[{"id":608,"title":"Polymathy or polymathies: A typology proposal","sha":"8e54bb477f4fe239e7a364af3d219c65","user_id":null,"state":"published","body":"Recent TED talks and books like \"Range\" and \"The Polymath\" generated great popular interest in the concept of polymathy. However, polymathy is still ill-defined in academia. Here, I propose a more systematic typology, based on the literature review carried out by Araki (2015; 2018).\r\n\r\nPolymathy is divided into two major categories: passive polymathy and creative polymathy.\r\n\r\nPassive polymathy refers to the consumption of extant knowledge (Burke, 2010) whereas creative polymathy involves the generation of original contributions via cross-pollination or multidisciplinary syntheses. Passive polymathy is further divided into three types: Omni genere polymathy is the Renaissance polymathy that spans every genre of knowledge. Philosophical polymathy is the devotion to the pursuit of wide-ranging (but not all-encompassing) knowledge. Experiential polymathy is the acquisition of life-skills and meaningful experiences in a variety of forms and domains.\r\n\r\nCreative polymathy is further divided into four types: Avocational polymathy is the active engagement in multiple interests to the point of mixing vocations and avocations in a synergistic whole. Pro-c polymathy is the generation of creative products at the Pro-c level involving cross-pollination and multidisciplinary insights. Big-C polymathy is like Pro-c polymathy but involves highly eminent creations. Finally, Triarchic polymathy combines Big-C in one domain with Pro-c in at least two more domains.\r\n","created_at":"2019-06-22T04:27:08.466Z","updated_at":"2023-10-30T06:00:50.424Z","zenodo_id":3252271,"doi":"https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3252271","subject":null,"tags":["polymathy","polymath","creativity","expertise","knowledge","genius","eminence","renaissance person"],"vote_count":2,"view_count":1,"score":5.1,"deleted":false,"muted":false,"tweeted":true,"attachment_file_name":"Typology_of_Polymathy.png","attachment_content_type":"image/png","attachment_file_size":34665,"attachment_updated_at":"2019-06-22T04:27:08.234Z"},{"id":561,"title":"Creativity, an Essential Condition for the Development of Smart and Age-friendly Cities and Communities","sha":"d6c9abed53385e0cac471dd89bc4d557","user_id":null,"state":"published","body":"The creativity of older adults and the ageing population is an essential condition for the development of “smart and age-friendly cities and communities” (SAFCC). First of all, the creativity may be understood as (1) the acceptance and use of new technologies in a creative way or as (2) the ability to produce ideas, solutions, products, and services that are new and appropriate to the context. Creativity helps us adapt to the complexity of social life and to coping with uncertainty. Thus, SAFCC need to be characterized by the creative activity of citizens of all ages, openness to diversity and focus on bridging the digital divide and the robotics divide. The discussion needs to highlight, among others, basic findings from the Active Ageing Index and the Medium-sized Smart Cities Ranking conducted in the European Union. Moreover, selected observations about inequalities related to the creativity at the regional and local levels should be presented. The idea development needs to underline that such differences may have an influence on the current and future distribution and use of technological innovations and social innovations for ageing societies.","created_at":"2019-02-04T22:58:19.425Z","updated_at":"2019-10-24T17:48:57.996Z","zenodo_id":3236948,"doi":"https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3236948","subject":null,"tags":["age-friendly","cities","communities","smart","creativity","ageing","digital divide","robotics divide","composite indicators"],"vote_count":1,"view_count":1,"score":1.1,"deleted":false,"muted":false,"tweeted":true,"attachment_file_name":null,"attachment_content_type":null,"attachment_file_size":null,"attachment_updated_at":null},{"id":69,"title":"Reducing the peer review burden and raising grant success rates by passing a simple law","sha":"0b34a8a607005992056b4f4eb8fed76c","user_id":267,"state":"published","body":"Pass a law that limits the total dollars that a research organization can request from the federal government to three times the average dollars they received in previous years. This would immediately change the average success rate of grants to one in three; a major improvement from current rates. Scientists would be free to spend more time in the lab and less time writing and reviewing grants.