
Multidisciplinary - Amorymeltzer
https://themultidisciplinarian.com/2016/05/06/multidisciplinary/
======
raddad
I especially like one of the comments on the page.

“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

~~~
amelius
A human being should be able to fly a Boeing 747, run a marathon, design a
nuclear reactor, prove Fermat's last theorem, climb the K2, dance the Swan
Lake, discover new drugs, speak 7 languages. Specialization is for insects.

Just to put things into perspective. I'm glad we have insects :)

~~~
RangerScience
It's more about: Humans should specialize in solving problems, or making art,
or performing... Which to a large extent just means "specialize in learning".

That's what each person in the article did. They found a problem, learned what
they needed to solve it, and solved it.

It's probably way less about specialization versus willing to depart from your
existing specializations. If you think, "Oh, I'm a software engineer, I can't
do electrical", then you can't solve some problems. Or you can say, "I'm a
software engineer, but I need to solve an electrical problem. Guess I'll go
learn some electrical engineering."

Over the last week, I've given myself a crash-course in Arch Linux, driver
code, and how feature points (as in computer vision) work, because there's a
problem I need to solve that needs me to know these things. Until I changed my
attitude from "I'm a web dev! I can't do that!" to "It's a problem I'm going
to solve", doing those things was hard. When I changed my outlook, doing those
things was easy _.

_ Do the work, get the output - work's still work, but it's not... "hard".
Just involved and time-consuming.

------
zyxley
> A famous example from another field is the case of the derivation of the
> double-helix model of DNA by Watson and Crick. Their advantage in the field,
> mostly regarded as a weakness before their discovery, was their failure –
> unlike all their rivals – to specialize in a discipline.

It's sad to see yet another source gloss over the central roles of Maurice
Wilkins and Rosalind Franklin in the understanding of the nature of DNA.

------
thecrow1213
Very interesting stuff. In the context of software development, I definitely
feel the silo of programming around me. While I enjoy it, it's all I do and
now I naturally have to compete with all other programmers for jobs and other
forms of professional attention. I'm sure I'm not the only one who feels this
way. Having a multidisciplinary approach to the work I do in my life may open
up some doors. Thanks for posting.

------
roflchoppa
I realized that the pursuit of being a jack of all trades (and master of few)
was worthwhile when I was cleaning drains for a ceramic class i was TA-ing
for. Long story short teacher comes up to me when i was scooping clay out of
the drain, says "just spin it clockwise" and voila the drain began to pull the
loose clay and drained the excess water as well.

Learned a lot from that dude, started reverse casting cement to make body
parts for cars too. Learned how to drop a skimboard with maximum velocity
without the water weight reducing the speed.

------
PaulHoule
(i.e. everybody in academia has a job because a discipline exists; question
the disciplinary boundaries and that calls the whole physical structure into
question.)

------
nraynaud
I want his job. I like having eagle, fusion 360 and pycharm open next to each
other.

If you have a position open for that kind of people, send me a message,
please.

