Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

What to learn to learn "everything."

grendel824_grendel824_ Registered User
edited September 2007 in Debate and/or Discourse
Now I'm sure it's not possible, but what line(s) of inquiry/study would one follow to "learn everything," at least hypothetically speaking. I assume that multiple fields and forms of philosophy, epistemology, and memory would be the first stops. If one were going the Batman route, some kind of venture into the fields of martial arts and physiology would also be important... this is primarily for fiction-writing purposes and as an exercise in thought, though I always did think I was a little haphazard with my own learning style and IQ (no eidetic memory, but close to polymath levels in a variety of fields without making a concerted go at learning anything but what I happen to find interesting at the time) and was wondering if I could make better use of it by learning about memory/epitemological approaches... any ideas/systems/references to things already in fiction (or even non-fiction)?

grendel824_ on
«1

Posts

  • _J__J_ Pedant Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Well, first you have to define the "everything' which you desire to learn. Then you have to realize that you can never learn all of that. Then you fixate your thoughts on that for a few years and become enlightened.

    Seriously J not only are you a monumentally umpleasant person when you start uttering the nonsense that passes for philosophy in your mind (shame on whatever institution you graduated in, and shame on your tutors for creating such a monster), but your sense of humor, such as it is, is awful.
  • DhalphirDhalphir don't you open that trapdoor you're a fool if you dareRegistered User regular
    edited September 2007
    _J_ wrote: »
    Well, first you have to define the "everything' which you desire to learn. Then you have to realize that you can never learn all of that. Then you fixate your thoughts on that for a few years and become enlightened.

    Tube-san wrote:
    I apologise for my rudeness desu.
  • IncenjucarIncenjucar QA Tester -> Game Producer Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Not physically possible.

    You can be a jack of many trades, but you can't be a master of all trades, or even a jack of all trades considering human variety.

    That said, if you just want -broad- knowledge... just look at the name of every major in a university catalog.

    For a start.

    freefallagentad_zps635a83ed.png
  • _J__J_ Pedant Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Dhalphir wrote: »
    _J_ wrote: »
    Well, first you have to define the "everything' which you desire to learn. Then you have to realize that you can never learn all of that. Then you fixate your thoughts on that for a few years and become enlightened.

    Don't let Jeffe see that or he'll lock the thread.

    Seriously J not only are you a monumentally umpleasant person when you start uttering the nonsense that passes for philosophy in your mind (shame on whatever institution you graduated in, and shame on your tutors for creating such a monster), but your sense of humor, such as it is, is awful.
  • DhalphirDhalphir don't you open that trapdoor you're a fool if you dareRegistered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Don't sum threads up so completely that there's no more to say on the topic, then.
    <img class=" title=":lol:" class="bbcode_smiley" /><img class=" title=":lol:" class="bbcode_smiley" /><img class=" title=":lol:" class="bbcode_smiley" />

    Tube-san wrote:
    I apologise for my rudeness desu.
  • The CatThe Cat Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited September 2007
    Do what I did, only betterer.

    To expand: General humanities degree encompassing sociology, geography, and history, plus a science degree starting with general stuff and majoring in environmental science. The only things I'm missing are a better background in law and econ, some business management stuff and maybe some more physics. Languages and literature stuff are better kept for hobbies. Degrees are only meant to be a start-point, so coming out of undergrad as a jack-of-all-trades isn't actually a problem.

    tmsig.jpg
  • The Green Eyed MonsterThe Green Eyed Monster i blame hip hop Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    The Cat wrote: »
    Do what I did, only betterer.

    To expand: General humanities degree encompassing sociology, geography, and history, plus a science degree starting with general stuff and majoring in environmental science. The only things I'm missing are a better background in law and econ, some business management stuff and maybe some more physics. Languages and literature stuff are better kept for hobbies. Degrees are only meant to be a start-point, so coming out of undergrad as a jack-of-all-trades isn't actually a problem.
    I hope this is a joke.

    You don't know close to "everything."

    QUICK! What shoes am I wearing?

    Oh right, it's really a silly question and this is really a silly answer. You can know what you know, but it's idiotic to presume that you could ever know "everything."

    wisdom wrote:
    if knowledge is power and power corrupts, be smart, be evil
  • FirstComradeStalinFirstComradeStalin Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    The Cat wrote: »
    Do what I did, only betterer.

