The modern polymath defined

Today we put it all together. We need to keep in mind Heraclitus’s original concept, Andrew Robinson’s idea (broad learning and curiosity), and Carr’s and Djerassi’s breadth and acceptance requirements, and overlay these ideas on Burke’s serial and proper polymaths.

Burke’s prerequisite of “several” fields of expertise pays homage to Heraclitus’s original notion and is a good middle ground between requiring too many fields of expertise and too few. It acknowledges that a real polymath should work in “several” disciplines.

Accordingly, the modern polymath should be one who is proficient in or who has made significant accomplishments in at least two widely disparate fields or three less disparate fields. The more unrelated the fields, the more polymathic the person.

This definition can be gauged objectively and satisfies the breadth test. The acceptance requirement can be satisfied by professional licensure, by publications, or by acceptance by experts in those fields. The acceptance requirement also allows for the conclusion that, the more generally accepted as an expert such a person is in each of his/her fields, the more polymathic the person is.

This definition puts Hedy Lamarr (remember her from the PopMatters article?) squarely in polymath status (acting and electronics are about as far apart as two fields can be), but easily knocks out the swimming, trumpeting, and tax polymaths that I discussed earlier. However, it will allow us to recognize and appreciate the incredible achievement of a real modern polymath.

Now that we have this definition under control, we can look at other similar concepts (the Renaissance man, the universal man, etc.), and also start getting to know the Real Polymaths.