It is not “many disciplines” is it willingness to work and learn in large networks

Cin-Ty Lee @CinTyLeeEarth  I used to be a big fan of interdisciplinary science, but not anymore, at least not in practice. We r seeing too much performative interdisciplinary science now and they are not producing much to get excited about. The reason why they often fail is that interactions are forced by
Replying to @CinTyLeeEarth

I never use the term “interdisciplinary” for the Internet. The reason, if you look at all (“interdisciplinary” OR “multidisciplinary” OR “cross-disciplinary”) with its 764 Million entries on Google Search, is the “disciplines” are drawn from a narrow set of classes offered in universities. And they are repeating what they think “sells”.  Not what is needed.

Packaging and classifying knowledge is hard work. And it takes practice. Sitting in classes or reading books is not “practice”.

Yes there have been many bursts and bubbles with groups discovering you need independent views. If the whole group has the same training, they can only produce what they know. Randomizing (pick people who stir things up) does help if all the people involved are mature and capable. But it turns to entertainment and acts.

In the physical universities I attended, I would usually go to as many seminars as I could find. I would read the books and papers of every presenter before they arrived. Listening (with deep preparation) can work if you do not have a lot of time or resources. Forcing humans to “be creative” does not work for long in universities, corporations, government agencies, social media, serial movie efforts, serial drama efforts, investment firms, funding agencies, first grade classrooms, Nobel prizes, prizes in general.