ciascu's Journal: Generalist Profundity

OUR IMAGINATIONS
----------------
As we give generalist profundity rein on our imaginations,
So we profit our imaginations, engendering a universality

So, having finished university, I'm now at home for a while - potentially starting a Math PhD after Christmas. As with many (but far from all!) math grads, I can't help noticing that friends from school who did literature, Spanish, philosophy etc. seem to have a better grounding in the ways and thinking of humanity that have been built up over ages of civilization. Go figure.

Now, don't get me wrong - math rocks, one can't beat complex manifolds with a big, four-dimensional wooden stick, but there is something to be said for having an idea of why countries are at war beyond a rather lacking and blinkered 'social evolution => countries desire expansion' argument or understanding where Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory came from and the bodies of thought it grew out of, from Aristotle, Avicenna and others. As a Christian, I'm particularly keen to find out more about the Church fathers, the Council(s) of Nicaea, Constantine and others who, and regardless of one's personal understanding, have had a seminal impact on Western civilisation as we know it. I want to know how cathedrals stand and why they stand. I want to know what a ziggurat is and how they were used by the Mesopotamians.

At the same time, I want to learn to speak and read French - a beautiful language of key Enlightenment philosophers and to read both Plato and St Paul in the original Greek. I want to know where Tristan da Cuhna is and what the weather's like there.

So this is a statement of intent, the manifesto of a generalist in potentia. We'll see if it happens.

------------------

A couple of additional notes. Firstly, why am I doing this? As a pure mathematician, it's the answer I'm used to giving! However, I believe there are other compelling reasons - to write, think and argue without understanding of the writing, thought and argument that has preceded is repetitious and spurious industry.

Prevalent modes of thought change while history repeats itself - a simple example of the recurring IP battle is given by Baron Macaulay's rebuttal to the proposed extension of copyright in 1841 (A Speech Delivered...). Few of us and I likely include myself, will bother to read this in entirety, but this shouldn't be due to the age, the language or our opinion of the writer's politic. It contains salient and persuasively presented points, details collectively forgotten by the technological crowd and sets out a stall more inviting to legislator's mindset than many rather partisan and emotive diatribes that are seen to represent the liberaliser's case in its entirety.

Next, why do I think anyone cares? I don't, but I think some people may be curious. I would be; I imagine there are some people who'd like to try this too and would enjoy a bit of a sense of armchair adventure. Maybe some who'd like to try it too and fancy company. So I'll keep you posted - let you know what I do and how I get on. I'll even try and keep track of the peak number of Wikipedia tabs I have open in Firefox at once. And if no-one's listening, I'll have peace and quiet to muse to thin air :)