Would you rather be...

[Syringer]

e.g. would you rather be a great engineer, doctor, writer, and pretty much have your life defined as such and not much else, or would you rather be just good at several different areas?

 

[AgaBoogaBoo]

Be great in one area, with knowledge being a level above others in hobbies and interests - why stop at a basic level? If you don't get more advanced in hobbies ever, that's pretty lame IMO.

 

[Syringer]

Well, say you're a doctor/banker working 80-90 hours a week with no ability to get better in other areas. Would you make that sacrifice?

 

[kranky]

Good in different areas. If I was moderately knowledgable in a number of areas I would have lots of options, friends with varied interests, and the ability to not only take care of many of life's problems on my own, I would be able to avoid many others.

Being a one-trick pony doesn't appeal to me.

 

[ppdes]

One area if I could choose it, various areas otherwise. IRL I'm great in a field I don't like anymore and mediocre at the things I do like.

 

[DainBramaged]

If I could be an amazing writer, I'd probably be willing to sacrifice my abilities in other areas.

 

[Evadman]

I am good at various things. I like it better this way.

 

[LordMaul]

The idea of being a Renaissance Man is nice and all, but if you're unable to do something particularly well, what is your use to society and your purpose in life? A Jack Of All Trades but Master of None only means that you're mediocre in all areas.