Well said. I wouldn't disagree with that at all because the second you have one creation, it provides the seeds for new creation. It's kind of the core eleement of the other essay I referenced. Well done.
I didn’t have a liberal arts education, and most of my knowledge beyond my major came from reading and self-education over the years. However, the most important factor shaping my critical thinking was my parents. They didn’t believe in mindlessly following authority or accepting information just because a book or an expert said so. They taught me to be an independent thinker. One of the best lessons I received from them was: “Listen to everyone, but do your thinking—and act based on what you believe is right, not just because someone told you to, including us.” That advice shaped my mindset and remains incredibly valuable to this day.
Now, let’s examine the state of education and its future from two perspectives:
1. Where We Are Today
Critical thinking has become more important than ever as we navigate a world saturated with information—some good, some bad, and much of it difficult to discern. A broader, interdisciplinary knowledge base helps us think better and evaluate what we encounter. Unfortunately, as the post highlights, schools increasingly fail to teach these foundational skills. If schools fall short, parents must fill the gaps and instill critical thinking in their children. However, this is easier said than done, as not all parents have the resources, time, or education to do so.
That’s why systemic reform is necessary. Schools need to focus not just on preparing students for tests or jobs but on teaching them “how to think”—an area where the classical liberal arts, such as the Trivium (grammar, rhetoric, and logic), could play a crucial role. These disciplines offer tools for effectively gathering, organizing, and communicating knowledge. Still, reform must go beyond looking backward. The challenges of today and tomorrow require a mix of classical principles and modern, forward-looking approaches.
2. Where We Are Heading
The world is changing faster than ever with the rapid advancement of technologies like AI, synthetic biology, quantum computing, robotics, and climate science. Many jobs will be transformed—or replaced—by these technologies, leaving many people searching for purpose, meaning, and identity in a world that looks nothing like today’s. In this context, education will need to evolve. I wrote a couple of comments (https://tinyurl.com/aytpa6sk) under a post about what to expect in the future. I know they may not be confirmed anytime soon, but we must prepare the next generations rather than let them live in chaos if it becomes true for many people in the next decade.
While technical skills are essential, we can’t focus solely on preparing students for specific careers that may soon become obsolete. Instead, education must prioritize adaptability, ethical reasoning, creativity, and interdisciplinary thinking. For example, the Quadrivium (arithmetic, geometry, astronomy, and music) could be reinterpreted to address modern challenges: arithmetic for data analysis, geometry for spatial reasoning in robotics, astronomy for exploring new frontiers, and music for understanding harmony and emotional intelligence in human-computer interactions.
Critically, we must also teach students what to think about, not just how to think. David Foster Wallace’s commencement speech, “This Is Water," highlights the importance of intentional focus and mindful thought. His message reminds us that education isn’t just about intellectual rigor—it’s about shaping how we perceive and engage with the world.
Our education system is inadequate for both current and future needs. Reform shouldn’t just revive the classical liberal arts and integrate them with cutting-edge disciplines to address the challenges of a rapidly changing world. For example, how can we combine the logic and rhetoric of the Trivium with AI ethics? How can we use the harmony and proportion of the Quadrivium to guide sustainable design in climate technology? These are the kinds of questions that modern education should address.
While the liberal arts offer a strong foundation for critical thinking and sense-making, we must also prepare for emerging technologies' ethical and social dilemmas. Reforming education requires looking to the past for timeless principles and to the future for new ways to apply them.
Parents and communities will need to step up if schools fail to adapt. However, the real solution lies in systemic reform that bridges the gap between classical education and modern innovation. We need an education system that prepares students for jobs and equips them to navigate uncertainty, think critically, and find meaning in a rapidly shifting world. Only then can we create a society capable of thriving in the face of unprecedented challenges?
Along with my parent's phrase, which is another version of the below two philosophies, I believe that all of us should seriously look for the following two as they will set us apart in a world where almost everyone is trying to conform us to something:
I've found guidance in two timeless philosophies. The Royal Society's motto, "Nullius in verba" ("Take nobody's word for it"), emphasizes critical thinking and skepticism, encouraging us to question authority and seek evidence.
Similarly, Gautam Buddha's wisdom reminds us to approach truth with humility and independence: "Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders."
All these principles encourage us to challenge the status quo, ask uncomfortable questions, and demand accountability—values that seem increasingly absent in today's landscapes.
