studying one thing vs studying everything?

[xisnotx]

Would you say it would be "better" (define that how you wish) to devote yourself to studying one thing in depth or studying anything and everything that captures your interest?

The ultimate goal is to contribute to the collective intellectual effort in a significant way.

Also,
study for its own sake vs study with a goal in mind.
study what makes sense to you vs study what doesn't.
study something physical vs study something non physical.
study going "in" or study going "out".

both is not a suitable answer (or if it is, provide real life examples...)

 

[Tiger Owl]

Would you say it would be "better" (define that how you wish) to devote yourself to studying one thing in depth or studying anything and everything that captures your interest?

The ultimate goal is to contribute to the collective intellectual effort in a significant way.

Also,
study for its own sake vs study with a goal in mind.
study what makes sense to you vs study what doesn't.
study something physical vs study something non physical.
study going "in" or study going "out".

both is not a suitable answer (or if it is, provide real life examples...)

Are you enlisting TypeC to pick a career for you?

 

[xisnotx]

Careers are for suckers.

 

[Anew Leaf]

I think studying everything is sort of the definition of being an NP.

 

[Elfboy]

I think studying everything is sort of the definition of being an NP.

it's a tendency I definitely struggle with as an NP. what I'm trying to do now is focus on something that gets me money without being a complete drag so that I have the time and resources to get a broader view of things later in life. it's all about Maslow's hierarchy of needs. gotta get the base covered before one focuses too much on self actualizing (I realize I am a total hypocrite for saying this and that it goes against the NF tendency to self actualize first and live later)

 

[chickpea]

i feel like i've suffered because i know a little bit about a lot, but i'm not really good at any one thing. i think having an expertise in something is good, but while still being well-rounded.

 

[ygolo]

Would you say it would be "better" (define that how you wish) to devote yourself to studying one thing in depth or studying anything and everything that captures your interest?

The ultimate goal is to contribute to the collective intellectual effort in a significant way.

Also,
study for its own sake vs study with a goal in mind.
study what makes sense to you vs study what doesn't.
study something physical vs study something non physical.
study going "in" or study going "out".

both is not a suitable answer (or if it is, provide real life examples...)

I don't know. I have the same questions, and I am significantly "further along" than you are. So you may not get the answers for a while.

Still, you have to do what you have to do to keep yourself alive, and in the game, in the mean time.

Somethings that shaped my thinking in this regard are two sources:

1. http://www.amazon.com/Creativity-Science-Chance-Genius-Zeitgeist/dp/052154369X
   In this book, Simonton argues that a broad knowledge base, working on multiple projects at the same time, and cross-pollination of ideas is common to the most productive scientists. However, I think he is missing a "concentration factor." I think there is a difference between having broad knowledge and many projects, and just being distracted. I have to find a way to get to the broad-knowledge-and-many-projects category.
2. http://www.amazon.com/Refuse-Choose-Revolutionary-Program-Everything/dp/1594863032
   In this book, Sher says that there are just certain people not suited to be specialists, and outlines ways that one can "Refuse to Choose" and still have a viable career. But this is essentially a self-help book. Those tend to be hit or miss.

 

[skylights]

the world at hand seems to push for specialization. i personally prefer studying everything.

ah, to be a renaissance man...

 

[the state i am in]

i think 5s and 7s are the worst at wanting to be generalists forever. but secretly i mean the best. the extreme head types who generally get off on pure possibilities more than any other types.

i think the balance is your own process of discovery vs the relevance of what you make. and i think it's also filtered through other lenses, w6 adds so much skepticism, they usually like more proof and tangible application. 5w4s like more stylized, idealized visions, and 7w8s care about body and power much more, so they to push and test limits most assertively. i also think the instinctual subtypes add flavor, sx wants autonomy and is usually willing to opt for higher risk/reward than sp types or so types. so types want community, belonging, and sense of shared purpose, and sp types like grounded, practical, lower risk projects.

for me the proofing part of making and testing something has always been such a drag because i want to keep exploring the other possibilities that are systematically getting closed off. ah, letting go! i'm getting better as i externalize my process and find better ways of documenting so i can just offload them temporarily while still feeling like a proper possibilities hoarder. not ideal, but it's a step in the right direction. for a 5, making something also is really grounding for you too, you feel like you and your story actually have a place in the world.

 

[EJCC]

Would you say it would be "better" (define that how you wish) to devote yourself to studying one thing in depth or studying anything and everything that captures your interest?

The ultimate goal is to contribute to the collective intellectual effort in a significant way.

Also,
study for its own sake vs study with a goal in mind.
study what makes sense to you vs study what doesn't.
study something physical vs study something non physical.
study going "in" or study going "out".

both is not a suitable answer (or if it is, provide real life examples...)

Are you an enneagram 1? The only people I know of who would want to ask "What career would be more useful to the world as a whole, because that's the career I want" are type 1. (I am included in there; sometimes I wish I wanted to be a doctor, because I'd be good at it and the world needs doctors, but the problem is that I'd be miserable.)

