Review

I’m often skeptical that we can learn much from the great Polymaths. They seem to have a curiosity and intellectual horsepower that most don’t. However, there’s some practical tips in this book that I think are important for those working in product development.

You Might Also Like:

The War of Art

An empowering, beautiful and poignant take on resistance… the force that creates the gap between intention and action. The final third of the book didn’t feel as practical and precise as the first two. I left the book feeling like I’d just spent two hours with a palm reader… who said a bunch of stuff, some of which hit but most didn’t, and I left a little put off by the mention of higher powers and spirits.

andrewclark.co.uk

Get Better at Anything

Knowing how to learn can put you at an advantage. This book can help you, but please don’t use it as an excuse to procrastinate. Getting better at a craft requires practice - so go read ‘The War of Art’ or ‘The Practice’ and then get on with getting better.

andrewclark.co.uk

Book Review and Summary: The Practice by Seth Godin

Get a comprehensive review and summary of the best-selling book "The Practice" by Seth Godin, the marketing and business thought leader. Learn about the key principles and practices of developing and honing your skills and expertise in any field, based on Godin's own experience and insights.

andrewclark.co.uk

Key Takeaways

The 20% that gave me 80% of the value.

A polymath builds usable competence across multiple domains, then integrates those abilities into a coherent toolkit. The defining edge isn’t raw breadth; it’s synthesis: translating between fields, learning fast, and generating solutions that don’t appear inside any single discipline. Famous examples (Franklin, da Vinci, Newton, Galileo, Plato, Archimedes, Michelangelo, Darwin, Musk) are memorable because their work recombined ideas across boundaries. Polymathism though is learnable, not genetic.

The core shift is to stop treating disciplines like sealed rooms and start treating them like interchangeable lenses. Problems become opportunities for cross-application: borrow a method from one domain, apply it to another, and test whether the transfer produces leverage. This “combinatorial” approach assumes the parts already exist; value comes from new configurations, new mappings, and better questions.

Skill stacking is the engine: assemble complementary skills that build on each other. Instead of aiming for world-class status in one thing, it can be strategically easier to reach strong, usable competence (top quartile / top 10–15%) in several skills and win at their intersection: where competition is thinner and differentiation is structural.

T-shaped profiles add broad context but remain anchored to one main pillar. π-shaped profiles combine breadth with two deep pillars, enabling genuine cross-pollination; comb-shaped extends this to several pillars, and star-shaped emerges over time through serial specialisation. The objective isn’t maximal knowledge; it’s a portfolio of depth points that can be recombined to solve problems.

Diversification can help with career risk management. A multi-function profile creates optionality: you can swap industries, redesign your role, and adapt when a market shifts. Becoming “irreplaceable” is less about being the single best specialist and more about being the person who can inhabit multiple functions and connect specialist outputs into an integrated solution.

Depth has a shadow: the Einstellung effect. Expertise can harden into a cognitive rut where familiar tools and standard solutions block better alternatives (“hammer → nail” thinking). The antidote isn’t abandoning depth; it’s counterbalancing it—add a second pillar, import outsider lenses, force alternative framings, and routinely ask how you’d solve the problem if your default toolkit were unavailable.

Polymaths tend to share a consistent operating system: insatiable curiosity; a genuine drive toward mastery; a healthy disregard for rules (conventions as provisional models); comfort with uncertainty; and a high tolerance for risk, failure, and social judgment. They are “boundary-blind” in the sense that labels and category lines don’t feel real: so they move freely across them. They also resist trend-chasing: copying fashionable skills too late is both crowded and misaligned with personal advantage; durable leverage comes from aligning learning with authentic interest and unique perspective.

Their learning style is explicitly experimental: close to the scientific method. Don’t assume, test. Run mini-experiments to generate tangible data, reduce perfectionism, and create fast feedback. This requires psychological safety around experimentation (internally and in teams): curiosity and creativity shut down under threat. Layered on top is Shoshin (beginner’s mind): openness, eagerness, low preconception, and comfort asking “dumb” questions even when experienced. A strong belief in agency (“time + effort + learning will move the needle”) sustains long arcs of competence-building, and relentless discipline makes discomfort tolerable rather than terminal.