    To expand: General humanities degree encompassing sociology, geography, and history, plus a science degree starting with general stuff and majoring in environmental science. The only things I'm missing are a better background in law and econ, some business management stuff and maybe some more physics. Languages and literature stuff are better kept for hobbies. Degrees are only meant to be a start-point, so coming out of undergrad as a jack-of-all-trades isn't actually a problem.

    I understand what you mean with a degree only being a starting point, but I always struggle to see how something this spread out can take you into something specific at the graduate level or something like that. Out of curiosity, what did you do once you graduated that your degree helped you springboard into?

    Picture1-4.png
  • TarantioTarantio Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    To address the science fiction aspect of an attempt at greatest obtainable knowledge:

    It's theoretically possible to eventually have a built in computer system, either wearable or surgically implanted (or integrated some other way, I guess) that records everything you see and hear, to a database searchable by content. It would probably use a HUD but I suppose any kind of easily portable interface could work. Add to this an internet connection, and perhaps an ideal Wikipedia, and you've got access to a great deal of information. Who knows, maybe we'll eventually get search technology that works just as well or better than human memory recall.

    Half of this I got from a project somebody did in one of my classes two semesters ago, and the other half is from Down and Out in the Magic Kingdom by Cory Doctorow.

    For something less... fictional, I really think we'll need a different objective than learning everything.

    For a list of things to concentrate on in the meantime:

    "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

    "Arguing with anonymous strangers on the Internet is a sucker's game because they almost always turn out to be -- or to be indistinguishable from -- self-righteous sixteen-year-olds possessing infinite amounts of free time."
    Neal Stephenson
  • The CatThe Cat Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited September 2007
    celery77 wrote: »
    The Cat wrote: »
    Do what I did, only betterer.

    To expand: General humanities degree encompassing sociology, geography, and history, plus a science degree starting with general stuff and majoring in environmental science. The only things I'm missing are a better background in law and econ, some business management stuff and maybe some more physics. Languages and literature stuff are better kept for hobbies. Degrees are only meant to be a start-point, so coming out of undergrad as a jack-of-all-trades isn't actually a problem.
    I hope this is a joke.

    You don't know close to "everything."

    QUICK! What shoes am I wearing?

    Oh right, it's really a silly question and this is really a silly answer. You can know what you know, but it's idiotic to presume that you could ever know "everything."

    That's plainly not even close to what the OP was asking. Don't be silly.

    tmsig.jpg
  • The CatThe Cat Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited September 2007
    I understand what you mean with a degree only being a starting point, but I always struggle to see how something this spread out can take you into something specific at the graduate level or something like that. Out of curiosity, what did you do once you graduated that your degree helped you springboard into?
    Its actually two degrees, I'm doing honors in enviro science right now since that was the 'proper' major*, and won't have any trouble getting a job. I'd argue most people overspecialise in undergrad, although its kind of unavoidable for some fields.


    *the one with the money >.>

    tmsig.jpg
  • The Green Eyed MonsterThe Green Eyed Monster i blame hip hop Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    The Cat wrote: »
    celery77 wrote: »
    The Cat wrote: »
    Do what I did, only betterer.

    To expand: General humanities degree encompassing sociology, geography, and history, plus a science degree starting with general stuff and majoring in environmental science. The only things I'm missing are a better background in law and econ, some business management stuff and maybe some more physics. Languages and literature stuff are better kept for hobbies. Degrees are only meant to be a start-point, so coming out of undergrad as a jack-of-all-trades isn't actually a problem.
    I hope this is a joke.

    You don't know close to "everything."

    QUICK! What shoes am I wearing?

    Oh right, it's really a silly question and this is really a silly answer. You can know what you know, but it's idiotic to presume that you could ever know "everything."

    That's plainly not even close to what the OP was asking. Don't be silly.
    Well the answer to the OP's question is that it's foolish to think that you could ever approach to know "everything."

    No matter what you know, there is always someone who knows more. I think there's some pithy quote along these lines, "The more I learn, the more I realize how little I know" or some shit like that.

