Master of Many Trades

General discussion about the Elder Race, Life, the Universe and Everything.
Post Reply
User avatar
deepfsh
Cellarius
Cellarius
Posts: 360
Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2013 5:19 pm

Master of Many Trades

Post by deepfsh » Wed Feb 25, 2015 3:52 pm

Here's an article that some will definitely enjoy reading: Anyone Can Learn to be a Polymath.
  • Monopathy, or over-specialisation, eventually retreats into defending what one has learnt rather than making new connections.
  • There is, I think, a case to be made for a new area of study to counter the monopathic drift of the modern world. Call it polymathics.
Well, actually, this concept is already counted in by the Institute For the Future's Future Work Skills 2020 (2011):
  • 7th skill: TRANSDISCIPLINARITY
    DEFINITION: literacy in and ability to understand concepts across multiple disciplines.

    The ideal worker of the next decade is “T-shaped”—they bring deep understanding of at least one field, but have the capacity to converse in the language of a broader range of disciplines. This requires a sense of curiosity and a willingness to go on learning far beyond the years of formal education. As extended lifespans promote multiple careers and exposure to more industries and disciplines, it will be particularly important for workers to develop this T-shaped quality.
"You talk the talk ... do you walk the walk?" Kubrick, Full Metal Jacket

User avatar
DSKlausler
Centurio
Centurio
Posts: 162
Joined: Thu May 01, 2014 12:03 pm
Location: My bubble outside Chicago.

Re: Master of Many Trades

Post by DSKlausler » Thu Feb 26, 2015 7:20 am

I think that it's clear that there are many of these here. I am fortunate to have at least three in my immediate friend group.

These people, and I include myself, are by far the most valuable in any job or task of value. By way of explanation: my skills are not visible here.
Anything is possible with the proper training.

User avatar
LoneBear
Legatus Legionis
Legatus Legionis
Posts: 4024
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 12:38 am
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Contact:

Re: Master of Many Trades

Post by LoneBear » Thu Feb 26, 2015 10:27 am

deepfsh wrote:
Monopathy, or over-specialisation, eventually retreats into defending what one has learnt rather than making new connections.
That's why I define an "expert" as "someone who knows more and more, about less and less, until they know everything about nothing." And they go to amazing extremes to defend their knowledge of nothing!
deepfsh wrote:The ideal worker of the next decade is “T-shaped”—they bring deep understanding of at least one field, but have the capacity to converse in the language of a broader range of disciplines. This requires a sense of curiosity and a willingness to go on learning far beyond the years of formal education. As extended lifespans promote multiple careers and exposure to more industries and disciplines, it will be particularly important for workers to develop this T-shaped quality.
But the trend is opposite, as the Masters of humanity do not want intelligent slaves--too much trouble. And I've noticed this trend over the years. Logic and analogy, as the "T-shaped" discipline was called, was actually taught in grammar school. I recall my 4th grade class, where we were taught basic logic and how to identify parallel patterns in different fields. These days, most do not even have a grasp of basic logic, let alone the tools to apply it in a cross-disciplinary field.

For example, if I assert that: "given all fleeps are gorps and all smurfies are gorps, then all fleeps are smurfies." Is the assertion true or false, and why?

I've noticed from the comments I've gotten on my papers and posts on the RS2 forum that the Reciprocal System is more logical than mathematical--and interestingly enough, that seems to be the main reason why people have such a tough time of understanding the reciprocal relation between space and time, and how to apply those concepts to other disciplines.

So DF, you found a good start on logic and reasoning, so why not hold a course here to teach others how to do it? It is probably one of the most important tools in life you can possess.
Keeper of the Troth of Ásgarðr, Moriar prius quam dedecorer.

User avatar
infinity
Centurio
Centurio
Posts: 118
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 7:35 am

Re: Master of Many Trades

Post by infinity » Fri Feb 27, 2015 12:45 am

I agree with Lonebear.

Would be cool if you could do a course to teach others.
"The death of dogma is the birth of morality" - Kant

User avatar
maeghan
Cognitor
Cognitor
Posts: 69
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2013 11:17 pm

Re: Master of Many Trades

Post by maeghan » Fri Feb 27, 2015 2:58 am

I can't help but immerse myself into many things, many subjects, many projects. I personally believe that it's part of being a musician. I build circuits, i've coded websites, i've done some graphic design, i've made video's. I am classically trained but I made electronic music and indie rock/pop. Obviously, you all know that I'm interested in walking the magnus opus because I'm here.

