I wouldn't change anything for the thrill of intellectual discovery. The feeling of downloading new information that unlocks or sheds light on previously acquired information.
Of course, having another piece of a puzzle doesn't mean the puzzle is now complete. Far from it. This piece has to be experimented with through trial and error to understand how it really fits into the puzzle.
I think in our modern world, it's often too easy to consume information without digesting it, given information is readily available all the time and our mental capacity is stretched thin across countless inputs.
I think the trend is more or less tilted towards becoming moderately skilled at skimming the surface of oceans of data, at the expense of being less adept at diving deep into any particular current.
I'm definitely guilty of this but not all the time. Because there's a filtering mechanism that I use to determine what deserves my full attention.
In practice, it's quite simple, do I need to understand beyond the tip of the iceberg of this information? What's the relevance, in terms of its impact on my understanding of the world?
Usually, when the answer is yes to both, then I consume and digest this piece of information and connect it to its related puzzle.
And when the answer is no but I'm remotely interested in this piece of information, then I just consume without digesting it. That's where the guilty part comes into play.
For example, I'm remotely interested in political discourse. I admire the the way different worldviews collide and reshape each other, but I hardly ever understand the full context because I don't bother moving beyond the surface level of headlines and sound bites.
Also, this tension between breadth and depth of knowledge is something that seems less explored, especially in terms of modern learning.
There's an art to maintaining a broad enough perspective to see connections across domains, while still developing the depth necessary for true understanding.
Arguably, in a world that's overwhelmed by information silos, this is a great skill to have.
What's not clear to me is how broad of a domain is enough to find the necessary balance for the depth of understanding.
Staying at the surface level of many topics can create a kind of intellectual pointillism, which can be defined as a mind state where individual dots of knowledge, while superficial on their own, combine to create a meaningful bigger picture.
Definitely big picture type of thinking but there's a pulse as to what's going on multiple small pictures, so to speak.
I don't doubt that this isn't humanly possible to achieve. The rate at which information is accelerating beyond our cognitive capacity however, makes me think that human augmentation through technology may become inevitable, sometimes.
On the flip side, these surface-level interests can serve as possible future diving points, ready to be explored more deeply when the right moment or inspiration arrives. Full circle moment.
In the midst of it all, maintaining an honest awareness of the depth of our understanding in different areas and also being intentional about where we choose to dive deeper could be the meta-skill that defines intellectual growth in this fluid digital age.
Thanks for reading!! Share your thoughts below on the comments!
