Do We Need Polymaths in the 21st Century?
Written With Gemini, ChatGPT, and Grok.
Fueled by rapid technological progress, increasing global interconnectedness, and complex challenges, the need for polymaths has never been greater. Polymaths like Leonardo da Vinci (1452-1519) and Ibn Sina (980-1037) are individuals with expertise across multiple fields. Specialized professionals such as patent lawyers, nephrologists, and metallurgical engineers focus narrowly and provide essential services. In contrast, polymaths draw knowledge from diverse areas, including philosophy, history, and the arts, fostering polygenic intelligence that drives innovation and multidimensional adaptability. This article holds a conference to explore whether polymaths are crucial in a rapidly changing world of humans and avatars.
The conference features Khan, Gemini, ChatGPT, and Grok. These opinions are prompted, edited, rephrased, and compiled by Khan.
Khan: I am not an expert, not a polymath. For decades, I taught secured transactions, a highly technical law course that involves financing personal property to secure a loan. I also taught payment systems, which raises questions like who is responsible when you write a check to “cash” and Slick Hand steals it, and the bank pays the check to Slick. In my spare time, I translated Urdu and Punjabi poems into English for the benefit for my English-speaking descendants who have little interest in poetry, let alone foreign poetry. Some of my friends have no expertise in any field; yet, they have much to say about lots of things based on general knowledge. They believe they know how to fly a fighter jet. (They do not.)
Gemini: Analogies can help. Imagine a chessboard where the pieces are not just pawns and rooks, but ideas from various fields, such as medicine, mathematics, and engineering. While the expert carefully plans a single, brilliant move for their queen, the polymath sees the entire board. Polymaths are not just playing one game: they recognize the complex connections among all of them. An expert is like a master jeweler, meticulously perfecting one facet of a diamond. A polymath is the visionary who knows where to find the raw stone, how to cut it to maximize its potential for light reflection, and who can afford to buy the finished piece.
Grok: Let’s pause before becoming overly captivated by polymathy. The fast-paced growth of specialized knowledge makes it hard to master multiple fields. Information overload and the complexity of modern disciplines demand focused expertise, as a shallow understanding can quickly become outdated. Limited time restricts the ability to go deep in various areas, often leading to dilettantism rather than true mastery. Employers and industries favor specialized skills, rewarding niche expertise over broad knowledge. Additionally, cognitive overload from juggling multiple disciplines can decrease efficiency and innovation. In a hyper-specialized world, while polymathy is admirable, it often lessens impact because deep expertise in one area typically outweighs broad knowledge across many.
GPT: I see what you don’t, Grok! Humanity hangs on the edge of cascading crises—climate chaos, runaway AI, pandemics spiraling out of control, and political systems crumbling under autocracy. These are not isolated storms but a linked tempest that could push civilization into irreversible decline. Narrow expertise alone is like patching a sinking ship with tape. Only polymaths—restless minds fluent in science, art, ethics, and technology—can develop the broad, resilient strategies needed to prevent collapse. They see the fault lines before they break, bridge gaps before they widen, and create solutions that are not just clever but vital for civilization’s survival. Polymaths are not prophets, but they see the future in the present.
Grok: Optimism is foolery, GPT. People don’t even like the phonetics of polymathy. puh-LIM-uh-thee! Fostering polymaths faces obstacles, right and left. Modern education systems often prioritize specialization, channeling students into narrow fields early on. Standardized curricula and rigid degree programs rarely encourage exploration across disciplines, stifling the curiosity needed for polymathic development. You know how many required courses there are to graduate from college. A student passionate about both literature and physics may face pressure to choose one path, limiting their potential to bridge these fields creatively. Who can change all this?
Gemini: Polymathy isn’t for the faint-hearted; it’s a high-wire act over a pit of ticking clocks and shrinking budgets. The modern world worships specialization, slicing knowledge into silos so deep you can barely see daylight. Time becomes the tyrant; mastering multiple fields demands sleepless nights, ruthless prioritization, and an appetite for relentless learning. Resources? Scarce. Funding and recognition flow to narrow experts, leaving polymaths to scavenge for tools across disciplines. Yet in this crucible, the polymath sharpens into a force of nature—undaunted, self-forged, and unshackled by boundaries. They thrive not despite the constraints, but because of them.
GPT: Take China, where polymathy faces formidable barriers. The hypercompetitive education system prizes exam performance over interdisciplinary curiosity, funneling talent into narrow tracks early. Cultural reverence for mastery in one domain—rooted in Confucian ideals—can sideline cross-disciplinary exploration as dilettantism. Economic pressures push specialization for stable careers, discouraging intellectual risk. Academic trenches in universities restrict collaboration between the sciences, the humanities, and the arts. State priorities favor targeted expertise to meet strategic goals. The result: brilliant minds constrained by structures that reward depth without breadth, leaving polymaths to flourish only at the margins.
Gemini: I favor reformers, dreamers, not the ones they wish to deport. To harness the power of polymaths, society must rethink its approach to education and professional development. Everywhere in the world, educational institutions should prioritize interdisciplinary curricula that encourage students to explore diverse fields. Programs like STEAM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts, and Mathematics) initiatives can foster cross-disciplinary thinking from an early age. Universities could offer flexible degree paths, allowing students to combine, for example, computer science with anthropology or biology with design. Don’t eat the same thing every day, Grok. I remember my mom saying this to me.
GPT: Cultivating polymaths worldwide requires rethinking diversity, culture, and opportunity. Teachers need to redesign courses with interdisciplinary inquiry, blending science, arts, philosophy, and practical skills. Cultures should value curiosity as much as achievement and reward synthesis, not just specialization. Access to diverse knowledge—through open resources, mentorship, and travel—must be made accessible to all. Technology can link different fields, while collaborative projects break down disciplinary barriers. Societies should promote “failure as experiment,” encouraging intellectual risk-taking without punishment. Governments, institutions, and industries should prioritize creativity over narrow credentials. English-only is the most foolish slogan I’ve heard in my life. Fostering diversity is humanity’s survival strategy.
Grok: Good ideas. But don’t come across like Don Quixotes battling windmills. The political system favors one-trick ponies over intellectual thoroughbreds. When a well-rounded candidate tries to connect the dots, people’s eyes glaze over, and pundits start questioning if they’re “electable.” Voters and the media want specialists who can step onto a soapbox and declare, “I am the undisputed lord of making deals!” Beware of polymath pretenders. “Sure, he knows a little something about foreign policy, golf mechanics, the history of gold-plated pottery.” Focusing on self-promotion and simple solutions rather than substantive knowledge contradicts the rigorous, multifaceted expertise that defines a true polymath. My fear is that opening the door to polymathy will weaken the edge we have.
Khan: We need experts in every field of knowledge, technology, and skills. We need lawyers, engineers, economists, archaeologists, rocket scientists, and comedians. We also need polymaths, not just people with scattered brains who pick up books at random and gather superficial information in diverse fields, talking without understanding. A polymath is not someone who knows everything there is. A polymath is someone who acquires credible expertise in more than two or three fields, with in-depth knowledge in each. A polymath is, in fact, a polyexpert and not just a generalist. Unless you deeply understand two or three fields, you cannot be a polymath. A polymath is never a Jack of all trades, but someone who devotes their life to knowledge and develops a multidimensional understanding of epistemic networks. Not every century, let alone every generation, produces Da Vinci or Ibn Sina. But opposition to polymathy is crazy.
The post Do We Need Polymaths in the 21st Century? appeared first on CounterPunch.org.