There are many fellow artists that immerse themselves too that I personally know locally.

A professor at college told me that I was peculiar because I retained my childlike sense of curiosity.

:)

Ilkka
Praefectus
Praefectus
Posts: 895
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2013 3:17 am

Re: Master of Many Trades

Post by Ilkka » Mon Mar 23, 2015 3:19 am

LoneBear wrote:For example, if I assert that: "given all fleeps are gorps and all smurfies are gorps, then all fleeps are smurfies." Is the assertion true or false, and why?
I think it is both true and false. Smurfies, fleeps and gorps are the same (true), but different (false) because they have their own individual definitions. Also I dont know what fleeps and gorps would translate to in my language :D But I guess it is something to do with that cartoon which I am not so familiar with, just a random memories of it.
Enjoy the Silence

User avatar
Arcelius
Atriensis
Atriensis
Posts: 534
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 12:35 pm
Location: Atlantic Canada

Re: Master of Many Trades

Post by Arcelius » Mon Mar 23, 2015 3:17 pm

Ilkka wrote:
LoneBear wrote:For example, if I assert that: "given all fleeps are gorps and all smurfies are gorps, then all fleeps are smurfies." Is the assertion true or false, and why?
I think it is both true and false. Smurfies, fleeps and gorps are the same (true), but different (false) because they have their own individual definitions. Also I dont know what fleeps and gorps would translate to in my language :D But I guess it is something to do with that cartoon which I am not so familiar with, just a random memories of it.
While the statement itself may be true or false, I think LoneBear was referring specifically to the logic behind it. Smurfies, gorps, and fleeps don't really mean anything at all so there isn't really a translation issue.

And his assertion is logically false. You cannot infer that all fleeps are smurfies given that all fleeps are gorps and all smurfies are gorps. The set of gorps may include all fleeps and smurfies and could also include many other things. Within the set of gorps, there may not be any overlap between the fleeps and smurfies though there could be as well and even a full and even full overlap is possible. Note again that what is possible is not the same as what can be inferred logically from the statements.

LoneBear's statement is a simple syllogism (a set of 3 statements which has 2 premises each with 2 terms with one shared and a logical conclusion containing a term from each premise). The broad idea is that most statements can be reduced to syllogism and if done accurately, then correct reasoning may be the result. The idea is that if the premises are true and the syllogism is logically valid, then the conclusion is also true. Here is a good summary of syllogisms (http://www.wikihow.com/Understand-Syllogisms). It includes some diagrams which may make things easier to understand.

LoneBear's syllogism has 3 All forms of statements. However, in the premises, the predicate in one premise must be the subject in the other in order for this to be valid. For example, this would work:

All fleeps are gorps.
All gorps are smurfies.
Therefore, all fleeps are smurfies.

This is a valid syllogism of the AAA type. Assuming that the premises are true, then the conclusion will also be true.

User avatar
dave432
Centurio
Centurio
Posts: 133
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2013 11:59 am

Re: Master of Many Trades

Post by dave432 » Mon Mar 23, 2015 3:41 pm

LoneBear wrote: For example, if I assert that: "given all fleeps are gorps and all smurfies are gorps, then all fleeps are smurfies." Is the assertion true or false, and why?
If all the students who go to North High School are Americans and all the students who go to South High School are Americans, that doesn't make North High students the same as South High students.

One of my favorite examples of logic from a junior college class was this: if it rains, the streets will be wet, so if the streets are wet, it must have rained.
"just down the road a little way, turn left, cross the drawbridge, and you will be my guest tonight."
-- directions to the grail castle. We'll have some toast.

User avatar
Arcelius
Atriensis
Atriensis
Posts: 534
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 12:35 pm
Location: Atlantic Canada

Re: Master of Many Trades

Post by Arcelius » Mon Mar 23, 2015 4:39 pm

dave432 wrote:One of my favorite examples of logic from a junior college class was this: if it rains, the streets will be wet, so if the streets are wet, it must have rained.
This is a different logical pattern from syllogisms though they can be converted.

"If it rains, then the streets will be wet" is a conditional statement.
The converse is: "If the streets are wet, then it has rained."
The inverse is: "If it doesn't rain, then the street won't be wet."
The contrapositive is: "If the streets are not wet, then it hasn't rained."

If the conditional statement is true, then the contraposition is also true. Though the inverse and converse may be true, this cannot be validly concluded using logic.

Post Reply