First of all, thanks for the responses, everyone.
Pengwuino said:
One of those people who have better things to do then listen to political nonsense that will be forgotten 2 months down the road? I know someone in our graduate program who puts watching politics above his studies and he is a moron and shouldn't even have received his BS, let alone be admitted to a graduate program (our program is extremely easy to get into).
There are consequences to the decision to do one thing or the other, it's just deciding which you're more comfortable dealing with.
I'm not talking about politics, although it's hard to say what falls under that term and what doesn't. I guess by following news I meant following what's going on in the world, which of course includes some politics, as well. However, I don't intend or want to become an expert on domestic political affairs.
DaveC426913 said:
One of which people?
I get the impression you think everyone around you is up on everything.
You can't be fully-informed on everything. Choose what things are important to you. Pursue them.
Yeah, I guess the problem is that I'm interested in too many things, which instead of motivating me has the opposite effect, as I tend to focus on what I miss out on. I don't really think everyone around me is up on everything, but I do feel I should be able to uphold a conversation on diverse topics, and by that I don't mean just talking out of my *** and making sweeping statements anyone can make, but actually discussing things from an argumented perspective. I namely often find when reading interviews with prominent scientists or people that excel in a specific field, that they are clueless about stuff in general. Often you will hear them make sweeping judgements akin to "all politicians are corrupted", "what's wrong with society is that it doesn't recognize the crucial significance of <insert field they're working in> and instead spends money on <whatever>" etc. And while I respect those people for being great in their fields, it does clearly showcase their lack of knowledge of how the world works outside that field. I guess I just want to be really good at something without having to risk falling into one-dimensionality.
DBTS said:
The thing is, that guy will not be an expert in the field which is what is most important. I'd rather be an expert in one thing and have a "fundamental" -basis in a few other things, over being a well-rounded person.
I think the problem with me is I want to do both. But as far as having a fundamental basis, that's just the thing. You think you have it, but you don't.
Herricane said:
You can pick a few things that you really want to read about and then you can learn how to speed read.
Speed reading is definitely a good suggestion, but I think sooner or later I'd get stuck in the same predicament.
cobalt124 said:
It sounds to me like you want to be all things to all people. That list you give is terrifyingly long and varied (to me). Pick no more than three and concentrate on them, the rest dip into whenever you want to but don't stress about not doing so. Pick ones that are relevant to your life and your interests. Pay more attention to what you are doing rather than what you are not doing, you can change what you are doing because it is one thing, you can't change what you are not doing, because that's lots of things. It's obvious, switch the emphasis around to what you are doing. Then you won't feel depressed.
Your response makes a lot of sense, and that's what I would like to do. It's just that I find it hard to drop even one of those interests without feeling deficient in a way. From a rational viewpoint, I know you're right and that you just can't do everything, but I guess that's why I made this topic in the first place, to see how people approach this and overcome the irrational thinking that seemed to be winning over rationality up to that point.