A practical 10 step process to learn a new field:

1. Broad overview: skim for map-level understanding; answer what it is, how extensive it is, and where to start.
2. Narrow scope: carve a slice small enough to finish in weeks; define essentials vs tangents.
3. Define success: measurable criteria (“I will have learned X when Y”) tied to a practical capability.
4. Compile resources: gather widely across media before judging; prioritise coverage.
5. Create a curriculum: break into modules and sequence them; steal structure from multiple tables of contents.
6. Filter: prune to a small core set; read selectively by module relevance, not cover-to-cover.
7. Dive in (per module): learn just enough basics to begin.
8. Explore: “play around” to generate hypotheses and organic questions.
9. Clarify: return to resources to answer questions; alternate theory with application until usable.
10. Teach: explain/summarise/present to force organisation, reveal gaps, and deepen retention (LPLT: learn, play, learn, teach).

Notes act as a second brain and make the loop stick. A four-pass method shifts note-taking from transcription to understanding: (1) capture detailed notes with space left beneath; (2) rewrite in your own words and list clarifying questions; (3) connect each point to the broader model (why it matters, implications, cause/effect); (4) at the end of each chunk, synthesizs and answer open questions or flag them for follow-up. This creates repeated processing in different forms, which improves both recall and transfer.

Choosing what to learn next is an “intentional discovery” problem. Start with a purpose audit (market competitiveness vs holistic development), then inventory your existing traits, history, aptitudes, and durable interests. Push outside your comfort zone on purpose: cross-train the opposite pole (math-minded → art/philosophy; arts-minded → logic/mechanics): because reality isn’t partitioned into academic departments. Use combinatory play: a secondary, seemingly unrelated activity to unlock perspective shifts and non-linear breakthroughs in primary work.

Avoid anchoring your value to a single skill. Reaching the top 1% in one domain is statistically rare and costly; a more reliable path is a strategic stack: be in the top 10–15% in three or four complementary skills. Build it deliberately: identify baseline skills your field expects, locate the gap that differentiates, then add “special sauce” capabilities (communication, coding, language, design, facilitation, etc.) that amplify the core. The aim is coherence: a stack that converges toward an outcome, not a random pile of hobbies.

Historical polymaths offer repeatable patterns. Diversification and cross-pollination produce paradigm shifts because fresh lenses reveal assumptions specialists stop noticing. Their fearlessness is less glamour than tolerance for resistance: solitary work, institutional pushback, mockery, and long delays before validation. They often choose authenticity over external reward: curiosity over status, identity flexibility over labels, and rapid correction over ego protection. The through-line is consistent: curiosity-driven exploration + disciplined learning loops + deliberate recombination yields uniqueness, resilience, and unusually high creative output.

Deep Summary

Longer form notes, typically condensed, reworded and de-duplicated.

Chapter 1: Jack of All Trades

A polymath is someone who has learned “much” across domains and can use that range: build real competencies in different areas, integrate them into a coherent toolkit, and stay unusually good at learning itself.

“When most people talk about famous polymaths, they are referring to people who have not just earned competencies in different areas, but who manage to creatively integrate those abilities—and the sum is inevitably greater than the parts!

Famous Polymaths include: Benjamin Franklin, Leonardo da Vinci, Isaac Newton, Galileo, Plato, Archimedes, Michelangelo, Charles Darwin, and Elon Musk.

Polymathism isn’t genetic; you can cultivate it.

The goal isn’t to know everything; but to be able to learn and synthesise quickly. To build enough breadth and depth that you can make novel connections between fields and solve important problems.

The polymath perspective shift is to stop treating disciplines like sealed rooms and start treating them like lenses you can swap. Instead of running one narrow race, widen your field of perception, deliberately place ideas side-by-side, and test unlikely pairings.

Skill stacking is the mechanics of this: assembling a portfolio of complementary skills that multiply each other. Aim for strong, usable competence across several areas, then combine them into a niche that looks “obvious” only in hindsight. It’s often easier to reach the top quartile in multiple skills than the top 1% in one: and the intersection is where differentiation happens.

Think of skill profiles as shapes:

• I-shaped: deep in one domain, little breadth; efficient but brittle in novel situations.
• T-shaped: broad familiarity plus one deep specialisation; better context, still constrained by one main pillar.
• π-shaped (polymath): breadth plus two deep pillars; more cross-pollination, more leverage.
• Comb-shaped for several deep pillars
• Star-shaped over time via serial specialisation

A polymath assumes the world is combinatorial. Many breakthroughs come from recombining what already exists: methods migrating between fields, concepts fused into hybrid disciplines, and old tools repurposed for new constraints. The mental default becomes: the parts are plentiful; the value is in new configurations.

Diversification isn’t just intellectual: it’s a career strategy. If you’re strong in multiple functions you create resilience: you can swap industries, redesign your role, and keep optionality when a market shifts. Anti-fragility comes from having many small bets, feedback loops, and the ability to redeploy skills across contexts.