That is an excellent comment - Education is broken. I despair at many universities, the droll dished out, when we are meant to be preparing young people to think and for the workplace, is dire.. it is fractured to say the least. I agree with you wholeheartedly about the liberal arts and have a post about to go live on that.
For me, the Purpose of Education at the Highest Level:
1. Expose Students to Diverse Perspectives
Education should teach students a wide range of ideas, including those we may believe to be incorrect. This enables them to critically evaluate, analyze, and differentiate between what is right and wrong. True understanding arises from engaging with differing viewpoints, fostering intellectual independence, and building critical thinking skills.
2. Emphasize the Journey, Not Just the Outcome
Education should not stop at presenting final conclusions, such as Newton's laws or scientific breakthroughs. Instead, it must illuminate the process—highlighting the failures, mistakes, and moments of ignorance that preceded success. This teaches students that progress is rarely linear and that perseverance, curiosity, and resilience are integral to achievement.
3. Equip Students with Tools for Thought
Education must empower students not only with the ability to think critically ("how to think") but also with the discernment to focus on meaningful questions and ideas ("what to think"). This balance ensures they are both independent thinkers and grounded in a sense of purpose, capable of navigating the complexities of the world.
As Max Planck famously said, "Science advances one funeral at a time." Progress often doesn’t come from convincing opponents to change their minds, but rather from the passage of time—when new generations embrace ideas that were once resisted.
Similarly, the education system will evolve one generation at a time. If we take the responsibility to teach future generations what needs to change, we will eventually witness that transformation. Change may be slow, but with consistent effort, it is inevitable.
The Planck Principle. It's depressing. Alongside Thomas Kuhn's The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, we see that Science is full of normal humans. 😂
It just tells us that the people who should be the most rational—scientists—are not always as logical as the discipline of science itself. Although science is rooted in objectivity and evidence, its progress often reflects human limitations and biases.
The general direction of your comment is spot on. However....these comments can only be implemented in a society where schools are run with the public interest in mind.
Yet, in fact, across the US and the so-called western countries, what we see is unfettered capitalism turning both secondary and higher educational institutions into increasingly privatized spaces that themselves as a source of corporate welfare profits AND are designed to churn out compliant, non-thinking warm bodies ready for large corporations to exploit.
That is what the changes in curriculum in public high schools and universities is about. Its what "charter schools" and school vouchers are about. And its why even private univeristies with huge foundations of money are being steered by the oligarchs, who control them, to stiffle free speech and inquiry, and instead be service centers for corporate product research.
The redirect you are talking about is not in any way possible until we take back control of public schools and universities into the hands of educational experts and community boards, and until private university boards are rid of the oligarchic leeches that control them via "donations".
We are talking about a 50 year track of work here. Two generations. Nothing shorter. Could even be longer.
In societies that are already riddled with a short attention span.
I think the prospects of success here are extremely weak.
I agree with you about the current situation. As someone told me a few years ago, “You get what you tolerate.” we must continue to demand change, as once we accept that status quo, we become part of the problem. If the school or college cannot do it, we as parents (I know we all do not have the time or education to do it) should try to build that in our children. I exactly did this with my only child.
Change often starts at the individual or family level, and collective action follows. By demanding better from institutions while simultaneously nurturing these qualities in the next generation, we create a ripple effect that can fundamentally shift the culture over time. It's not easy, but it's necessary.
As my father always said to me, if you do not start, you never get anywhere.
There are a lot of us that did this on a personal and that's fine
But:
Even for your own child or children, you as a person doing this is working against an entire society opposing your every action. This issue gets worse from teenage years onwards when the (polluted) minds of peers are a strong force in the development of teenagers. All of that is 10x worse now in the age of digital media which is designed for lowest common denominator behaviour and lack of thinking at all becoming a pervasive norm
Simply put, Isolated individual cannot solve the problem of a pervasive environment. Without collective action for systemic change nothing can change.
So just doing this for your own child alone is like buying organic stuff in the shops for yourself and thinking well my individual will solve the chemical pollution problem. No it wont.
None of this will change within the current structure of schooling. The very environment that children grow up educated in has to be transformed. It's a long slog.
I have never believed that entire society was working against me. My focus has always been ensuring that my son learns to think independently, especially regarding critical issues. I want him to question things thoughtfully, analyze perspectives, and not take anything, even from me, as absolute truth or gospel.
