestra, you'd better spend six hours a day practicing violin, another two on music theory and never miss a rehearsal; if you just want to have fun with a local chamber group on weekends, an hour a day will suffice.
If you hope for a Pulitzer, you'd better learn your background information, triple-check your sources, organize your research material and hone your writing skill. If you just scribble in a blog, any interesting bits and pieces will do.
While it's possible to excel at a specialized profession or craft and still take an interest in other subjects, it grows increasingly difficult as your work-load and responsibility increase.
Unfortunately, that's also when your physical and mental energies are starting to wane. Oh well, you can always dabble after retirement.
- Rr6
- Posts: 1034
- Joined: April 5th, 2015, 2:20 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: R. Bucky Fuller
Re: Knowing a lot about a little, or a little about a lot?
r6
Rr6 wrote:Specialization{ professional scientist jack-of--one trade, master of one } versus generalization{ layperson scientist jack-of-all-trades, master of none }Ozymandias wrote:Simple question: is it better to know a lot about a little, or a little about a lot?
"Better" is the key word there and may vary in every individuals case. And what any knowledge may lead too has to also be considered.
I'm a jack-of-all-trades type of person including the sciences{ biology, cosmology, quantum mechanics, etc }.
My list includes, auto mechanic, cowboy, farmer, lumber jack, factory jobs of a variety including food production, retail stores, E.M.T license in two states, carpentry, electrician, plumber, painter, truck driver, door-to-door solicitor, forklift driver.
Never been professional cook or dishwasher in restaurant type environment.
r6
- -1-
- Posts: 878
- Joined: December 1st, 2016, 2:23 am
Re: Knowing a lot about a little, or a little about a lot?
What is "better"? As a survival skill? As a means to social standing? As a means to getting girls? As a means to landing a good job? As a means to feeling happy? As a means to further your family's well-doing?
Whatever is "better"?
So if you want to increase your survival chances, spread out. Be a renaissance man.
If you want to feel happy, then do whatever feels comfy.
If you want to make love to many women (or men) and you want a lot of money, then either is good.
If you want your family to strive, either is good.
If you are shy with people, and they irritate you, and you wish they'd all go to hel, then turn inward, and find a hobby and learn things that interests only a very few, or preferrably nobody else but you.
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7990
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: Knowing a lot about a little, or a little about a lot?
-
- Posts: 132
- Joined: January 29th, 2014, 6:43 pm
Re: Knowing a lot about a little, or a little about a lot?
- MindfulMystic
- New Trial Member
- Posts: 8
- Joined: March 23rd, 2017, 9:02 pm
Re: Knowing a lot about a little, or a little about a lot?
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7990
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: Knowing a lot about a little, or a little about a lot?
I disagree. Who makes more: a handyman or a plumber?MindfulMystic wrote:I believe that one should aim at knowing a little about a lot...for do we not know a lot about a little? I guess it depends on if you don't know yourself. There is a time to know yourself-the rest is to find out, or put out your find not claiming to know yourself-allows you to know a lot about a little...you are little-and there are a lot about me! Then if you aim to know a little about my lot. I'll realize, a lot of little things-relate to a little big thing-ME. I don't claim me, perhaps it is for two;such are here
-
- Posts: 48
- Joined: September 1st, 2016, 11:12 am
Re: Knowing a lot about a little, or a little about a lot?
- Burning ghost
- Posts: 3065
- Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am
Re: Knowing a lot about a little, or a little about a lot?
Seriously, I am more of a Big Picture kind of guy. Either way you are inclined there are positives and negatives. I honestly think if you follow your own passion for long enough you'll eventually bump into others with different interests as you come to realise the relations between every subject of knowledge.
- Sy Borg
- Site Admin
- Posts: 15154
- Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm
Re: Knowing a lot about a little, or a little about a lot?
Unless groomed to be a 'general', society at large prefers its constituents to be, as George Carlin put it - smart enough to operate the machines but dumb enough to buy into BS. By the same token, we prefer our pancreas cells not to 'get above their station' and start thinking they are brain cells. Otherwise the whole house of cards falls down! Of course, societies are not nearly as integrated as organisms, and thus not as requiring of strict conformity. Not yet, anyway ... [cue spooky music]
To what extent should we sacrifice our desire to intellectually free-range so as to be good citizens? We are obviously morally obliged to give back to the edifice that sustains us. However, we need not necessarily give 'the machine' our whole heart and soul - only as much as our inclinations, conscience, contingency and 'Caesar' require.
2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
2023 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023