The more polymathic you can be, the more functions you can inhabit, and the less replaceable you will become.

“Your goal as a polymath is to become a generalist, i.e. the person who can talk about any topic with anyone, because they are able to bridge gaps, draw connections and learn.”

Be a connector: someone who can translate across tribes, map a problem landscape quickly, and assemble specialists’ best contributions into an integrated solution.

Intellectual curiosity is the fuel. Polymaths collect perspectives, and look for novel connections that others miss because they’re trained to stay inside the lines. If most people compete head-to-head within one lane, an unusual combination of lanes creates a personal “USP” almost automatically.

Breadth and side-interests can strengthen, not dilute, performance; especially when problems are ambiguous, fast-changing, or require analogies. Generalists accumulate a wider library of patterns to draw from, and that variety can correlate with higher creative output and unusual solutions.

Chapter 2: The Polymathic Mind

The Polymathic Mindset

Polymaths share a distinctive set of traits and approaches that set them apart:

Insatiable curiosity: drives their exploration. They possess an unquenchable desire to understand how things work and why.

Yearning for mastery: motivates their deep dives into multiple domains, pushing beyond surface-level understanding.

Healthy disregard for rules: they see conventions as provisional guidelines rather than absolute constraints, questioning established boundaries when necessary.

Comfort with uncertainty: they tolerate the unknown and thrive in ambiguous situations where others hesitate.

Risk-taking and resilience: they fail often, sometimes spectacularly, but don't care what others think of those failures. They see failure as part of the learning process.

Boundary-blind thinking: they don't see the labels, boxes, and limits that constrain others, allowing them to make connections across disciplines.

Experimental mindset: open-minded, curious, and fearless, they follow an approach close to the scientific method. Rather than assuming, they test ideas in reality and observe results. They encourage safety around experimentation and gather tangible results from mini experiments.

Beginner's mind: they maintain openness, an eagerness to learn, and avoid preconceptions. They accept they'll never stop learning, approach subjects with wonder, and aren't afraid to ask "dumb questions."

Unwavering belief: they trust that with time, effort, and energy, they'll solve the problems they’re working on or achieve goals they set. They don't listen to others' preconceptions about what's possible. They believe what they wish to achieve is just out of reach: close enough to motivate relentless pursuit.

Relentless discipline: they know there are no shortcuts. Success belongs to those who can tolerate distress, uncertainty, and sacrifice. They have the self-discipline to embrace discomfort and thrive in it.

Chapter 3: Novice to Expert in 10 Steps

1. Get a broad overview of the topic by skimming for breadth, not depth, until you can answer: What is it about? (2) How extensive is it? (3) What’s an appropriate starting point? Use fast sources (Wikipedia, top search results, book previews) to map subtopics and spot what you actually mean when you say you want to learn “X.”
2. Narrow the scope to a slice you can realistically learn in a few weeks to a month. Deconstruct the slice into parts you can tackle one-by-one, and decide what’s “essential” versus “nice to know” so you don’t drown in an infinite topic. Learn other slices later, sequentially.
3. Define success in measurable, objective terms so you can tell if you’ve “won.” Use a simple template: “I will have learned ___ when ___.” Anchor it to a practical capability (a task you can perform), then work backwards to identify what must be learned.
4. Compile resources widely before you judge them. Avoid the one-book trap by gathering across formats (books, blogs, courses, podcasts, articles, practitioners, friends/expert advice), and store them in one place (folder/bookmarks/notes). Minimal filtering is fine; the priority is coverage.
5. Create a curriculum by turning your scope into “modules” (subtopics or skill chunks) and ordering them. Steal structure from the tables of contents of your best resources and compare how multiple authors segment the same subject; recurring patterns are a reliable backbone. Keep modules aligned to what your success criteria requires.
6. Filter aggressively until you have a small core set you’ll actually use. Choose the best 1–2 primary resources (plus a few targeted supplements) based on module-fit, clarity, and usefulness; scan fast to decide. Don’t read everything cover-to-cover: pull only the chapters/sections that serve the modules, and keep cost/time constraints explicit.
7. For each module, “dive in” just enough to get started: learn the basic terms, building blocks, and what a correct output looks like. Use quick intros and free tutorials, and ask knowledgeable people “where do I start?” Stay shallow on purpose; the goal is readiness, not mastery.
8. Explore by “playing around” with no performance pressure. Try the concepts/tools, form rough hypotheses, and let questions emerge organically (questions are the point). Three useful exploration modes: build a conclusion from premises, reverse-engineer premises from a conclusion, or chain conclusions into the next inference.
9. Clarify by returning to your resources to answer the questions you generated and to build working competence. Go back and forth between learning and application so knowledge turns into usable skill (especially for technical topics). Keep iterating until you can apply the module in real situations without constantly looking things up.
10. Teach to lock it in: explain it to a person, write it up, record a short video, make slides—any format that forces you to simplify and organize. Teaching exposes gaps fast, sends you back to patch them, and deepens retention beyond “I read it.” Repeat steps 7–10 for each module, using LPLT: learn, play, learn, teach (and loop learn/play/learn longer if a module needs it before you teach).