I’m not here to challenge your opinions or try to change how you think. I believe you have valid reasons for your beliefs, and I respect that. At the same time, I recognize that I can never fully understand the rationale behind your perspective without having lived your experiences or walked in your shoes. Everyone’s journey shapes their outlook, and I can only approach that with respect and a willingness to listen.
Im not sure why the diverge to personalization ("Working against me").
If society is currently constructed to hinder critical thinking, and you claim you are working to teach your children critical thinking, then the unavoidable fact is that any action invested in fostering critical thinking is battling against the motion of the entire society. So basically that's one person digging a hole in sand with a spade....while society has a backhoe dumping sand in the hole. This can only produce one inevitable result.
If you plan on succeeding in your action, it will require work to change the social context and structures pertinent to the goal. Blind faith in solo action with no plausible action of overcoming group momentum is cult belief - not critical thinking.
Change here requires group action to change the schooling environment.
You know, as an art major in college, this kinda nails what I really got out of school, and it wasn't due to the classes I took. I switched from engineering to art, but looking back, both were just frameworks of learning how to think.
"Here's how to do engineering" is one takeaway the students might get. Another is "here is one way to think in a more complex manner." It's that 2nd thing that I keep revisiting in my memory, and i realize how fortunate I was to stumble upon a polymathic approach to learning almost by accident.
I have come to feel the same way about jiu jitsu, punk rock music/ideology, and a whole slew of other things I've been obsessed with. I see all of that as just different ways to think, like very crude versions of mental models to practice, or maybe lenses.
BTW, I am doing my best to write down everything I ever did, at least pre-internet. I'm getting an overall sense of my own lens and trying to understand that much better.
Correct. That's why I'm aspiring. However with that comes humility which is a lesson you need to learn yet. Your shit posting is cute but still, waaaaay off target. All you've done is try and attack while missing the points. Any fool can insult. Try adding value. Try just a bit harder please?
You know, the more you talk the more I realize you're looking into a mirror. You're not responding to what I said but what you see reflected in the mirror. And I agree with you, I don't find it interesting either. Really just kind of pathetic.
You e added nothing of value, not even a well placed critique which I Iove. I can't even really say you're trolling because there's an art to that too. It's just kind of sad to realize the target of your angst, and the insults you're trying to land, are at a reflection of you.
Absolutely agree with you. Many years ago, I was granted a Liberal Arts degree, which was given as a General Studies Degree, as if to say, I couldn't make up my mind on what to learn. That was not the issue. I wanted a broad understanding of both scientific subjects and the liberal arts in order access foundational knowledge to think critically. This decision meant that, as the years have rolled by, I am able to remain informed in multiple fields. Being a polymath is precisely what is needed today, or rather, 'a generalist' when the volume of knowledge doesn't met an expert level. Ah, there is that word again!
Great points. The need for Polymaths is the driving reason I started writing here because I agree. Jack of all trades and master of none, but most often better than a master of one!
are you proficient in any tangible arts, crafts, or skills or is your broad expanse of knowledge limited to imaginary pseudosciences like psychology, philosophy, religion, and unicorns
I don't need to claim anything. Silly claims of authority are for fools. You've been engaging in logical fallacies and I refuse to play that game. Go ahead and do just a smidge of due dilligence. Go ahead, Google my name. 😉
Thank you for pointing out the art within STEM. As someone who's been in the sciences for decades, it's nice to hear someone else recognize it.
Yes, its bugged me for years when they talk about STEM as if it were artless and staffed by soulless machines.
STEM are the tools to make art. Art is at the top of Bloom’s taxonomy, STEM is the base.
Or Artistic expression is the root of STEM because most Engineers I know express their art through their design. More on the Art of STEM here:
https://www.polymathicbeing.com/p/the-art-of-stem
All human creation is art. STEM are the building blocks of prior knowledge coming together to create art. Art is unequivocally stratified above STEM.
Well said. I wouldn't disagree with that at all because the second you have one creation, it provides the seeds for new creation. It's kind of the core eleement of the other essay I referenced. Well done.
