In today's world, is it better to be an expert at one thing or to be a "Renaissance person" who studies many different things?

The answer to whether it's better to be an expert in one field of study or a "Renaissance" person depends on one's definition of "better," but there are arguments for both. Someone who is competent in many fields can be seen as more flexible or interesting than someone who is only an expert in one field. On the other hand, specializing in one field can make someone stand out or receive a higher income.

Expert Answers

An illustration of the letter 'A' in a speech bubbles

The first point to establish is what you mean by "better." Do you want to be a more interesting person? To make more money? To contribute more to society? A Renaissance man or woman might be more interesting at a dinner party than an expert (unless you happen to be...

See
This Answer Now

Start your 48-hour free trial to unlock this answer and thousands more. Enjoy eNotes ad-free and cancel anytime.

Get 48 Hours Free Access

The first point to establish is what you mean by "better." Do you want to be a more interesting person? To make more money? To contribute more to society? A Renaissance man or woman might be more interesting at a dinner party than an expert (unless you happen to be fascinated by that person's area of expertise). On the other hand, job stability, financial security, and even wealth are most likely to be available to someone who has a specific and rare skill. This is true even within particular professions. The lawyer or doctor who has a particular area of practice and is highly expert within a narrow field is likely to command higher fees and enjoy higher status than the generalist.

However, there is no reason why one should not aim to be both a Renaissance person and an expert. Obviously, one cannot be an expert in everything, but there is no reason why you should not aim to combine expertise in a specific field with a high level of general knowledge and culture. It is notable that many scientists who write for a general audience are able to do this. They have to be an expert in their field, but they are also better writers and more effective communicators because they have a wide knowledge of literature, history and art. Stephen Jay Gould and Edward O. Wilson are both excellent examples of those who have managed to combine the best elements of the specialist and the generalist in their writing.

Approved by eNotes Editorial Team