What’s the Difference Between a Multipotentialite, a Scanner, a Generalist and a Polymath?

The Subtle Differences and Similarities Between 10 Different Labels We Have for Curious and Creative Adventurers of Life

Dr. Jan Schlösser

Jul 31, 2024

Polymaths.

Multipotentialites.

Scanner Personalities.

Renaissance men and women.

Those are just four of the labels that are thrown around on the internet for people who are interested in many different things, are driven by their curiosity, have a love of learning, and are often highly creative.

Some people claim they all mean the same thing. But – spoiler alert – that’s wrong.

Yes, there is something all those terms have in common: Namely, they all refer to people who are high in the Big Five-personality trait “Openness to Experience”, which is expressed in character traits such as the ones I mentioned above. I will talk more about what this actually means in my next article, so make sure you’re subscribed if you want to get notified when it goes live.

For now, all you need to know is that people who are high in Openness to Experience have the following traits:1

They are curious about many things.
They are interested in novel and abstract ideas.
They love to learn and are often voracious readers.
They are imaginative and often have a rich fantasy.
They are often described by others as intelligent and creative.
They are sensitive to aesthetics and often have artistic hobbies or interests.

I’d argue that these are all traits that most people who identify themselves as multipotentialites, scanners, polymaths and so on, share.

But apart from this commonality, there are many subtle (and some not-so-subtle) differences between those labels. That’s because they emphasize different aspects of this underlying trait of Openness to Experience, or because they refer to different ways or contexts in which it is expressed.

But why should you even care about those differences?

Well, two reasons:

1. You can pick the one that describes you best. Many people I talk to who think they might be a multipotentialite, renaissance man, scanner and so on are confused about these terms. And that’s understandable because they are often not clearly explained by those who use them. For example, one of my friends thought she might be a polymath but wasn’t sure. She needed to spend an entire Saturday afternoon doing a deep dive to find out. The result: No, she couldn’t really identify with that label. So what would be one that suits her better? If you’re in a similar place, this article is for you.

2. You can search more effectively for information and communities: Because there are so many different words out there that refer to a similar thing, it can be challenging to find the information that you need. For example, on Reddit alone, there are subreddits for multipotentialites, scanners, and polymaths. One of them might have just that exact piece of information you’re looking for. But if you aren’t aware of the fact that, for example, multipotentialite isn’t the only label there is, you might never find that crucial piece. Also, you’ll have an easier time finding communities that are right for you. For example, the various communities for polymaths that I’m aware of have a very different vibe than those for multipotentialites, and one might suit you better than the other.

…and just one more thing before we dive in

As you read this article, it may sound like I’m splitting hairs in some places. The reason is that I really wanted to clarify the differences between the terms I analyzed. But since their meanings do overlap – some more, some less – it can look like I’m being overly pedantic.

I went back to the original source of each term wherever possible to get to its original meaning, and in some cases, those just happen to be pretty similar. Working on this article was actually a nice reminder of the kind of academic work I often used to do as a PhD student.

And now, let’s dive in!

Multipods and scanners, and polymaths, oh my!

What follows is a list of 10 different labels for people like us – curious and creative adventurers of life with an insatiable hunger for learning who are interested in many different things.

We’ll look at the common threads between them, but also at the differences.

1. Multipotentialite

This seems to be the most frequently used label, and the one that the most people identify with. I don’t have any hard data to back up this claim, it’s just the feeling I get from spending time in the different online communities.

The term “Multipotentialite” was coined in 1972 by Ronald H. Fredrickson and John W. M. Rothney in their book “Recognizing and assisting multipotential youth”. In the preface of this book, on page vii, they write:

“A multipotential person is defined […] as any individual who, when provided with an appropriate environment, can select and develop any number of competencies to a high level. He is a person who seemingly is able to adapt his performances and is, therefore, well suited for a world in which there is much change”.2

*Like a slab of clay, a multipotentialite can become many things. Photo by Taylor Heery on Unsplash*

So the emphasis of the term was originally on having the potential to excel in any one of several different areas, or even in more than one because the person has the necessary potential to do so.

But it says nothing about the actualization of that potential.

This original meaning got somewhat diluted over the years.

For example, Emilie Wapnick who popularized the term “multipotentialite”, defines it a lot more loosely as “someone with many interests and many pursuits (in other words, multiple potentials)”.3

Wapnick also introduced the shorthand ‘multipod’.

The fact that ‘Multipotentialite’ is so loosely defined might just be the reason why it’s such a popular label—it’s easy to identify with it!

To a degree, you could even look at it as an umbrella term for the more specific ones below—with the exception of ‘Polymath’, for which there is a relatively clear definition (see #9 below). While every Polymath is an (actualized) Multipotentialite, not every Multipotentialite is a Polymath, because they haven’t necessarily actualized their potential in multiple areas (yet).

But as you’ll see later (#10), I think there is an even better umbrella term.

2. Scanner personality

The Scanner personality (or simply “Scanner”) is a term that was coined by Barbara Sher in her book “Refuse to choose”.

