I was inspired by Da Vinci in my younger days to become a modern Renaissance Man. Then I discovered that the depth of knowledge in any given field had become far too deep to ever hope at becoming expert in more than one. Sure you can still make art, and study mathematics and astronomy, and so forth, but it's almost impossible to reach the level of mastery that Da Vinci reached in his day. No one hires Renaissance Men anymore :(
In my career I've found that knowning "enough" about a lot of fields (often self taught) has led me to invent valuable things that experts in any given field would have never discovered. Things with many millions in sales.
Also I've found that experts in some field will say something is impossible that I, not knowing it's "impossible", will try to do anyway and find a way to do it by applying techniques from outside the field.
I feel these are my "secrets of success", other than a lot of hard work and persistence. :)
A more modest goal would be to remain open to the wonders of fields you know little about.
As one example close to my heart: there is a streak within the tech community that rejects anything that isn't "pure" science. To quote the only good joke from the Big Bang Theory: "Oh, the humanities!".
If you read Feynman, one of the more modern Renaissance Men, you will see this streak in action. He deeply appreciate fields rather far from physics, including linguistics, music, and art, and even succeeded in some of them independent of his main career. He also showed that "appreciation for" does not require uncritical believe, specifically minting the term "cargo-cult science" for what he saw as a weakness in the field.
Leonardo wasn't an expert in all those fields, if he had to ask how to square a triangle. The point of a Renaissance man is following your curiosity in all kinds of different fields, not being a master in all of them.
Becoming a deep expert has too many diminishing returns IMHO.
Just look at Japan where it is often the goal to become a deep expert at your career. I once watched a documentary about creating buckwheat soba, and the guy making it said something along the lines of "I've been making buckwheat soba noodles for over 20 years, but I still have another 20 before I'm a true master"
That's great some people are willing to go for the gold in an extremely narrow field (like buckwheat soba), but I'd rather have silver or bronze in as many fields as possible than a single gold.
The wider the breadth of my knowledge, the more I can use one domain to solve a problem in another.
I found this to be true as well. But I think having broad knowledge is helpful regardless to construct new mental models in the work we do. You may not go super deep anymore but understanding the basics of different fields of study is still super useful.
I wonder if entrepreneurship is a counter example?
True, people looking to hire someone are almost always looking for a specialist.
But if you are starting a business, you are almost required to perform many different kinds of roles at the beginning, until you grow to the point where you can hire specialists for all the various functions of the business.
But were they ever? All 'Renaissance Men' were extremely exceptional in their own time, and not exactly any sort of normal. They also seem to have made their own jobs rather than being hired.
There has never been a human being who "knew everything" in recorded history, though there have occasionally been those who were given the title.
The goal isn't to become an expert and know everything, the best people tend to be the "T" shaped, or "π" shaped in HR terms. Where you know an extensive amount about a small number of subjects and know a small amount about an extensive number of subjects. Strive to be able to carry on a 5 minute conversation about anything and days of conversation about a few things.
I recently finished Isaacson's biography on LDV and, while somewhat slow at parts, it was thoroughly enjoyable as well as inspirational. I would highly recommend it if you have any interest in history and/or the man himself. What stood out most to me was the affirmation of the power of disparate fields information when applied to creativity/innovation.
[+] [-] mci|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] johnrbent|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] gxx|6 years ago|reply
Also I've found that experts in some field will say something is impossible that I, not knowing it's "impossible", will try to do anyway and find a way to do it by applying techniques from outside the field.
I feel these are my "secrets of success", other than a lot of hard work and persistence. :)
[+] [-] IfOnlyYouKnew|6 years ago|reply
As one example close to my heart: there is a streak within the tech community that rejects anything that isn't "pure" science. To quote the only good joke from the Big Bang Theory: "Oh, the humanities!".
If you read Feynman, one of the more modern Renaissance Men, you will see this streak in action. He deeply appreciate fields rather far from physics, including linguistics, music, and art, and even succeeded in some of them independent of his main career. He also showed that "appreciation for" does not require uncritical believe, specifically minting the term "cargo-cult science" for what he saw as a weakness in the field.
[+] [-] TuringTest|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] umvi|6 years ago|reply
Just look at Japan where it is often the goal to become a deep expert at your career. I once watched a documentary about creating buckwheat soba, and the guy making it said something along the lines of "I've been making buckwheat soba noodles for over 20 years, but I still have another 20 before I'm a true master"
That's great some people are willing to go for the gold in an extremely narrow field (like buckwheat soba), but I'd rather have silver or bronze in as many fields as possible than a single gold.
The wider the breadth of my knowledge, the more I can use one domain to solve a problem in another.
[+] [-] abhiyerra|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cy6erlion|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mixmastamyk|6 years ago|reply
Once freed from this requirement, the joy of learning may continue unabated.
[+] [-] jimbokun|6 years ago|reply
True, people looking to hire someone are almost always looking for a specialist.
But if you are starting a business, you are almost required to perform many different kinds of roles at the beginning, until you grow to the point where you can hire specialists for all the various functions of the business.
[+] [-] spinach|6 years ago|reply
But were they ever? All 'Renaissance Men' were extremely exceptional in their own time, and not exactly any sort of normal. They also seem to have made their own jobs rather than being hired.
[+] [-] dpeck|6 years ago|reply
The goal isn't to become an expert and know everything, the best people tend to be the "T" shaped, or "π" shaped in HR terms. Where you know an extensive amount about a small number of subjects and know a small amount about an extensive number of subjects. Strive to be able to carry on a 5 minute conversation about anything and days of conversation about a few things.
[+] [-] godelmachine|6 years ago|reply
The ratio and proportion will remain the same.
Information in today's age travels at light speed whereas in his time it was at horse's pace.
[+] [-] AlwaysRock|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kvartz|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kitten_smuggler|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] throwayEngineer|6 years ago|reply
Da Vinci seems popular among everyone.
[+] [-] idlewords|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] laughingman2|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kvartz|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] idlewords|6 years ago|reply