    It's just foolish to presume that anyone can approach knowing "everything," and the true challenge is knowing when to defer to others when your expertise is exhausted.

    wisdom wrote:
    if knowledge is power and power corrupts, be smart, be evil
  • The CatThe Cat Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited September 2007
    celery77 wrote: »
    Well the answer to the OP's question is that it's foolish to think that you could ever approach to know "everything."

    No matter what you know, there is always someone who knows more. I think there's some pithy quote along these lines, "The more I learn, the more I realize how little I know" or some shit like that.

    It's just foolish to presume that anyone can approach knowing "everything," and the true challenge is knowing when to defer to others when your expertise is exhausted.

    Absolutely, but its fun to have a stab at it. God knows I'm nowhere near the 'everything' point and never will be, but i got a fair chunk of stuff in my head. Makes it easy to talk to people, at least. If your head is full of, say, nothing but accountancy and yu-gi-oh, not so much :P

    tmsig.jpg
  • The Green Eyed MonsterThe Green Eyed Monster i blame hip hop Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    The Cat wrote: »
    celery77 wrote: »
    Well the answer to the OP's question is that it's foolish to think that you could ever approach to know "everything."

    No matter what you know, there is always someone who knows more. I think there's some pithy quote along these lines, "The more I learn, the more I realize how little I know" or some shit like that.

    It's just foolish to presume that anyone can approach knowing "everything," and the true challenge is knowing when to defer to others when your expertise is exhausted.

    Absolutely, but its fun to have a stab at it. God knows I'm nowhere near the 'everything' point and never will be, but i got a fair chunk of stuff in my head. Makes it easy to talk to people, at least. If your head is full of, say, nothing but accountancy and yu-gi-oh, not so much :P
    I (privately) pride myself on my ability to talk to people about in-depth NFL bullshit along with what the fuck else ever fills my head, but the point is that no matter what I may know about early '90s NFC Championship games and Merton Hanks, the extent of my Australian history begins and ends with some 1980s Queensland scandals I read in one single book.

    It's just a ridiculous question. We all know what we know, and it's a little presumptuous to lump one kind of knowledge in "everything" and some other kind of knowledge in "everything else."

    It all has its value.

    wisdom wrote:
    if knowledge is power and power corrupts, be smart, be evil
  • TarantioTarantio Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Ok then, so that the discussion doesn't die, we'll rephrase.

    How would one go about learning as much as is possible for a human to learn?

    "Arguing with anonymous strangers on the Internet is a sucker's game because they almost always turn out to be -- or to be indistinguishable from -- self-righteous sixteen-year-olds possessing infinite amounts of free time."
    Neal Stephenson
  • devoirdevoir Registered User
    edited September 2007
    Make a list, work through it.

    Start with a basic list, so you have arts, science, etc, etc. Then once you acquire basic knowledge in those, progress deeper. Basically iterative (might be the wrong word...) learning.

    It's basically how the education system of most societies is constructed with primary school, secondary school, tertiary education. It's just that usually you pick one path (science) and follow that (mathematics) to a very specific point (modelling of human population based on environmental factors).

  • Aroused BullAroused Bull Registered User
    edited September 2007
    celery77 wrote: »
    No matter what you know, there is always someone who knows more. I think there's some pithy quote along these lines, "The more I learn, the more I realize how little I know" or some shit like that.
    I think you've amalgamated Socrates and Homer Simpson.

  • electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    You know setting out to learn "everything" seems like entirely the wrong approach to the problem, and especially the wrong approach to choosing degrees in university.

    Setting out to learn a lot about something you'd like to do should be how you approach university. Then simply taking the trouble to look things up when you wonder about them should cover the rest.

    The Company: The CYOA game that anybody can join at any time - running now!
  • FeralFeral Who needs a medical license when you've got style? Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Tarantio wrote: »
    How would one go about learning as much as is possible for a human to learn?

    Lock yourself in a library after an apocalypse destroys all the other humans on earth.
    Just be careful not to step on your glasses.

    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
    the "no true scotch, man" fallacy.
  • LiveWireLiveWire Registered User
    edited September 2007
    The pursuit of knowledge is the most noble endeavor a man can undertake, and I applaud your ambition. Obviously a mastery of every skill is not possible in a single lifetime, but we can still try. I made myself a list about a year or so ago as a lad of 19, of things that I wanted to accomplish before I die. I set only the barest limits (ie No walking on the Moon), but when I was done I was shocked at the number of things that were within my immediate grasp.