Keep notes as a second brain; a four-pass method forces understanding instead of transcription:

• Capture detailed notes while learning, leaving space under each point.
• Rewrite in your own words and add clarifying questions.
• Write how it connects to the bigger topic and why it matters (cause/effect, implications, links).
• At the end of each page/chunk, synthesise the rewritten notes + connections, and try to answer the questions (or mark them for follow-up).

Chapter 4: Intentional Discovery

To determine what to learn next, begin by auditing your purpose. You may seek to become more competitive in the marketplace or simply wish to become a more well-rounded human being. Start by taking stock of your existing inventory: your unique personality traits, history, aptitude, and lifelong passions. These serve as the foundation upon which you can build new competencies.

To achieve true polymathy, deliberately pursue endeavours that sit outside your natural comfort zone. If you are mathematically minded, study art or philosophy; if you are artistically inclined, explore logic or mechanics. The natural world does not divide itself into rigid academic disciplines, so you should not limit your development to one side of the spectrum. The goal is not merely to accumulate knowledge, but to integrate diverse fields to find the creative connections between them.

Adopt the practice of "combinatory play." This involves engaging in a secondary, seemingly unrelated activity: such as playing an instrument: to aid problem-solving in your primary work. Indulging in creative distractions allows the mind to shift perspective, leading to breakthroughs that linear focus often misses. The combination of disparate elements is where creativity thrives.

Avoid establishing your value based on a single skill. Reaching the top 1% of a specific field is statistically improbable and requires immense sacrifice. A more effective strategy is "skill stacking." Instead of striving for elite perfection in one area, aim to reach the top 10–15% in three or four distinctive skills. While you may not be the best in the world at one thing, a unique combination of competent skills makes you virtually irreplaceable.

To build a strategic skill stack, ensure your chosen abilities complement one another toward a specific end goal.

• Analyse your industry: Identify the baseline skills that everyone in your field possesses (the top 5%).
• Identify the gap: Determine what additional skills would differentiate you from the average practitioner.
• Acquire the "special sauce": Learn 2–3 complementary skills (e.g., a foreign language, coding, or public speaking) that enhance your core competency.

Gaining a top 15% proficiency in these secondary areas often requires only a moderate amount of study: reading a few books or attending lectures: yet it exponentially increases your market value by creating a rare profile that few can replicate.

Chapter 5: Standing on the Shoulders of Giants

Historical polymaths offer patterns worth studying:

Diversification as strategy. Polymaths succeed not through individual achievements but through combining skills and exploring fertile areas between fields. A single expertise is like a point on a page; multiple perspectives create dimensionality. Many polymaths had contemporaries working on identical problems: Thomas Young had fierce rivals in his field. Yet specialists devoted to single disciplines aren't revered like those whose involvement may have been shallower but brought fresh perspective from dealing with varied problems in varied ways. This cross-pollination enables bigger-picture thinking and explains why paradigm-shifting breakthroughs often come from generalists rather than specialists. The magic lies in what emerges from the combination, not the individual parts.

Fearlessness despite resistance. Polymaths often work as loners against criticism, mockery, and institutional pushback. The romantic image of flitting happily between achievements masks the unglamorous reality: quiet, solitary work despite extreme resistance. For someone driven by genuine curiosity, external disapproval is merely a small impediment. Many deliberately chose poverty over work that would distract from their vision. This extends to challenging entire disciplines—Young contradicted Newton's theories on light, Goethe challenged Newtonian optics with his own color theory, Imhotep rejected the prevailing belief that diseases were divine punishment. The courage to push back against dominant frameworks, even when it takes years to be vindicated, characterises polymathic achievement.

Authenticity over external reward. Polymaths resist easy definition and fixed labels, instead following what inspires them. They embody growth mindset—quick to acknowledge mistakes because faster correction means faster progress. Being driven by curiosity rather than money or fame allows them to pursue ideas long after they stop being profitable or approved of. This devotion to learning itself, not its rewards, keeps them honest and genuine. Self-delusion and distraction simply get in the way of the enormously exciting world they seek to explore.