I didn’t have a liberal arts education, and most of my knowledge beyond my major came from reading and self-education over the years. However, the most important factor shaping my critical thinking was my parents. They didn’t believe in mindlessly following authority or accepting information just because a book or an expert said so. They taught me to be an independent thinker. One of the best lessons I received from them was: “Listen to everyone, but do your thinking—and act based on what you believe is right, not just because someone told you to, including us.” That advice shaped my mindset and remains incredibly valuable to this day.
Now, let’s examine the state of education and its future from two perspectives:
1. Where We Are Today
Critical thinking has become more important than ever as we navigate a world saturated with information—some good, some bad, and much of it difficult to discern. A broader, interdisciplinary knowledge base helps us think better and evaluate what we encounter. Unfortunately, as the post highlights, schools increasingly fail to teach these foundational skills. If schools fall short, parents must fill the gaps and instill critical thinking in their children. However, this is easier said than done, as not all parents have the resources, time, or education to do so.
That’s why systemic reform is necessary. Schools need to focus not just on preparing students for tests or jobs but on teaching them “how to think”—an area where the classical liberal arts, such as the Trivium (grammar, rhetoric, and logic), could play a crucial role. These disciplines offer tools for effectively gathering, organizing, and communicating knowledge. Still, reform must go beyond looking backward. The challenges of today and tomorrow require a mix of classical principles and modern, forward-looking approaches.
2. Where We Are Heading
The world is changing faster than ever with the rapid advancement of technologies like AI, synthetic biology, quantum computing, robotics, and climate science. Many jobs will be transformed—or replaced—by these technologies, leaving many people searching for purpose, meaning, and identity in a world that looks nothing like today’s. In this context, education will need to evolve. I wrote a couple of comments (https://tinyurl.com/aytpa6sk) under a post about what to expect in the future. I know they may not be confirmed anytime soon, but we must prepare the next generations rather than let them live in chaos if it becomes true for many people in the next decade.
While technical skills are essential, we can’t focus solely on preparing students for specific careers that may soon become obsolete. Instead, education must prioritize adaptability, ethical reasoning, creativity, and interdisciplinary thinking. For example, the Quadrivium (arithmetic, geometry, astronomy, and music) could be reinterpreted to address modern challenges: arithmetic for data analysis, geometry for spatial reasoning in robotics, astronomy for exploring new frontiers, and music for understanding harmony and emotional intelligence in human-computer interactions.
Critically, we must also teach students what to think about, not just how to think. David Foster Wallace’s commencement speech, “This Is Water," highlights the importance of intentional focus and mindful thought. His message reminds us that education isn’t just about intellectual rigor—it’s about shaping how we perceive and engage with the world.
Our education system is inadequate for both current and future needs. Reform shouldn’t just revive the classical liberal arts and integrate them with cutting-edge disciplines to address the challenges of a rapidly changing world. For example, how can we combine the logic and rhetoric of the Trivium with AI ethics? How can we use the harmony and proportion of the Quadrivium to guide sustainable design in climate technology? These are the kinds of questions that modern education should address.
While the liberal arts offer a strong foundation for critical thinking and sense-making, we must also prepare for emerging technologies' ethical and social dilemmas. Reforming education requires looking to the past for timeless principles and to the future for new ways to apply them.
Parents and communities will need to step up if schools fail to adapt. However, the real solution lies in systemic reform that bridges the gap between classical education and modern innovation. We need an education system that prepares students for jobs and equips them to navigate uncertainty, think critically, and find meaning in a rapidly shifting world. Only then can we create a society capable of thriving in the face of unprecedented challenges?
I really like how you dug deeper into this. These are great insights and I'm going to steal that phrase from your parents and give it to my kids!
Along with my parent's phrase, which is another version of the below two philosophies, I believe that all of us should seriously look for the following two as they will set us apart in a world where almost everyone is trying to conform us to something:
I've found guidance in two timeless philosophies. The Royal Society's motto, "Nullius in verba" ("Take nobody's word for it"), emphasizes critical thinking and skepticism, encouraging us to question authority and seek evidence.
Similarly, Gautam Buddha's wisdom reminds us to approach truth with humility and independence: "Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders."
All these principles encourage us to challenge the status quo, ask uncomfortable questions, and demand accountability—values that seem increasingly absent in today's landscapes.
fanboi gave u a thesis and all u gave back was a headpat
That is an excellent comment - Education is broken. I despair at many universities, the droll dished out, when we are meant to be preparing young people to think and for the workplace, is dire.. it is fractured to say the least. I agree with you wholeheartedly about the liberal arts and have a post about to go live on that.