    My 200 or so goals ranged from the high minded (Earn a phd, write a novel) to the less enlightened (go sky diving, two chicks at the same time), from the primal (learn to fight, hunt, garden some of my own food) to the Romantic (become an accomplished musician, live abroad). Its only been a year but I am quite pleased with the progress I see myself making. For instance, I'm three years into a Biology degree with my sights on grad school, I went sky-diving last summer, I train at a Jujitsu dojo every Tuesday and Thursday, once a week I practice with a voice coach, etc.

    Most things worth doing take a loooong time to do. For me my list has been incredibly important to keeping me focused. Its sooo fucking easy to just collapse after you get home and not really do much anything, but I try to orient myself to the mindset that I am constantly needing to sow the seeds that will feed me later. Always work toward that payoff. Next month I will be at a local club performing a few songs I wrote. Literally tens of thousands of hours of my life have gone to working toward this moment, from piano lessons as a kid to learning how to string my first guitar to my new voice lessons that I'm paying out the ass for.

    Theres a quote from a movie, and maybe this is cliche and banal to you, but I don't care because its fucking beautiful to me and its helped to sustain me when I feel like quitting. Its from A League of Their Own, and Gena Davis's character is telling Tom Hanks that she's going home and giving up baseball, because, she says "it just got too hard". Hanks says back to her "It's supposed to be hard. If it wasn't hard everybody would do it. The Hard is what makes it great."

  • LindenLinden Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Tarantio wrote: »
    "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

    I felt I had to address this. Some of these are valid. Others, less so.

    Those I'd consider valid in a typical environment:

    change a diaper, balance accounts, build a wall, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, cook a tasty meal
    I'm not totally sure about "solve equations", I admit. That one's dependent on how exactly it's defined - I wouldn't expect the ability to solve cubics, for instance. Even some of these are unnecessary in certain circumstances. The first, for instance, is only an issue if you have children.

    These, however, I would consider specialist in today's environment:

    plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, set a bone, pitch manure, program a computer, fight efficiently, die gallantly
    I think that these are worth considering in greater detail.
    • plan an invasion: No. This is not something a human being "should" be able to do effectively. I'm not sure how it is reasonable by any metric to expect someone who has not put years in to have the strategic knowledge to do this.
    • butcher a hog: This is somewhat more defensible. However, I would argue that in our current society, this is a long way from necessary. That said, it may be a skill that can be cultivated relatively quickly.
    • conn a ship: Yeah, no. This is absurd to expect.
    • design a building: Sure, this might be a good thing. Does a simple square count? As things get more elaborate, the time needed to learn becomes implausible.
    • write a sonnet: Why would this be something I "should" be able to do?
    • set a bone: Maybe. I wouldn't be spending time where I'd be unreachable without this knowledge or the company of those who have it, certainly. But I don't expect that to happen.
    • pitch manure: For those of us in the circumstances where we regularly encounter manure, this may be a necessity. For the rest of the world, less so.
    • program a computer: To do what? Anything interesting, no. Because there's no need to do this in an interconnected society.
    • fight efficiently: I think my view on this should be clear at this point.
    • die gallantly: Why would it matter? Really, why?

    Admittedly, this all comes from a character who happens to be practically immortal (whee, plot armour!). In a society which actually requires all of this. So, in context, it makes more sense. However, as we do not live in isolated bubbles within which we are required to survive (and, furthermore, carry out warfare), it's not totally relevant.


    As far as learning as much as you can, though, you first have to determine whether you value depth or breadth more. Learning what you want to is probably the best option.

    What if this weren't a rhetorical question?
  • Loren MichaelLoren Michael Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Now I'm sure it's not possible, but what line(s) of inquiry/study would one follow to "learn everything," at least hypothetically speaking.

    Reading Wikipedia for fun is a great first step.

    2ezikn6.jpg
  • Loren MichaelLoren Michael Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    The Cat wrote: »
    Absolutely, but its fun to have a stab at it. God knows I'm nowhere near the 'everything' point and never will be, but i got a fair chunk of stuff in my head. Makes it easy to talk to people, at least.

