What to learn to learn "everything."

jotate

Run for a political office and try as hard as you can to be unbiased. I'd bet you'll learn a shit ton more than you ever wanted to know.

grendel824_

Most of you actually read my post and realize that 1) I KNOW it's not possible to "know everything," I just thought that for a couple of different purposes, one being something I'm writing and the other being that I'd like to have an ordered approach to my continuing education and teaching, and 2) that by saying "everything" I deliberately left it open to interpretation to get as many ideas as possible, rather than limit it by saying "I want to write a character exactly like Batman - how did he become so good at everything?" or "how could somebody attain ALL POSSIBLE KNOWLEDGE OMGWTFBBQ!"

Lots of different angles, which is great - some specific and some very general. For my own purposes, while I enjoy knowing a crap-ton of seemingly random stuff that lets me have interesting conversations with college professors across many disciplines and also help my students with a variety of work, not just their English classes, I was considering a different approach to start making the best use of what I've got so far - for instance, I don't have an eidetic memory but I've heard that a close approximation can actually be learned. That might be neat, but then I wonder if there's not something else I could learn that would make learning THAT easier/more interesting. etc.

But the tangents that came out here are also interesting and well worth continuing to talk about, so don't let the limits of my OP put a stop to any.

Inquisitor

I'd say the most important thing to have while attempting to learn everything (which is of course, not possible) would be an incredibly open mind.

That and a lot of free time and patience.

The Cat

Tarantio wrote: »

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.

that's what I was thinking.

The Cat

Quid wrote: »

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.

Kind of a given . Guess I should add nutrition/fitness in as well, for throroughness' sake. And what I posted wasn't a hard and fast guide - best to tailor it to individual strengths, like. I mean, I completely forgot to include music in the list, because I'm basically crap at it. But there's at least a plan there, in which one picks a specialty, and plugs in a bunch of slightly-tangential-but-useful stuff to be studied slightly less in-depth, and then plugs in the holes with stuff one considers less vital but still fun/interesting, to be pursued when time allows.

ViolentChemistry

A lot of "learning everything" is taking multiple seperate disciplines and applying them to critical analysis of one particular activity. Over and over for everything that is. Hence the basis in logic, physics, chem and materials science I recommended. You'll eventually need deeper courses in all of these, and some mechanical and chemical engineering. And then you still only understand physical entities, you're going to have to fuck around with some philosophy to try to figure out abstract concepts. Which will fuck you because there's no "knowing" there.

Veegeezee

I can't really muster much respect for a person who educates himself for the sole purpose of being well or broadly educated, but I give major props to the kind of person who accumulates a depth and breadth of knowledge that's based on genuine interests. So, to proffer my opinion, a person should approach "knowing as much as possible" by building their foundation on things they're really concerned about mastering and working outward from there.

Also, budgeting your time in formal education wisely is pretty crucial. For me, that meant enrolling in lots of math and engineering classes, but it also means I'm going to miss out on a lot of law, philosophy, econ, etcetera because they may or may not be feasible self-education topics for me. We shall see.

Linden

Tarantio wrote: »

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.

Oh, certainly. In retrospect, I definitely erred there.

I agree that a degree of versatility is important to society and individuals. I suppose I disliked what I perceived as an attempt to specify this. And the last sentence, because it implied "at the expense of deep understanding of a specific topic" to me.

Zombiemambo

Linden wrote: »

Tarantio wrote: »

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.

Oh, certainly. In retrospect, I definitely erred there.

I agree that a degree of versatility is important to society and individuals. I suppose I disliked what I perceived as an attempt to specify this. And the last sentence, because it implied "at the expense of deep understanding of a specific topic" to me.

Well, Heinlein is obsessed with war. Ever read Starship Troopers? Might as well be a "I want you!" poster. The whole, "plan an invasion, die gallantly" schpiel isn't a coincidence.

But that's off-topic. Carry on.

ViolentChemistry

Veegeezee wrote: »

I can't really muster much respect for a person who educates himself for the sole purpose of being well or broadly educated, but I give major props to the kind of person who accumulates a depth and breadth of knowledge that's based on genuine interests. So, to proffer my opinion, a person should approach "knowing as much as possible" by building their foundation on things they're really concerned about mastering and working outward from there.

Also, budgeting your time in formal education wisely is pretty crucial. For me, that meant enrolling in lots of math and engineering classes, but it also means I'm going to miss out on a lot of law, philosophy, econ, etcetera because they may or may not be feasible self-education topics for me. We shall see.

But why can't everything be interesting?

Veegeezee

ViolentChemistry wrote: »

Veegeezee wrote: »

I can't really muster much respect for a person who educates himself for the sole purpose of being well or broadly educated, but I give major props to the kind of person who accumulates a depth and breadth of knowledge that's based on genuine interests. So, to proffer my opinion, a person should approach "knowing as much as possible" by building their foundation on things they're really concerned about mastering and working outward from there.

Also, budgeting your time in formal education wisely is pretty crucial. For me, that meant enrolling in lots of math and engineering classes, but it also means I'm going to miss out on a lot of law, philosophy, econ, etcetera because they may or may not be feasible self-education topics for me. We shall see.

But why can't everything be interesting?

Then more power to ya, I say. I'm all for the modern day daVinci. I just don't think it's safe to assume that any arbitrary person can become him merely by educating themselves.

Incenjucar

ViolentChemistry wrote: »

But why can't everything be interesting?

When someone finds EVERYTHING interesting they have ADD.

Seriously though, people aren't even aware of the majority of topics, due to the sheer number of them (How many years would YOU devote to studying Peruvian albino stink bug mating habits?), so it's hard to claim universal interest when there's nearly universal ignorance.

Gihgehls

I have ADHD and I have a general interest in almost everything. At some point or another most of my friends have said "man, you know way too much." They ask how I know so much and I can't really tell them more than "I find lots of things interesting and I read all day." Reading isn't all I do to satisfy my interests, as many of them turn into hobbies that I have not nearly enough time for.

EDIT: I should say that I agree with Incenjucar above in that there are just way too many topics that you will never even hear about, and it sucks but you will never ever get to know about them. Speaking for myself, I can say that when I DO find out about a topic, I usually find at least one thing about it that interests me, and that will lead me down a road of discovery about that topic that dead ends when the effort required to learn more outweighs my interest level.