[johnrbent]

I was inspired by Da Vinci in my younger days to become a modern Renaissance Man. Then I discovered that the depth of knowledge in any given field had become far too deep to ever hope at becoming expert in more than one. Sure you can still make art, and study mathematics and astronomy, and so forth, but it's almost impossible to reach the level of mastery that Da Vinci reached in his day. No one hires Renaissance Men anymore :(

[gxx]

In my career I've found that knowning "enough" about a lot of fields (often self taught) has led me to invent valuable things that experts in any given field would have never discovered. Things with many millions in sales.

Also I've found that experts in some field will say something is impossible that I, not knowing it's "impossible", will try to do anyway and find a way to do it by applying techniques from outside the field.

I feel these are my "secrets of success", other than a lot of hard work and persistence. :)

[SketchySeaBeast]

Do you have some examples?

[IfOnlyYouKnew]

A more modest goal would be to remain open to the wonders of fields you know little about.

As one example close to my heart: there is a streak within the tech community that rejects anything that isn't "pure" science. To quote the only good joke from the Big Bang Theory: "Oh, the humanities!".

If you read Feynman, one of the more modern Renaissance Men, you will see this streak in action. He deeply appreciate fields rather far from physics, including linguistics, music, and art, and even succeeded in some of them independent of his main career. He also showed that "appreciation for" does not require uncritical believe, specifically minting the term "cargo-cult science" for what he saw as a weakness in the field.

[TuringTest]

Leonardo wasn't an expert in all those fields, if he had to ask how to square a triangle. The point of a Renaissance man is following your curiosity in all kinds of different fields, not being a master in all of them.

[umvi]

Becoming a deep expert has too many diminishing returns IMHO.

Just look at Japan where it is often the goal to become a deep expert at your career. I once watched a documentary about creating buckwheat soba, and the guy making it said something along the lines of "I've been making buckwheat soba noodles for over 20 years, but I still have another 20 before I'm a true master"

That's great some people are willing to go for the gold in an extremely narrow field (like buckwheat soba), but I'd rather have silver or bronze in as many fields as possible than a single gold.

The wider the breadth of my knowledge, the more I can use one domain to solve a problem in another.

[abhiyerra]

I found this to be true as well. But I think having broad knowledge is helpful regardless to construct new mental models in the work we do. You may not go super deep anymore but understanding the basics of different fields of study is still super useful.

[cy6erlion]

I bet that's what they said in Da Vinci's time.

[cr0sh]

Something else that is sometimes forgotten - LDV's notebooks were for his personal use; none (that I recall) were ever published during his lifetime, and then they were "lost" (squirreled away by others would be a better term - ie, "lost" as in "stuffed in an attic in the back corner and forgotten about until passed - yet again - after the owner died") for a long period before being rediscovered and finally published much later - more for curiosity sake than for any knowledge contained in them, as most of it was out of date and/or rediscovered by then.

I doubt that he would have cared, either; his interest in bettering his knowledge and more were for his own sake and nobody else's. Many of the things he noted down and learned, then expanded upon, were actually well-known concepts and such that just hadn't been "written down", or if they had, they were generally done in a far inferior fashion.

Ultimately, though, they were for his own study, and maybe for the few others he (possibly) showed them to (students and/or people he asked questions of would be my guess) - to convey ideas very clearly, as if the actual device or object in question were in front of him or another. Most of the prior attempts at conveying such information could be termed more as "schematic" than as representative of actual form. Some weren't even that clear.

As others have noted, I wouldn't bother with trying to become an expert in everything today - that's a near impossibility. Rather, focus on bettering your knowledge about a wide variety of subjects that interest you. Learn how to apply knowledge from one area to solve problems in another domain. Learn how to integrate knowledge across domains to also solve problems, or come up with creative solutions or further ideas in another domain. In short, treat learning and creativity more like a child; play with it, and enjoy it.

That's a large part of what it means to be a "Renaissance Man"; to me, it doesn't have anything to do with being an expert in any number of particular fields, or even one field. Rather, to me it means having a broad knowledge base, and finding joy in applying that to learn in other areas and solving problems new to me using that - and, when I can or when asked - passing on what I have learned.

[psadri]

The invention of writing systems, numerical systems and mathematics, etc were huge boosts to human’s cognitive capabilities. Have those tools kept up with the explosion of available knowledge?

[ASalazarMX]

I'm imagining Leonardo applying gravitational waves, nanotechnology and genetic engineering to his A.I. moon sculptures.

[mixmastamyk]

> No one hires Renaissance Men anymore :(

Once freed from this requirement, the joy of learning may continue unabated.

[jimbokun]

I wonder if entrepreneurship is a counter example?

True, people looking to hire someone are almost always looking for a specialist.

But if you are starting a business, you are almost required to perform many different kinds of roles at the beginning, until you grow to the point where you can hire specialists for all the various functions of the business.

[spinach]

"No one hires Renaissance Men anymore"

But were they ever? All 'Renaissance Men' were extremely exceptional in their own time, and not exactly any sort of normal. They also seem to have made their own jobs rather than being hired.

[dpeck]

There has never been a human being who "knew everything" in recorded history, though there have occasionally been those who were given the title.

The goal isn't to become an expert and know everything, the best people tend to be the "T" shaped, or "π" shaped in HR terms. Where you know an extensive amount about a small number of subjects and know a small amount about an extensive number of subjects. Strive to be able to carry on a 5 minute conversation about anything and days of conversation about a few things.

[godelmachine]

That's a problem which will hold true in any age.

The ratio and proportion will remain the same.

Information in today's age travels at light speed whereas in his time it was at horse's pace.

[AlwaysRock]

Is it worth it to learn and possess the knowledge of a renaissance man without making money from that knowledge?

[cr0sh]

Of course it is! Finding joy in the learning and application of knowledge - for it's own sake, and for applying it to other areas of study, learning, or practical use - that was a key part of being a "Renaissance Man" (as we term it today); making money is - or should be - secondary to those goals.

[kvartz]

We are all renaissance people by his day's standards