For me, the Purpose of Education at the Highest Level:
1. Expose Students to Diverse Perspectives
Education should teach students a wide range of ideas, including those we may believe to be incorrect. This enables them to critically evaluate, analyze, and differentiate between what is right and wrong. True understanding arises from engaging with differing viewpoints, fostering intellectual independence, and building critical thinking skills.
2. Emphasize the Journey, Not Just the Outcome
Education should not stop at presenting final conclusions, such as Newton's laws or scientific breakthroughs. Instead, it must illuminate the process—highlighting the failures, mistakes, and moments of ignorance that preceded success. This teaches students that progress is rarely linear and that perseverance, curiosity, and resilience are integral to achievement.
3. Equip Students with Tools for Thought
Education must empower students not only with the ability to think critically ("how to think") but also with the discernment to focus on meaningful questions and ideas ("what to think"). This balance ensures they are both independent thinkers and grounded in a sense of purpose, capable of navigating the complexities of the world.
Absolutely 100% agree..one other point… it is a battle at university every day against tenured professors who “know best”.
As Max Planck famously said, "Science advances one funeral at a time." Progress often doesn’t come from convincing opponents to change their minds, but rather from the passage of time—when new generations embrace ideas that were once resisted.
Similarly, the education system will evolve one generation at a time. If we take the responsibility to teach future generations what needs to change, we will eventually witness that transformation. Change may be slow, but with consistent effort, it is inevitable.
The Planck Principle. It's depressing. Alongside Thomas Kuhn's The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, we see that Science is full of normal humans. 😂
It just tells us that the people who should be the most rational—scientists—are not always as logical as the discipline of science itself. Although science is rooted in objectivity and evidence, its progress often reflects human limitations and biases.
The general direction of your comment is spot on. However....these comments can only be implemented in a society where schools are run with the public interest in mind.
Yet, in fact, across the US and the so-called western countries, what we see is unfettered capitalism turning both secondary and higher educational institutions into increasingly privatized spaces that themselves as a source of corporate welfare profits AND are designed to churn out compliant, non-thinking warm bodies ready for large corporations to exploit.
That is what the changes in curriculum in public high schools and universities is about. Its what "charter schools" and school vouchers are about. And its why even private univeristies with huge foundations of money are being steered by the oligarchs, who control them, to stiffle free speech and inquiry, and instead be service centers for corporate product research.
The redirect you are talking about is not in any way possible until we take back control of public schools and universities into the hands of educational experts and community boards, and until private university boards are rid of the oligarchic leeches that control them via "donations".
We are talking about a 50 year track of work here. Two generations. Nothing shorter. Could even be longer.
In societies that are already riddled with a short attention span.
I think the prospects of success here are extremely weak.
I agree with you about the current situation. As someone told me a few years ago, “You get what you tolerate.” we must continue to demand change, as once we accept that status quo, we become part of the problem. If the school or college cannot do it, we as parents (I know we all do not have the time or education to do it) should try to build that in our children. I exactly did this with my only child.
Change often starts at the individual or family level, and collective action follows. By demanding better from institutions while simultaneously nurturing these qualities in the next generation, we create a ripple effect that can fundamentally shift the culture over time. It's not easy, but it's necessary.
As my father always said to me, if you do not start, you never get anywhere.
There are a lot of us that did this on a personal and that's fine
But:
Even for your own child or children, you as a person doing this is working against an entire society opposing your every action. This issue gets worse from teenage years onwards when the (polluted) minds of peers are a strong force in the development of teenagers. All of that is 10x worse now in the age of digital media which is designed for lowest common denominator behaviour and lack of thinking at all becoming a pervasive norm
Simply put, Isolated individual cannot solve the problem of a pervasive environment. Without collective action for systemic change nothing can change.
So just doing this for your own child alone is like buying organic stuff in the shops for yourself and thinking well my individual will solve the chemical pollution problem. No it wont.
None of this will change within the current structure of schooling. The very environment that children grow up educated in has to be transformed. It's a long slog.
I have never believed that entire society was working against me. My focus has always been ensuring that my son learns to think independently, especially regarding critical issues. I want him to question things thoughtfully, analyze perspectives, and not take anything, even from me, as absolute truth or gospel.
