Polymathy degree problem

Polymathy Degree Problem
Shown above is the basic three step feedback (cybernetics) mechanism, in respect to the polymathy degree problem, showing how to start with students educated in the fundamentals of physics, chemistry, and thermodynamics, chemical thermodynamics specifically, who they read the main Social Principias (e.g. Goethe, Winiarski, Pareto, Beg, Thims), then engage into a physicochemical humanities course, e.g. physicochemical sociology, in a working established university, which in turn produces professors that go through the loop again, itself requiring a six-eight degree plus polymathic mind to turn, rotate, and or operate.
In hmolscience, polymathy degree problem, aka “one nature” (or monism) credentiality problem (hydraism or interdisciplinarity), refers to issue that one, supposedly, has to become a "Socrates + Einstein", new Aristotle (Raymond Fosdick, 1924), social Newton, or last universal genius (e.g. Leibniz, Goethe, Helmholtz, or Neumann), equivalent to obtaining somewhere in the neighborhood of "five plus degrees" (Dolloff, 1975), or "six degrees" (Bray, 1910; Patton, 1920), to "seven or eight degrees" (Scott, 1985), of which, one must be in chemistry (organic chemistry, physical chemistry, chemical engineering, chemical physics), and another in thermodynamics (chemical thermodynamics, in particular), the mental equivalent to a "another Newton" (Adams, 1910) or a “few super-Einsteins” (Wheeler, c.1935), the fruit of which, supposedly, would be a Social Principia, in order to broach the problem of solution of how to update the humanities as the modern physicochemical sciences sees things.

The following are representative quotes:

“It is not at all probable that the author will ever write another book; nor would he be inclined to publish this, did he not feel that he owes it to the world. Socrates told the court that he was moved by the indwelling spirit to teach as he had been taught; and thousands of others before and since have felt compelled to give utterance to thoughts not altogether originating in themselves. Without professing to have said the final word on the subjects concerning which the arguments and theories in this book are made, being a hard student and having been one all his life, and in addition to his natural love of study and assiduity in prosecuting it, having had a broader and more varied experience than but a few of his kind, and completed full courses in medicine, law, divinity, science and arts, and philosophy, receiving no less than six degrees from such well-known institutions of learning as Victoria University, Toronto University, Michigan University, Drew Theological School, and Hahnemann Medical College, Chicago, the author feels he is, and believers that the reader should consider him, comparatively well conversant with the subjects here investigated; and he does not doubt that the conclusions drawn from his life's studies and experience, and carefully set down in these pages, will stand the test of all true scholarship of the present, and be increasingly approved in the future.”
Henry Bray (1910), The Living Universe [1]

“Surrounding us on all sides are the physicists, chemists, geologists, and astronomers, with whom we must reckon, for their domains and their subject matter overlap ours in countless ways.”
William Patten (1920), Social Philosophy of a Biologist [2]

“Ideas about order and disorder began to germinate in my mind about the end of the 1940s and the beginning of the 1950s. Their origin was in the areas of physics and chemistry—the Carnot cycle, of course, as well as my wanderings through the labyrinth of chemical thermodynamics. It was about this time that the laws and principles of thermodynamics began to be applied on an increasing scale to the geological and biological sciences. The conviction grew that energy and entropy relationships were fundamental not only in understanding processes in physics and chemistry but also in astronomy, geology, and biology. Inevitably this led to the conjecture that further extrapolation would lead to the human sciences and arts, and even to psychology, sociology, history, music, philosophy and religion. Someone, I thought, will bring out the importance of understanding the concepts of order and disorder to all configurations of matter—including man and all of his works. Individuals have applied these concepts within their own specialties; there are articles on information and electronics, entropy in literature, music, and even entropy in religion. But I have waited in vain for someone to show that order and disorder are universal. Most of this essay, and it is an essay—an attempt—was written in the early 1960s. But I am, I believe, a cautious person. I ask myself, who am I [four degrees: BS geology MIT; MA Columbia; MA and PhD metallurgical engineering, Stanford] to presume myself enough of an eclectic to be able to discuss all of human knowledge [see: last person to know everything]?”
Norman Dolloff (1975), Preface to Heat Death and the Phoenix [3]

“Since my name is not Socrates or Einstein and I hold only one of the seven or eight PhD degrees [organic chemistry] this problem requires, readers are quite justified in questioning my qualifications to testify as such a multidisciplinary expert.”
George Scott (1985), Atoms of the Living Flame; introduction to the study of the ethics and physical chemistry of will [4]

“If it could stand the test of time, Beg’s ideas, presented in [New Dimensions in Sociology] will rediscover new frontiers in sociology and will revolutionize the existing theories of human behavior as it has so far been propounded by philosophers. Beg's approach is a pioneering effort his writing style is matter of fact and demands adequate knowledge of physical chemistry.”
— Jameel Jalibi (1987), “Foreword by a Sociologist” to Mirza Beg's New Dimensions in Sociology: a Physico-Chemical Approach to Human Behavior [5]

1. Bray, Henry T. (1910). The Living Universe (Preface pgs. 5-6). Truro Publishing Co., 1920.
2. (a) Patten, William. (1919). “The Message of the Biologist”, Address of the vice-president and chairman of Section F, Zoology, American Association for the Advancement of Science, St. Louis, Jan 31.
(b) Patten, William. (1920). “The Message of the Biologist”, Science, pgs. 93-101, Jan 30.
(c) Patten, William. (1920). The Grand Strategy of Evolution: the Social Philosophy of a Biologist (molecule, pgs. 58-59, 127, 159, 345, 381, 419-20; molecular society and Mr. Molecule, pg. 419; Appendix: “The Message of the Biologist”, pgs. 415-25; "surrounding us" quote, pg. 417). R.G. Badger.
3. Dolloff, Norman H. (1975). Heat Death and the Phoenix: Entropy, Order, and the Future of Man (Preface, pgs. xi-x). Exposition Press.
4. Scott, George P. (1985). Atoms of the Living Flame: an Odyssey into Ethics and the Physical Chemistry of Free Will (pg. viii). University Press of America.
5. Beg, Mirza. (1987). New Dimensions in Sociology: a Physico-Chemical Approach to Human Behavior (abs) (intro) (pdf, annotations by Libb Thims, 2014) (Foreword by a Sociologist, pgs. iv-v). Karachi: The Hamdard Foundation.

TDics icon ns

More pages