    I'm the same way. I'm well-versed in enough stuff that even if I don't know a lot about something (sports is my severely weak point), I can ask some good questions.

    2ezikn6.jpg
  • The CatThe Cat Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited September 2007
    I feel you're taking that quote rather too literally, linden.

    tmsig.jpg
  • TarantioTarantio Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    The Cat wrote: »
    I feel you're taking that quote rather too literally, linden.

    Well, to be fair, I probably was as well, in offering it as any kind of literal guide. I think it does give a fairly good approximation of the variety of fields one could benefit from having knowledge in, for the type of person that enjoys being useful.

    For instance, I would interpret write a sonnet, set a bone, and pitch manure as express oneself artisically, know first aid, and be capable of manual labor, respectively. I do think these are quite reasonable for any able bodied individual even in today's society- let alone an individual who wants to learn whatever he or she can.

    "Arguing with anonymous strangers on the Internet is a sucker's game because they almost always turn out to be -- or to be indistinguishable from -- self-righteous sixteen-year-olds possessing infinite amounts of free time."
    Neal Stephenson
  • Bliss 101Bliss 101 Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    I find that browsing Wikipedia and following random links will teach you a lot of stuff.

    If you're the kind of person who's naturally interested in a broad spectrum of fields, then you'll eventually develop a working knowledge in many/most fields within said spectrum. I'm not sure if formal education is necessary or even the best way to achieve this. My approach to school has always been "this is how I get a reasonably interesting, reasonably well paid job so I can afford to pursue my other interests", and at the moment I'm working on a PhD in a very specialized field, but this hasn't stopped me from becoming familiar with what I think is a wide variety of subjects.

    MSL59.jpg
  • shutzshutz Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Conventional methods of learning are meaningless if learning "everything" is your goal.

    In any case, I've developped a philosophy wherein, as long as I know where to look for a piece of information or knowledge, I don't need to know the information or knowledge myself. So an unrestricted Internet connection at your fingertips is the closest you might come to "knowing" everything. The only problem is, you end up "knowing" all sorts of inaccurate or even false stuff.

    If you want to go into a science fiction route in your writing, then you can try to imagine a simple but fertile mathematical and programming construct that "contains" all possible knowledge, and then figure out a way for a human mind to interface with that, so that the human in question has access to all possible knowledge.

    Creativity begets criticism.
    Check out my new blog: http://50wordstories.ca
    Also check out my old game design blog: http://stealmygamedesigns.blogspot.com
  • ElJeffeElJeffe Super Moderator, Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited September 2007
    There is a finite amount of knowledge you can learn in your life. Period. That finite amount is orders of magnitude less than "everything."

    Further, I would say that that the amount of knowledge that pertains to any reasonably specific subset of study is still more than any human can hope to learn in a life time. Let's say, economics. No one person will ever be able to learn everything there is to know about econ. That would require them to internalize the work of every half-decent economist, learn all theories ever created, learn about the workings of every civilization in every nation on the planet for all of human history, just for starters. A human can't do that. And that's just for a single field of study.

    Unless you're willing to somehow quantify the value of some knowledge over others - establish, for instance, that the ideal breadth of knowledge for a given field is X, and then work towards achieving X in as many fields as possible - there's not really an answer that isn't self-evident.

    Read a lot. Try to read about something every day that you don't already know. If acquisition of knowledge is your only goal, it doesn't really matter what you read. If you buy nothing but sociology books, you'll still be gaining knowledge each day, and you'll be getting closer to that so-unattainable-it's-not-even-funny goal of yours.

    If a broad knowledge base is also part of your goal, then read a lot. Search the internet a lot. Wiki a lot. Talk to people who know more than you a lot.

    Maddie: "I named my feet. The left one is flip and the right one is flop. Oh, and also I named my flip-flops."