I’m not here to challenge your opinions or try to change how you think. I believe you have valid reasons for your beliefs, and I respect that. At the same time, I recognize that I can never fully understand the rationale behind your perspective without having lived your experiences or walked in your shoes. Everyone’s journey shapes their outlook, and I can only approach that with respect and a willingness to listen.
Im not sure why the diverge to personalization ("Working against me").
If society is currently constructed to hinder critical thinking, and you claim you are working to teach your children critical thinking, then the unavoidable fact is that any action invested in fostering critical thinking is battling against the motion of the entire society. So basically that's one person digging a hole in sand with a spade....while society has a backhoe dumping sand in the hole. This can only produce one inevitable result.
If you plan on succeeding in your action, it will require work to change the social context and structures pertinent to the goal. Blind faith in solo action with no plausible action of overcoming group momentum is cult belief - not critical thinking.
Change here requires group action to change the schooling environment.
You know, as an art major in college, this kinda nails what I really got out of school, and it wasn't due to the classes I took. I switched from engineering to art, but looking back, both were just frameworks of learning how to think.
"Here's how to do engineering" is one takeaway the students might get. Another is "here is one way to think in a more complex manner." It's that 2nd thing that I keep revisiting in my memory, and i realize how fortunate I was to stumble upon a polymathic approach to learning almost by accident.
Yeah, I think it gets lost on a lot of people that college is mostly a framework for problem solving with some skills sprinkled in to help you out.
I have come to feel the same way about jiu jitsu, punk rock music/ideology, and a whole slew of other things I've been obsessed with. I see all of that as just different ways to think, like very crude versions of mental models to practice, or maybe lenses.
BTW, I am doing my best to write down everything I ever did, at least pre-internet. I'm getting an overall sense of my own lens and trying to understand that much better.
this reads like dunnykroog Larping if you’re familiar with bildung or tokkatsu
poly ≠ whole, u got big blindspots
Correct. That's why I'm aspiring. However with that comes humility which is a lesson you need to learn yet. Your shit posting is cute but still, waaaaay off target. All you've done is try and attack while missing the points. Any fool can insult. Try adding value. Try just a bit harder please?
More on aspiring Polymaths here:
https://www.polymathicbeing.com/p/embracing-my-white-belt
not interesting
You know, the more you talk the more I realize you're looking into a mirror. You're not responding to what I said but what you see reflected in the mirror. And I agree with you, I don't find it interesting either. Really just kind of pathetic.
You e added nothing of value, not even a well placed critique which I Iove. I can't even really say you're trolling because there's an art to that too. It's just kind of sad to realize the target of your angst, and the insults you're trying to land, are at a reflection of you.
More on that mirror here: https://www.polymathicbeing.com/p/looking-into-a-mirror
MMA = mental masturbation arts
I’m not the one claiming I sit with DaVinci
what skills/crafts do you count in your polymath catalog
I never claimed I sit with Davinci. I claimed I aspire to that.
You're arguments are falling apart across your threads. Are you losing track?
Absolutely agree with you. Many years ago, I was granted a Liberal Arts degree, which was given as a General Studies Degree, as if to say, I couldn't make up my mind on what to learn. That was not the issue. I wanted a broad understanding of both scientific subjects and the liberal arts in order access foundational knowledge to think critically. This decision meant that, as the years have rolled by, I am able to remain informed in multiple fields. Being a polymath is precisely what is needed today, or rather, 'a generalist' when the volume of knowledge doesn't met an expert level. Ah, there is that word again!
Great points. The need for Polymaths is the driving reason I started writing here because I agree. Jack of all trades and master of none, but most often better than a master of one!
are you proficient in any tangible arts, crafts, or skills or is your broad expanse of knowledge limited to imaginary pseudosciences like psychology, philosophy, religion, and unicorns
You know, for someone who spends so much time on a keyboard, do yourself a favor and just Google my name.
boy for a self-professed polymath you sure are unwilling to claim proficiency let alone expertise at anything tangible
I don't need to claim anything. Silly claims of authority are for fools. You've been engaging in logical fallacies and I refuse to play that game. Go ahead and do just a smidge of due dilligence. Go ahead, Google my name. 😉
poly ≠ whole, u got big blindspots
Great, now you've sent me down a deep dive into subjects that I kind of understood but didn't appreciate like this. What have I missed!!??