Life In 19x19

I'm sometimes conflicted in life. There are many interesting things I want to be good at. I like go, of course, but I also enjoy math, programming, doing better in the workplace, studying Japanese, studying Korean, reading novels, and of course, posting incessantly on L19. Now that I've got a kid, I guess being a good father also goes into the mix. Oh, and I recently ordered a microcontroller kit because I want to learn more about embedded programming... That's a lot of stuff to "master".

In my experience, I have been able to do better in a particular area of life when I focus single-mindedly on ONE thing. The problem is, there are many things I wouldn't mind mastering... But is it feasible to "master" many things?

Maybe I should try to be "OK" at many areas... But it seems to be unsatisfying across the board if that is the case.

So the question I pose to you L19ers is: Do you prefer to master one area of life, or would you rather be OK at many?

I vote 'other': I'd prefer to be master of many.

Ok, I've failed terribly in that regard, fooling only my dog.

I think the happy medium is to dive really deeply into one subject at a time (so far as possible). There's something you can't get if you study five things at once that you can get by studying them serially.

I think you see that pattern a lot in a number of great polymaths.

It's a little complicated ... But many years ago I made a list of all of things I would like to do and learn. Then I crossed items off the list until I had a list of the most important items that I could reasonably complete in my lifetime. After some organization, I began to follow the list and have looked forward since : )

There are many other personal details I did to items in the list, but this is general idea.

Another thing I come to terms with was whether it was important to me to try and be the best at anything. And if it was not ultimately important, then what level of competency would help me be content in my life? When you come to terms with this, then I think it will be your guide to determining your personal baseline for each goal.

As for 'master' vs 'jack-of-all,' I think in the river live many more fish than just these. Such as the 'expert but not master,' the 'guru to my family & friends' and 'hero to my children.'

It depends on what standard you set for "master", but basically I agree with hyperpape. You want to be brutally realistic about how much time you have and how you're going to prioritize your interests; and you need to be equally brutal about how you're going to keep your already-acquired skill sets limber; but you can master lots of different things, at least to the level that the man on the street would find impressive, if you tackle them one at a time.

If you want to be world-class at something, then you really need to be, in many respects, a monomaniac; but for most of us it's too late for that, so there's no need to worry about that highest level of mastery.

When I was younger, I was more of a Master of One -type, later in life I have become a Jack of all Trades -type. From what I see around me I think it's not uncommon.

there's my job & being a parent which would be nice to be good at, both of which take up most of my time between them and 1 hobby - Go. I'd like to be as good as possible at all three. Having a new hobby every year is okay I suppose (good for people choosing Christmas presents for you) and learning a new skill is quite exciting but I've started to see new hobbies as unwelcome distractions (a bit like some aspects of the internet ). For me it seems better(or to have more character) to have the same hobby for 10 years rather than 20 hobbies over a period of 10 years.

When I was younger, I was more of a Master of One -type, later in life I have become a Jack of all Trades -type. From what I see around me I think it's not uncommon.

I'm not that old (so plenty of time to reverse), but for me it's gone the other way. I suppose having young children has in a strange way made me more efficient with my time and more focussed. - not so efficient or focussed I can avoid the dangers of internet forums though

I don't really know what to vote. I'd call myself a jack of all trades right now, but I have no idea which one of both I would prefer to be.

Imho the decission seems to somewhat depend on what one understands of mastering and how much one is neglecting other trades to master a specific one.
I think I do both, I am fairly competend in some trades and am trying to master go to the best of my ability. I'm not sacrificing everything else for it though.

Joaz Banbeck wrote:I vote 'other': I'd prefer to be master of many.

Ok, I've failed terribly in that regard, fooling only my dog.

Sure, keep telling yourself you have the dog fooled.

I prefer being a jack of all trades. There are too many things I enjoy to just narrow the focus to one. See my sig, just in case

A serious downside to "Jack of all trades" is that he is generally "a master of none."

I enjoy being good at lots of things and having a wide range of interests, but I am envious of those who get really good at one thing.

Go analogy: Master of one plays thick. Jack of all trades leaves weaknesses everywhere.

I prefer Jack of All Trades because you find that some of the skills you learn in one trade applies or gives you insights to other trades.

I'm a happy jack of all trades, a rebel against our cultures pressure to specialize. There are a lot of different sorts of jacks of all trades; I tend to be a sort of serialist, like someone already mentioned in this thread. I'll get interested in something and for a while it Will fill much of my free time.

If you find yourself under pressure from others to narrow down a book called Refuse to Choose.

I have been a jack of all trades all my life and now I seriously regret it, having mastered nothing.