    I make tweet.
  • El_DesamparadoEl_Desamparado Registered User
    edited September 2007
    As we're already throwing around some references to fiction, I strongly recommend the OP read the short story "Understand" by Ted Chiang:

    http://www.infinityplus.co.uk/stories/under.htm

    Victim of severe brain damage undergoes experimental techniques to regenerate brain tissue and becomes increasingly intelligent. I haven't read it for a while, but remember that initially the main character seems to be blessed and it's easy to feel envious of his blossoming abilities. However, before long he has acquired such a unique perspective through his increased intelligence and knowledge that he becomes quite obnoxious. This is a character that potentially could learn everything, and instead of using that knowledge to benefit everyone he just goes into evil genius mode...

    So, y'know, be warned.

  • durandal4532durandal4532 Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    As we're already throwing around some references to fiction, I strongly recommend the OP read the short story "Understand" by Ted Chiang:

    http://www.infinityplus.co.uk/stories/under.htm

    Victim of severe brain damage undergoes experimental techniques to regenerate brain tissue and becomes increasingly intelligent. I haven't read it for a while, but remember that initially the main character seems to be blessed and it's easy to feel envious of his blossoming abilities. However, before long he has acquired such a unique perspective through his increased intelligence and knowledge that he becomes quite obnoxious. This is a character that potentially could learn everything, and instead of using that knowledge to benefit everyone he just goes into evil genius mode...

    So, y'know, be warned.

    Actually, it's worse.
    Spoiler:

  • CantideCantide Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    You could always try reading the entire Encyclopedia. You wouldn't even be the first.

    2v0ltm9.jpg
  • El_DesamparadoEl_Desamparado Registered User
    edited September 2007

    Actually, it's worse.
    Spoiler:

    I completely forgot about that twist. There really is no hope. D:

  • ViolentChemistryViolentChemistry __BANNED USERS
    edited September 2007
    An intro course in materials science and engineering gives you a really great starting point for figuring out how to break shit. Unless it's living shit. To learn how to break shit that's a live, take an intro anatomy course.

    DAMM
    Drunks Against Mad Mothers
  • electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    An intro course in materials science and engineering gives you a really great starting point for figuring out how to break shit. Unless it's living shit. To learn how to break shit that's a live, take an intro anatomy course.
    ^ He's right you know. You learn a lot about how and why to break things, and also the best ways to spot things which are likely headed that way on their own.

    The Company: The CYOA game that anybody can join at any time - running now!
  • ViolentChemistryViolentChemistry __BANNED USERS
    edited September 2007
    An intro course in materials science and engineering gives you a really great starting point for figuring out how to break shit. Unless it's living shit. To learn how to break shit that's a live, take an intro anatomy course.
    ^ He's right you know. You learn a lot about how and why to break things, and also the best ways to spot things which are likely headed that way on their own.

    You also learn why good katanas are made in a totally different manner from bastard-swords, what each one is better for and why, and why they should both be made of carbon steel, not stainless. In fact you learn to think very little of stainless steel for any use except food preparation and consumption.

    Edit: You also need physics and chemistry. Take at least the first two of each that an engineer would take. Which means you're going to have to take calculus. Take a logic course (usually listed under both Math and Philosophy, like simultaneously, with a slash), too.

    DAMM
    Drunks Against Mad Mothers
  • ZalbinionZalbinion Registered User
    edited September 2007
    No love for foreign languages? Learning languages lets you read/listen to/watch media that teach you a lot about many different cultures.

  • QuidQuid The Fifth Horseman Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    The Cat wrote: »
    Languages... are better kept for hobbies.
    Youse and I gonna have some words thar bitch.

    I'm also disappointed by the lack of mention of sex and a thorough understanding of it. I mean, of all the things to be knowledgable in one would think that'd be high up on the list.

    PSN: allenquid
  • DjinnDjinn Registered User
    edited September 2007
    Read widely. Spend less time watching/reading the news- most of it is trivial and repetitious. Spend more time reading commentary of all kinds. A good place to start is to scan this and this. Dont just soak up what you read; think about it, question it, engage with it. Come up with a considered opinion and then and argue it with others, on forums perhaps.

  • AbsoluteHeroAbsoluteHero __BANNED USERS
    edited September 2007
    Clearly, the way to learn everything is to destroy everything so there is very little left to learn.

  • FencingsaxFencingsax Registered User regular
    edited September 2007
    Well, if you want Life, the Universe and Everything, the answer's simple.
    Spoiler:

    It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it
«1
Sign In or Register to comment.