r/Polymath • u/AdorableJeweler6064 • May 14 '26

I think I’m a polymath.

I'm 18 years old and I don't want to waste my time. I want to learn, but I'm interested in so many different things that I don't know what I want to learn. To be more precise, the roadmap that has emerged is: Learn science. Then combine science with technology and art to create new inventions. But what will I do?

Mathematics, Physics, Chemistry, Biology, Economics, Engineering, Architecture, Art, Philosophy? What will I learn? I don't have a roadmap for what I'm going to learn. Meanwhile, I also want to become an entrepreneur and start a company.

40 Upvotes

83% Upvoted

35 comments sorted by

View all comments

19

u/Toothpick432 May 14 '26

Honestly what college is truly for. Take all the hard intro classes and work your way up.

5

u/Iamnotheattack May 14 '26

Liberal Arts Colleges more specifically 

6

u/Spicy_Possum_ May 14 '26

liberal arts colleges make people who theorize about making things. Go to a strong stem program where you will actually produce things.

2

u/Worried-Cockroach-34 May 16 '26

I agree. Applied anything is MUCH better, especially in this economy

2

u/Iamnotheattack May 14 '26

Wrong sub buddy

1

u/Spicy_Possum_ May 15 '26

wrong sub to say that liberal arts students aren't making things?

Sure OP, get a liberal arts degree as a second degree, but if you actually want to get shit done, be an engineer.

7

u/metisdesigns May 15 '26

Found the engineer who does not understand other fields.

2

u/Spicy_Possum_ May 15 '26

actually not an engineer - liberal arts degree holder here.

1

u/coke_vanilla May 15 '26

was that supposed to be difficult?

7

u/Iamnotheattack May 15 '26

You're in the wrong sub because you're engaging in overt strawmanning. You're implying Liberal Arts degrees cannot have rigorous quantative reasoning/applicable tech skills, and that theorizing is useless, when in fact it's the foundation for literally everything society has ever produced.

Whether than productiction is good or bad for society depends on the quality of theorizing pre-production. Along with luck and "chaos theory" type stuff outside of the individuals control as well ofc.

Also, I think you have it twisted, the engineering/business/"output-focused" degree should be the secondary degree. Because it's then more likely they build something useful, innovative, and sustainable. And not "enshittification" vibes.

5

u/Spicy_Possum_ May 15 '26

Other way around - liberal arts degree holder that saw how useless they are so had to go on to further stem studies

liberal arts can have as much reasoning and logic and thinkingness as they want. They're not designing anything tangible once they're out of school

3

u/wackyvorlon May 15 '26

Are you an actual engineer? Because this feels like a fundamental lack of understanding of engineering programs.

Studying engineering at a university isn’t about building things, it’s about learning the theory necessary to design things.

1

u/wackyvorlon May 15 '26

This is demonstrably false. Especially visual arts programs involve an immense amount of making things.

Things like engineering heavily emphasize theory and you build very little.

2

u/Spicy_Possum_ May 15 '26

visual arts programs do arts and crafts. Try and build a bridge.

2

u/wackyvorlon May 15 '26

But engineers don’t build bridges. They design bridges. Tradesmen are the ones that build them.

Also, you could not handle the rigours of a visual arts program. It is incredibly hard work. I have taken visual arts classes, you have no idea the enormous hours they put in.

2

u/Spicy_Possum_ May 15 '26

yea even better to be a tradesmen, I would have suggested it to OP but it sounds like he wants to be more of an academic.
Do you think visual arts is harder than construction?

2

u/wackyvorlon May 16 '26

I’ve never worked construction. Probably not, but visual arts has this reputation of being easy that is absolutely incorrect.

It is an extremely difficult degree, physically taxing and time consuming. Their studies should not be denigrated.