\r\n\r\nHow would this work? If an institution did not generate an internal screen for limiting applications, their grants would be assigned a random number and only the appropriate fraction would be sent on to the respective funding agency. Smart institutions would establish priorities that matched to their values (e.g. supporting young scientists or multidisciplinary science). \r\n\r\nAsking institutions to screen grant applications based on their values would be a big change. But it is reasonable to ask institutions to share the burden of peer review and to play a roll in the process of selecting the best ideas. Regardless of how institutions responded, the burden of peer review would drop. Scientists would spend less time in DC, less time at the computer, and more time in the lab. ","created_at":"2015-02-19T19:05:06.450Z","updated_at":"2023-12-12T21:01:35.952Z","zenodo_id":23159,"doi":"http://dx.doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15533","subject":null,"tags":["research","researchers","academia","publishing","economy","science","society","occupation","science_policy","workforce","government","logistics","market","universities","creativity"],"vote_count":10,"view_count":1,"score":10.1,"deleted":false,"muted":false,"tweeted":false,"attachment_file_name":null,"attachment_content_type":null,"attachment_file_size":null,"attachment_updated_at":null},{"id":631,"title":"Relationships Between Polymathy as a Trait and Neurochemically-Based Individual Differences","sha":"753fac5b42e4c3cac704937e5be2ef39","user_id":null,"state":"published","body":"Polymathy traditionally means “wide-ranging knowledge”. However, Sriraman(2009) and [Michael Araki](/users/7e5ab981b273ead711a70ba889e65ff0) [Polymathy_](/ideas/8e54bb477f4fe239e7a364af3d219c65) have proposed that polymathy can function as a trait. Based the idea that polymathic people distinguishably seek to develop breadth and depth of knowledge as well as novel and useful integrations arising from it, we developed the Trait Polymathy Questionnaire, a self-report instrument. In a preliminary study, we found the following relationships between trait polymathy dimensions and neurochemically-based temperament traits:\r\n\r\n1.\tGeneral polymathy is positively associated with cortical temperament traits—plasticity(PL); probabilistic processing(PRO); and intellectual endurance(ERI)—as well as sensation seeking(SS) and self-satisfaction(SLF), and negatively associated with neuroticism(NEU).\r\n2.\tThe depth dimension alone shows no association with SS, nor plasticity or SLF. Thus, polymathy requires more novelty-seeking, speed of mental integration and self-satisfaction than specialism. \r\n3.\tThe breadth dimension alone shows no association with intellectual endurance and a stronger association with SS. Thus, an aspiring polymath without sustained attention will likely become a dilettante, not a polymath.\r\n4.\tThe integrativity dimension shows a stronger negative relationship with neuroticism and and association with motor tempo(TMS), possibly indicative of stronger dopaminergic system.\r\n\r\nPolymathy seems to originate from a unique set of traits working synergistically. Mainly cortical systems coupled with security about performance when faced with uncertainty.\r\n","created_at":"2019-11-15T20:33:30.997Z","updated_at":"2023-10-30T00:35:56.668Z","zenodo_id":3549054,"doi":"https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3549054","subject":null,"tags":["polymathy","polymath","temperament","personality","individual differences","differential psychology","neurochemistry","creativity","expertise","knowledge","genius","eminence","renaissance person"],"vote_count":0,"view_count":1,"score":1.1,"deleted":false,"muted":false,"tweeted":true,"attachment_file_name":"Trait_Polymathy_and_the_Functional_Ensemble_of_Temperament_together.png","attachment_content_type":"image/png","attachment_file_size":653291,"attachment_updated_at":"2019-11-15T20:33:30.856Z"},{"id":776,"title":"Breadth, Depth and Integration: The Three Dimensions of the Polymathy Construct","sha":"5ff33bee3321766b7bb581634aebfd72","user_id":null,"state":"published","body":"At the core of the polymathy construct is the person's relationship with knowledge in three dimensions: depth, breadth and integration.\r\n\r\nDepth refers to expertise and to the cumulative penetration into certain subjects of interest (in which society circumscribes within domains). It entails [knowledge components](/ideas/ffab4037c166cc20b1aebfadb090f205) (epistemic, technical and practical) that one “samples” from society, and the knowledge and expertise that one “composes” from their unique experiences and turns into self-made knowledge (Gabora, 2016). When depth is absent, dilettancy should be used instead of polymathy.\r\n\r\nBreadth refers to the latitude (also extension or comprehensiveness) of knowledge and to its diversity. Latitude entails covering several domains (as currently organized by society) whereas diversity entails knowledge in unrelated domains. More (sub-)domains and less typical combinations increase one's breadth score. Thus, developing typical arrays of expertise, well-circumscribed within a single domain, underscores specialism, not polymathy.\r\n\r\nIntegration refers to the capacity of developing connectedness and synergies among sufficiently profound and diverse ideas, activities, worldviews, styles, and modes of thinking or operation. Integration happens at the (i) ideational, (ii) personal, and (iii) societal levels: (i) involves trans-contextualism, and the synergistic command of different modes of thinking (e.g., analytic and intuitive); (ii) involves developing synergistic networks of enterprise (Gruber, 1988), or integrated activity sets (Dewey, 1934); (iii) involves creativity through integrative themes and informed, reflective and consequential actions (Bildung; [Michael Araki](/users/7e5ab981b273ead711a70ba889e65ff0)), or the examination, enlargement, and posterior enrichment of the world (Camus, 1942).