Complex interests, what to study, and if it matters

  • Thread starter Thread starter i2b
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Complex Study
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the challenges of selecting a field of study for a career in science, particularly for a new undergraduate interested in the intersection of various disciplines such as physics, biophysics, neuroscience, psychology, and philosophy. Participants explore the implications of pursuing broad interests versus specializing, the potential for interdisciplinary contributions, and the practicality of such pursuits in the modern academic landscape.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses a desire to contribute to the convergence of different disciplines, mentioning interests in emergence, quantum mind, and chaos theory, while questioning the validity of pseudoscience as a precursor to established knowledge.
  • Another participant asks whether it is feasible to become a polymath in today's world, suggesting that the depth of subjects may pose a challenge.
  • A third participant raises concerns about the economic practicality of pursuing broad interests and suggests focusing on a more secure scientific career while exploring personal interests on the side.
  • One participant advises that becoming an expert in at least one field is crucial and suggests starting with a traditional science like psychology if the goal is to understand consciousness, while also incorporating knowledge from related fields.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the feasibility of pursuing broad interdisciplinary interests versus the necessity of specialization. There is no consensus on the best approach to balancing these interests with practical career considerations.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge the potential limitations of their proposed paths, including economic factors and the depth of knowledge required in various fields. The discussion reflects a range of assumptions about the nature of interdisciplinary study and the prerequisites for success in different scientific domains.

i2b
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
I'm a new undergrad. I have been obsessed with learning for a long time but it has had no direction. It's all about the rush for me. However, I've decided that I need to take my studying more seriously and systematically to genuinely add anything new to pile of human knowledge.

The problem is that I feel what I know is so broad as to become a jack of all trades yet master of none. I have struggled with trying to choose one subject to specialize in for a career.

However, I am genuinely most interested in the convergence of different disciplines and I would say that this is where I'd like to contribute.

Emergence, quantum mind, theories of consciousness, psychology, probability, systems, chaos theory, and what quantum mechanics really mean to everyday life, if anything.

The problem is, I of course don't have enough technical knowledge of any of those things to produce more than pure conjecture. In fact, most of the things that are most interesting to me are considered pseudoscience by many. Can pseudoscience be a precursor to what is currently understood?

I'm trying to decide if I want my b.s. to be in physics or biophysics. Is it possible to be accepted to a neuroscience graduate program with a b.s. in physics? Or do I even have a b.s. in biology and then try to go for a physics graduate degree? Which is preferable? It seems to me that there is ground to be broken everywhere, so I wonder what difference it really makes.

I have also considered double majors like physics and philosophy or mathematics and philosophy.

How does one become a useful transdisciplinarian, if there is such a thing?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Can one become a polymath in the modern world without being a savant or is every subject too deep?
 
Also, it has of course occurred to me that this may be economically impractical or that I may not actually be good enough to pull it off. I have thought about studying something in science with more job opportunities and security while pursuing my own interests on the side. I feel after my degree, I'll have considerably more self control with which to systematically teach myself.

I'd prefer to be in a position where my work is my play.

A person only lives once, why not shoot for the stars?
 
What you are up to is not technically wrong, but you need to be aware that you need to become an expert in at least one field of study. And before going into unknown territory, it is essential that you have an indepth understanding of the current state of the art in "conventional" science. Almost all breakthroughs in all areas of science were done by people who were either experts in their field or related fields.

I'd say what field you should choose is is more or less arbitrary. But if your interests are so broad anyway, why not settle for something which *also* can serve as a valid backup if your plans don't work out? For example, if you really wish to understand consciousness, it is likely a good idea to start it with a hard traditional science like psychology, which actually does deal with those issues and is founded on hard evidence. Then you can take up the additional knowledge (say, in comp sci, programming, artificial intelligence) you might need in your quest on the side and incorporate it into the building of things you already know.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 102 ·
4
Replies
102
Views
9K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
5K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K