4 ms·
Well yeah, given the choice between specializing in one area and acquiring specialist-level expertise in a bunch of areas before you're 40 (which is what von Ne
by croissants 6y ago
Well yeah, given the choice between specializing in one area and acquiring specialist-level expertise in a bunch of areas before you're 40 (which is what von Neumann did -- look at all of the sections in his Wikipedia page [1]!), it's better to do the second one.
But most people are choosing between specializing in one or maybe two areas and having very-sub-specialist-level expertise in more. von Neumann's not an example of that kind of generalist.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_von_Neumann https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_von_Neumann
- hackerfromthefu 6y agoI think this illuminates the difference that makes the difference here. A polymath is actually good at many things, not just has an opinion about them. This takes an unusual level of ability. In other words a generalist is not a polymath, because the polymath is better at the generalised abilities. That's what felt wrong about the article, it was conflating unusually talented polymaths with the ubiquitous averagely talented internet pundits :p