I'm sometimes conflicted in life. There are many interesting things I want to be good at. I like go, of course, but I also enjoy math, programming, doing better in the workplace, studying Japanese, studying Korean, reading novels, and of course, posting incessantly on L19. Now that I've got a kid, I guess being a good father also goes into the mix. Oh, and I recently ordered a microcontroller kit because I want to learn more about embedded programming... That's a lot of stuff to "master".

In my experience, I have been able to do better in a particular area of life when I focus single-mindedly on ONE thing. The problem is, there are many things I wouldn't mind mastering... But is it feasible to "master" many things?

Maybe I should try to be "OK" at many areas... But it seems to be unsatisfying across the board if that is the case.

So the question I pose to you L19ers is: Do you prefer to master one area of life, or would you rather be OK at many?

_________________
be immersed

I vote 'other': I'd prefer to be master of many.

Ok, I've failed terribly in that regard, fooling only my dog.

_________________
Help make L19 more organized. Make an index: https://lifein19x19.com/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=5207

I think the happy medium is to dive really deeply into one subject at a time (so far as possible). There's something you can't get if you study five things at once that you can get by studying them serially.

I think you see that pattern a lot in a number of great polymaths.

_________________
Occupy Babel!

It's a little complicated ... But many years ago I made a list of all of things I would like to do and learn. Then I crossed items off the list until I had a list of the most important items that I could reasonably complete in my lifetime. After some organization, I began to follow the list and have looked forward since : )

There are many other personal details I did to items in the list, but this is general idea.

Another thing I come to terms with was whether it was important to me to try and be the best at anything. And if it was not ultimately important, then what level of competency would help me be content in my life? When you come to terms with this, then I think it will be your guide to determining your personal baseline for each goal.

As for 'master' vs 'jack-of-all,' I think in the river live many more fish than just these. Such as the 'expert but not master,' the 'guru to my family & friends' and 'hero to my children.'

It depends on what standard you set for "master", but basically I agree with hyperpape. You want to be brutally realistic about how much time you have and how you're going to prioritize your interests; and you need to be equally brutal about how you're going to keep your already-acquired skill sets limber; but you can master lots of different things, at least to the level that the man on the street would find impressive, if you tackle them one at a time.

If you want to be world-class at something, then you really need to be, in many respects, a monomaniac; but for most of us it's too late for that, so there's no need to worry about that highest level of mastery.

When I was younger, I was more of a Master of One -type, later in life I have become a Jack of all Trades -type. From what I see around me I think it's not uncommon.

_________________
Offending ad removed

there's my job & being a parent which would be nice to be good at, both of which take up most of my time between them and 1 hobby - Go. I'd like to be as good as possible at all three. Having a new hobby every year is okay I suppose (good for people choosing Christmas presents for you) and learning a new skill is quite exciting but I've started to see new hobbies as unwelcome distractions (a bit like some aspects of the internet ). For me it seems better(or to have more character) to have the same hobby for 10 years rather than 20 hobbies over a period of 10 years.



I'm not that old (so plenty of time to reverse), but for me it's gone the other way. I suppose having young children has in a strange way made me more efficient with my time and more focussed. - not so efficient or focussed I can avoid the dangers of internet forums though

_________________
I am John. John-I-Am.

I don't really know what to vote. I'd call myself a jack of all trades right now, but I have no idea which one of both I would prefer to be.

_________________
a1h1 [1d]: You just need to curse the gods and defend.
Good Go = Shape.
Associação Portuguesa de Go

Imho the decission seems to somewhat depend on what one understands of mastering and how much one is neglecting other trades to master a specific one.
I think I do both, I am fairly competend in some trades and am trying to master go to the best of my ability. I'm not sacrificing everything else for it though.

Sure, keep telling yourself you have the dog fooled.

I prefer being a jack of all trades. There are too many things I enjoy to just narrow the focus to one. See my sig, just in case

_________________
Geek of all trades, master of none: the motto for my blog mostlymaths.net

A serious downside to "Jack of all trades" is that he is generally "a master of none."

I enjoy being good at lots of things and having a wide range of interests, but I am envious of those who get really good at one thing.

Go analogy: Master of one plays thick. Jack of all trades leaves weaknesses everywhere.

_________________
Patience, grasshopper.

I prefer Jack of All Trades because you find that some of the skills you learn in one trade applies or gives you insights to other trades.

_________________
http://tchan001.wordpress.com
A blog on Asian go books, go sightings, and interesting tidbits
Go is such a beautiful game.

I'm a happy jack of all trades, a rebel against our cultures pressure to specialize. There are a lot of different sorts of jacks of all trades; I tend to be a sort of serialist, like someone already mentioned in this thread. I'll get interested in something and for a while it Will fill much of my free time.

If you find yourself under pressure from others to narrow down a book called Refuse to Choose.

I have been a jack of all trades all my life and now I seriously regret it, having mastered nothing.

I'm more of a Jack of all trades kind, but I'd much rather be a master of one. I have way too many hobbies that I try to translate into becoming a master of:

1. Guitar
2. Go
3. Story Writing
4. Poetry
5. Card Game/Board Game Development

It may not sound like a lot, but it becomes difficult knowing where to delegate your time to when you have 5 or more things you'd like to get better at. So, recently, I've made it a goal to focus on maybe 1-2 of these things. Of course Go is #1. As for #2....I haven't really worked that out yet.

_________________
Slava Ukraini!

I feel like im the opposite of most who have voiced their opinions. I spend all me free time on go, and I don't see that changing anytime soon.

It really depends on your target and goals in life.
People who believe that you should master one thing in life tend to say things along the lines of: "If all you have is a shallow understanding of many things, you really have nothing useful." Also: "If you truly master one thing in your lifetime, it will open your eyes and allow you to speak with authority on a large number of topics in a high level of society."
On the other hand, people believe in the concept of Jack-of-all-trades say that dedicating yourself to a large number of interests gives you a sufficient base from which to pull your true passions.

I haven't a clue which school of thought is right, or even if one of them is more likely to be right I guess we're in the same boat.

_________________
Ko is the best solution.
With Ko, I can keep eating and drinking until I am full.

Visit >>>Koosh's Study Journal<<<

I don't think ones right and one is wrong, and I am not criticizing anyone who wants to study many things, but I think that it really comes down to how you want to spend your time. I am much more likely to eventually become a high dan player (Far future) than someone who plays go and many other things, on the other hand maybe the other person enjoys the game more because they just play it for fun sometimes, I don't think there is really right or wrong.

I believe that we (humans) can do almost whatever we want. I love learning languages, playing Go, karate and lots of other things, for example, guitar playing (one of the hardest, IMO). So far the only thing I can "say" I've mastered may be maths, in the sense that objectively, I have a degree and will soon finish my thesis for a PhD. So okay, one thing (even if I know that this is not a subject that can be mastered in ANY case, but I can't go much further in the field).

But I believe I can make to a decent dan level in my lifetime, I can learn a lot more languages and eventually get to play decently with a guitar. Already green belt (although our required learning for getting green were the katas usually found in the blue exam, our teacher is peculiar), but my dojo is too far from home and had to stop 1.5 years ago.

I'd rather learn Swedish better than taking a high level examination of English (or French, for that matter). But this is just me: there's people that would prefer having a very high level in something than a decent level in many things.

_________________
Geek of all trades, master of none: the motto for my blog mostlymaths.net