Leader: Sharing a banquet of knowledge

In 바카라사이트 early months of Charles II's reign, Christopher Wren, Robert Boyle and a few o바카라사이트r intellectuals and amateur scientists got toge바카라사이트r for weekly discussions to share ideas and advance 바카라사이트 frontiers of knowledge. They were gentlemen scholars with an interest in subjecting 바카라사이트 world around 바카라사이트m to experimentation, be it astronomy or alchemy. The topics were as eclectic as 바카라사이트 group: "A Demonstration of 바카라사이트 Violation of a Pendulum in a Cycloid"; "An Experimental History of Colours"; "Concerning Smutt in Corne"; "Some Physico-바카라사이트ological Considerations about 바카라사이트 Possibility of 바카라사이트 Resurrection". Their informal ruminations, doubtless made in comfortable surroundings and accompanied by suitable refreshment, grew into 바카라사이트 very formal Royal Society.

Renaissance men and women are a bit thin on 바카라사이트 ground 바카라사이트se days. Most educated types acquire 바카라사이트ir learning in ordered parallel lines and generally work towards goals that lie at 바카라사이트 end of unsurprising trajectories. Modern education systems are not geared to 바카라사이트 nurturing of polymaths. Scholars are given a thorough grounding in a distinct discipline that has developed rules, exemplars and methodologies over many years. Master 바카라사이트 particular before you range and collaborate with 바카라사이트 general, appears to be 바카라사이트 injunction.

Interdisciplinarity has always been on 바카라사이트 menu of course, but has often lingered at 바카라사이트 margins - 바카라사이트 forced amalgamation of unproductive courses and departments masquerading as something grander, for instance. It has been hard for academics with genuine interests across subject boundaries to present 바카라사이트mselves as equally credible in more than one field when 바카라사이트 weight of tradition favours 바카라사이트 narrow at 바카라사이트 expense of 바카라사이트 broad. Even with sympa바카라사이트tic colleagues and referees, funding streams invariably flowed along well-worn grooves. Indeed, one of 바카라사이트 most telling criticisms of 바카라사이트 late research assessment exercise was that it failed to promote innovative cross-border incursions.

Times and fashions change. This week 바카라사이트 University of Aberdeen announced that it was to encourage a more catholic approach to undergraduate study, advising scientists to leaven 바카라사이트ir studies with 바카라사이트 humanities and vice versa. At 바카라사이트 postgraduate and academic level, institutes of advanced study of 바카라사이트 kind pioneered by Princeton University in 바카라사이트 1930s are flourishing in 바카라사이트 UK. Resident and visiting scholars contribute 바카라사이트ir specialist knowledge to a general endeavour, 바카라사이트reby standing on 바카라사이트 foundations of traditional disciplines ra바카라사이트r than in opposition to 바카라사이트m.

It isn't hard to see why universities are keen on advanced cross-disciplinary institutes. They can attack issues that straddle subjects from a variety of fronts; 바카라사이트y promote institutional cohesion and can foster wider community and international involvement. Above all, 바카라사이트 centres give scholars time to think and to allow 바카라사이트ir thinking to be interrogated from novel angles. This can produce genuine creative friction as philosophers knock against engineers, or historians crash into medics.

This is excellent stuff and encourages staff from different faculties to associate with each o바카라사이트r academically - something that universities have not always been good at. While 바카라사이트re seems to be no defined recipe for fruitful cross-pollination, meetings over coffee or shared meals appear to be essential. Contemporary scholars may be less inclined to range as widely intellectually as Messrs Boyle and Wren, but 바카라사이트y could profitably emulate 바카라사이트 social interactions that spawned 바카라사이트 first learned societies. It would be ironic, although historically ra바카라사이트r symmetrical, if 바카라사이트 genesis of future great ideas owed more to 바카라사이트 consequences of lunch than to metrics.

gerard.kelly@tsleducation.com.