\r\n","created_at":"2020-08-08T15:45:17.824Z","updated_at":"2024-07-10T09:40:14.070Z","zenodo_id":3977159,"doi":"https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3977159","subject":null,"tags":["polymathy","polymath","creativity","expertise","knowledge","genius","eminence","renaissance person","innovation","multipotentiality","multipotentialite"],"vote_count":0,"view_count":1,"score":2.1,"deleted":false,"muted":false,"tweeted":false,"attachment_file_name":"polymathy_triune.png","attachment_content_type":"image/png","attachment_file_size":239329,"attachment_updated_at":"2020-08-08T15:45:17.586Z"},{"id":1333,"title":"The Atlas of Human Range","sha":"63cbe19fe1e7eebc379231e1fb8430a1","user_id":null,"state":"published","body":"The Atlas of Human Range (AoHR) is an [Atlas of Human Interests](/ideas/98e3f9cea2b150029d0205070f59db05) evolution. The AoHR, however, maps a vast spectrum of human inner and outer manifestations, spanning temperament, personality, interests, knowledge orientations, soft and hard skills, and important behaviors and outcomes (e.g., well-being, health, income). Thus, it seeks to cover lifespace from early traits to mature realization.\r\n\r\nCentral to the AoHR is the identification of unique individual configurations in comparison to the aggregate of many individuals. The AoHR “positions” an individual within a larger, multidimensional “map,” hence the term “atlas.” It can be an important scientific tool to help individuals understand their comparative advantages and identify the most fruitful areas for growth. With a multidimensional and integrative approach, the atlas can also aid in estimating varying levels of “resistance” (e.g., competition, perceived profile distance) in different career paths, considering a combination of the individual's multidimensional profile and aggregate data from a large number of individuals. This can help answer what is special about oneself and how to contributing meaningfully to society. \r\n\r\nIt can also serve as a measure of [polymathy](/ideas/5ff33bee3321766b7bb581634aebfd72). Breadth is gauged by the diversity and disparatedness in one's knowledge profile. Depth relates to a minimum skill or [expertise](/ideas/ffab4037c166cc20b1aebfadb090f205) requirement in each domain. Integration is gauged through synergies between skillsets.\r\n","created_at":"2024-07-10T09:40:13.991Z","updated_at":"2024-07-30T06:00:36.412Z","zenodo_id":13129532,"doi":"https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13129532","subject":null,"tags":["human flourishing","polymathy","creativity","vocational interests","inventories","self development","lifelong learning"],"vote_count":0,"view_count":1,"score":0.1,"deleted":false,"muted":false,"tweeted":false,"attachment_file_name":null,"attachment_content_type":null,"attachment_file_size":null,"attachment_updated_at":null},{"id":487,"title":"Components of Expertise","sha":"ffab4037c166cc20b1aebfadb090f205","user_id":null,"state":"published","body":"Herling (2000:13) in his \"Operational definitions of expertise and competence\" outlined three basic components of expertise: knowledge; problem-solving; and experience.\r\n\r\nHere, I propose a more sophisticated differentiation that involves four types of knowledge:\r\n1) Epistemic Knowledge; \r\n2) Tooled Knowledge;\r\n3) Meta-Cognitive Knowledge;\r\n4) Idiosyncratic Knowledge.\r\n\r\nEpistemic knowledge refers to the understanding and the formation of principles and generalizable causal relationships. Epistemic principles are highly likely to cross domain boundaries.  \r\n\r\nTooled knowledge refers to specialized techniques of fact-finding, interpretation, or analysis. They are highly domain-specific.\r\n\r\nMeta-Cognitive Knowledge refers to knowledge about one's own cognition. It involves constantly improving one's schemata regarding one's own optimal cognitive and psychic functioning.\r\n\r\nIdiosyncratic Knowledge is divided into two types. Personal Idiosyncratic Knowledge refers to personal experiences that are not (yet) integrated into higher order functional schemata. Social Idiosyncratic Knowledge refers to social knowledge of highly arbitrary nature, which one has to learn as an instrument to function better in the society.\r\n\r\nIt is important to note that all types of knowledge can be either derived by the person themselves via Peircean abduction, or they can be acquired through systematic training or education.","created_at":"2018-09-16T18:53:48.334Z","updated_at":"2024-07-10T09:40:14.090Z","zenodo_id":1419803,"doi":"https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1419803","subject":null,"tags":["expertise","competence","knowledge","cognition","developmental psychology","intelligence","polymathy","creativity","social knowledge","training","education","learning","proficiency"],"vote_count":1,"view_count":1,"score":7.1,"deleted":false,"muted":false,"tweeted":true,"attachment_file_name":"lotus_flower_of_expertise.png","attachment_content_type":"image/png","attachment_file_size":224638,"attachment_updated_at":"2018-09-16T18:53:48.283Z"}]