hide

Read Next

What Separates a Generalist and a Dabbler?

Kind of a speculative entry today, I don't have a complete answer. I've been trying to crack this nut for a while -

What's the difference between a generalist and a dabbler?

Rather, what separates a generalist from a dabbler?

They're very similar. Both dive into a wide variety of things and affairs. Both pick up new skills regularly, sometimes at the expense of the highest level of mastery in a specialized field.

But we all know people who dabble in this, do a little of that, and never make any contributions. And then, on the other hand, you've got people like Thomas Jefferson and Leonardo da Vinci, who did excellent work in a variety of fields.

Comment: "over time, I think the wide array of skillsets [of a generalist] will actually lead to higher quality than a specialist"

There were a lot of excellent comments and discussion on "What Separates a Generalist and a Dabbler?"

I'd recommend you check them all out - lots of good insights - and I thought this one by Phaedrus ought to have its own top level post -

Mmmm excellent post! A very good question, and an intriguing style too.

I think Soham hit on an excellent point, which you touched on as well. A generalist may not have a theme for all of his generalities, but he usually does have a purpose for them. The end result of this purpose manifests in shipping, yes. But it also manifests in a consistency of various actions over time.

I’m going to pick two examples from my own life that straddle the line…