The pace of AI development is moving extremely fast—so fast that it's not uncommon for us to look back on what we wrote and see that the future we were describing is here. Dan Shipper's piece about the importance of generalists over specialists in the AI age from six months ago holds true more than ever. He reframes what it means to be a generalist—not just someone with shallow knowledge across multiple domains, but a curious, adaptable problem-solver who thrives in environments where rules are unclear and patterns aren't obvious. In an allocation economy, the winners won't be those who know all the answers, but those who know which questions to ask in the first place.—Kate Lee
Was this newsletter forwarded to you? Sign up to get it in your inbox.
A common refrain I hear is that in the age of AI, you don’t want to be a “jack of all trades and a master of none.”
For example, my good friend (and former Every writer) Nat Eliason recently argued:
“Trying to be a generalist is the worst professional mistake you can make right now. Everyone in the world is getting access to basic competence in every white-collar skill. Your ‘skill stack’ will cost $30/month for anyone to use in 3-5 years.”
He makes a reasonable point. If we think of a generalist as someone with broad, basic competence in a wide variety of domains, then in the age of AI, being a generalist is a risky career move. A language model is going to beat your shallow expertise any day of the week.
But I think knowing a little bit about a lot is only a small part of what it means to be a generalist. And that if you look at who generalists are—and at the kind of mindset that drives a person who knows a lot about a little—you’ll come to a very different conclusion: In the age of AI, generalists own the future.
What generalists are
Generalists are usually curious people who like to hop around from domain to domain. They enjoy figuring things out, especially in areas that are uncertain or new. They’re good at solving problems that domain experts struggle with, because they’re able to bring bits of knowledge from diverse fields together.
Create a free account to continue reading
The Only Subscription
You Need to
Stay at the
Edge of AI
The essential toolkit for those shaping the future
"This might be the best value you
can get from an AI subscription."
- Jay S.
Every Content
AI&I Podcast
Monologue
Cora
Sparkle
Spiral
Join 100,000+ leaders, builders, and innovators
Email address
Already have an account? Sign in
What is included in a subscription?
Daily insights from AI pioneers + early access to powerful AI tools
Front-row access to the future of AI
In-depth reviews of new models on release day
Playbooks and guides for putting AI to work
Prompts and use cases for builders
In-depth reviews of new models on release day
Playbooks and guides for putting AI to work
Prompts and use cases for builders
Bundle of AI software
Dan Shipper
Reviews of new AI models on release day
Comments
Don't have an account? Sign up!
I always think generalists should know enough about a topic to be dangerous. As you say their real superpower is knowing a bit about a lot of topics, and combining them in new ways to make things better. When they partner with AI, it only amplifies their dangerousness.
As an aside, my own personal measure of AGI is when the machines can match this:
"A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects."
— *Robert A. Heinlein, Time Enough for Love (1973)
Christian -- Thanks for quoting Heinlein, one of my favorite authors and life-advisors! Lazarus Long (aka Woodrow Wilson Smith) was indeed a generalist.
§ Lorin
I feel seen and understood. Thanks for sharing such an eloquent perspective.
Hmm, I'm not convinced. "They’re good at solving problems that domain experts struggle with...". Really? Which problems? There's no argument to be made here. Simply look at the job market and the requirements for getting hired. No serious company is hiring generalists. Now, if by "generalist" you mean "solopreneur", then I can see how they will thrive, but that worker profile accounts for a very small fraction of the population.