Here are my answers to each question specifically, keeping in mind that an ESTJ's answers are obviously going to be VERY different from an INTP's, and they depend a lot on what makes me happy -- because you can't pick a career path only based on whether it's "better" for the "collective intellectual effort", or else you won't live a happy life, and part of the goal is obviously for you to live a happy life because no one (including yourself) wants you to be miserable. (Jeez, that was a long disclaimer!) Anyhoo, I digress:

1) One thing in depth or anything/everything: One thing or a few things for your career, and whatever the hell you want outside of work. Or even better, pick the sort of career where all your interests could be of use. For example, my INTP dad did very well as the executive director of a small nonprofit in my hometown, because of his creativity, his exactitude, his big ideas, and his skill at delegating. Before he had that job, he had gotten a degree in arts management, and then worked in real estate for a while -- as well as being an amateur multimedia artist. All those things have come in handy throughout his life. (Of course, this is all under the assumption that you don't keep the same job for 20 years, xisnotx, and under the assumption that you don't have One True Passion -- because if you do, then you ought to be following it! because not a lot of people have One True Passion.)

2) If you study with a goal in mind, you're probably going to be disappointed. Either you'll never reach it (consider all the scientists who almost discovered the cure they were looking for, and then died mere years before it was discovered by someone who worked a lot less than them!), or you'll reach it midway through your career and then go "Okay, now what?" So, I'd say that if you have a goal, it should be pretty broad, i.e. broad enough that you don't expect to fulfill it 100% -- otherwise it'll drive you bonkers.

3) Depends on what you mean by "makes sense". A lot of things don't make sense to me because my brain doesn't work in the appropriate way for me to make sense of them, so I don't try to learn about them. But if they don't make sense purely because I don't know the required information for them to make sense, then I'll go and learn about them. In that second case, I'd say it links directly to #1.

4) Your choice! Both are equally "useful". I know you said not to say "both", but the thing is, both physical and non-physical study are required for a healthy life, and a healthy society, and without both, we'd be screwed.

5) I have no idea what this means.

 

[Tiger Owl]

A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.

-Robert A. Heinlein

 

[Such Irony]

My goal in life is strike the perfect balance between these two extremes. I don't want to study one thing so much in depth that I miss out on other things. Yet, I don't want to spread myself so thin that I never feel like I've mastered anything.

 

[mujigay]

Are you an enneagram 1? The only people I know of who would want to ask "What career would be more useful to the world as a whole, because that's the career I want" are type 1. (I am included in there; sometimes I wish I wanted to be a doctor, because I'd be good at it and the world needs doctors, but the problem is that I'd be miserable.)

Damn, that really pinged for me. I've spent a long, long time feeling guilty because I hate the maths and sciences and really, really don't want to go into medical, research, or engineering, but it's the kind of contribution the world needs. Then I feel selfish, because instead of doing something for the world, I'm being an asshole and picking the irrelevant things that I actually like. Ah well.

In response to the actual OP, studying for it's own sake only really works if....ya know, you're actually learning, not just jacking off and smoking a joint and occasionally spouting off something pseudo-philosophical, which is the tendency of many self-proclaimed intellectuals that I have witnessed. In theory, being a Rennaissance man would give you the edge, but in actuality, specializing in something, particularly if it's rare can give you the edge when driving your career. Of course, that only matters if you actually care about advancing a career, which some people genuinely don't, and that's fine.

 

[Red Herring]

If you want to broaden your horizon and enrich your mind - become a generalist!
If you want to be well repected for your knowledge and make money - become a specialist!
If you want to contribute something new and revolutionary to science or the world in general - study two or more seemingly unrelated fields and build a bridge between them!

 

[Lark]

I started out just wanting to master one topic but now I just want to learn everything.

 

[Habba]

Would you say it would be "better" (define that how you wish) to devote yourself to studying one thing in depth or studying anything and everything that captures your interest?

If something captures your mind, you should already know it is important to you.

Also, it might feel like studying everything, but after sometime you should start finding the underlying pattern. You begin to notice that you aren't interested in random topics, but there's something common in the topics.

The ultimate goal is to contribute to the collective intellectual effort in a significant way.

This usually means going where no one has gone before, or taking a view no one has taken before.

Depth of knowledge gives you the former, width of knowledge gives the latter.

study for its own sake vs study with a goal in mind.

Learning is the goal in life, not knowing. When you start knowing and stop learning, you become old. Knowledge makes you certain. Certainty makes you prideful. Pride makes you ignorant.

study what makes sense to you vs study what doesn't.

Depending on what you mean with "making sense":

Sense, as being reasonable and logical - Makes little sense to study something you already understand. You should study the things that escape your mind.

Making sense, as being opposite of supernatural - When studying esoteric studies, there's lots and lots of false logic and evidence. However, I believe that these supernatural phenoms are related and based on actual psychological aspects of human mind, and thus can be valuable area when studying the human mind.

study something physical vs study something non physical.

The more physical it is, the younger you have to be to benefit from it. Your body begins to degenerate after early twenties, but your mind can peek much later. But neither is superior to the other. Except that masters of physical things get much more money and women. xD

study going "in" or study going "out".

Now this is a weird one. Cool people wants to stay in, but going out is cool. So can an outgoing person be in? Is it hot to be cool? Can one study how to be in, or is it in not to study?


(BTW, I'm 1w9)

 

[King sns]

I like studying everything. Thankfully, it actually helps my career to study everything- (nursing- a lot of stuff applies when dealing with people all day- you don't need to, but it makes you better at the job- science, medicine, philosophy, psychology, sociology, health, world affairs, etc.) Something I wrote in a paper about personal goals related to career other day, lifelong learning- (kind of a cop out, since it's a personality trait/ lifestyle choice more than a goal..) I think a lot of careers are similar, so you can kind of try to engulf a huge amount of information but with a focus. It also helps with life in general. I can see pros to having more of an intense focus, but the cons outweigh a lot.

So yeah. 1 for broad knowledge base.

(and this is what I tell myself when up till three in the morning on wiki.... )