Sher describes Scanners as “genetically wired to be interested in many things” and states that “intense curiosity about numerous unrelated subjects is one of the most basic characteristics of a Scanner”.4

Further, “curiosity, creativity and learning are essential to Scanners, and without them they become depressed”.5

Similarly, Emilie Wapnick definies Scanners as “someone with intense curiosity about numerous unrelated subjects”.6

*Scanner personalities live their lives like people browsing spines in a bookstore. Photo by John Michael Thomson on Unsplash*

Sher also describes several subtypes of the Scanner personality. There are too many to describe them all in this article, so here are just four that stood out to me:

Cyclical Scanners have multiple core interests that they frequently revisit. So they may do a few bookbinding projects, then stop bookbinding for a while and engage in astronomy, and after that, painting. Then it’s bookbinding again, and so on.
Sequential Scanners, in contrast to cyclical Scanners, usually abandon whatever they were previously interested in once their interest is piqued by something new. That means, they typically don’t have any core interests. So they may cycle through bookbinding, astronomy, and painting—and then on to yet another thing. But they usually don’t revisit any of those interests.
Serial master: This subtype can look similar to the sequential Scanner – but in contrast to them, serial masters put a focus on challenge and mastery. Often, they immerse themselves deeply in something, only to lose interest once they feel they mastered it (or got the accolades and certificates to prove it). They then move on to the next interest, and master that one as well. Typically, they stick with something for a few years (enough time to master it) before they move on. You could say that ‘serial master’ is a different name for renaissance men and women (see #3 below) renaissance souls (#4)—and to a lesser degree, for polymaths (#9).
Jack-of-all-trades: Jack-of-all-trades are good at almost everything they try—but not great at anything. They don’t have an ultimate passion—they are the ultimate generalist and the eternal student. Because everything comes so easy to them, they often underestimate the value of their skills. Another thing about them is that they usually don’t get their life satisfaction from work or from their career, but from avocations and social relationships.

Although Sher herself doesn’t state this explicitly, the term “Scanner” suggests a rather superficial engagement with interests and pursuits—although this is clearly not the case with some of the subtypes, such as the serial master. But for scanner personalities as a whole, there isn’t any inherent commitment for deep learning or mastery.

This is a major difference to Polymaths, Renaissance People and Renaissance Souls, for whom mastery is emphasized.

Also, as Wapnick’s definition above suggests, the things scanners are interested in are often unrelated. There is no need for integration—which is a defining feature of Polymaths.

Similarly to Renaissance People and Renaissance Souls, a Scanner’s interests can be in any area—business, sports, arts and crafts, intellectual pursuits—you name it. This is another difference to Polymaths, whose interests are primarily intellectual in nature (see #9).

All in all, it’s really the curiosity aspect of Openness to Experience that is emphasized with this term. This is also reflected in the fact that Sher contrasts Scanners with “Divers”. These are people who go deep in one area, or specialists in the workplace.7 In contrast to the Generalist (see #7), the label Scanner is applicable to any context, not just the work context.

3. Renaissance Man

In its original sense, the term “Renaissance Man” simply refers to “a man who exhibits the virtues of an idealized man of the renaissance” (according to the Oxford English Dictionary), with Leonardo da Vinci often regarded as the man who best exemplified those ideas.

Typically, however, the word is used in the more modern sense that the Merriam-Webster dictionary gives as a definition: “a person who has wide interests and is expert in several areas”.8

*The poster child of all renaissance people – Leonardo da Vinci. Photo by Blaz Erzetic on Unsplash*

This newer definition might be the reason why “Renaissance Man” is often used synonymously with “Polymath”: Similarly to the latter term, there is an emphasis on the mastery of multiple areas.

But there is a difference.

Specifically, compared to Polymaths, there is less of an emphasis on intellectual knowledge and intellectual achievement. Historically, ‘Polymath’ was applied primarily to scholars.9

Instead, people who embodied the renaissance ideal were supposed to excel at basically everything - sports, business, conversation and social skills, as well as the arts.10

As such, it is clearly an ideal—something to be strived for that will never be fully realized.

Renaissance Men were supposed to be “complete” and “well-rounded” people who should ideally excel at anything. In contrast, someone is often regarded as a Polymath when they excel in two widely disparate or three not so widely disparate fields. A renaissance man could be a polymath, but the opposite isn’t true.11

There’s also an overlap with the concept of the Multipotentialite/Scanner Personality/Renaissance Soul. But in contrast to those, the term “Renaissance Man” implies a larger emphasis on mastery and expertise. Multipotentialites, Scanners, and Renaissance Souls don’t necessarily need to excel at anything.

4. Renaissance Soul

“Renaissance soul” is a term invented by Margaret Lobenstine in her book “The Renaissance Soul”.

Lobenstine defines renaissance souls as “people whose number one career or hobby choice is “Please don’t make me choose!” [Renaissance souls are] much more inclined to pursue a slew of interests than to narrow our options to a single one. Renaissance souls love nothing better than to take on a new problem or situation and then dig into it… until we master the challenge we’ve set for ourselves. And then, with fresh enthusiasm, we move on to another passion.”12

This definition suggests that renaissance souls are what Barbara Sher calls ‘serial masters’ – they don’t merely ‘scan’ an interest or skill but develop it to some level of competence.

That Renaissance Souls can be seen as a subtype of the Scanner Personality is also confirmed by the fact that they also ‘refuse to choose’ (according to Lobenstine’s definition), which is a trait of typical scanners who are characterized by ‘commitment phobia’.13

Also, the word “Renaissance” for many people (including myself) brings up mental images of Leonardo da Vinci and other Renaissance People. So there is an obvious similarity to “Renaissance Man”.

All in all, ‘Scanner’ and ‘Renaissance Soul’ have fairly similar meanings. The difference is merely in the fact that with Renaissance Souls, some form of commitment to mastery of a skill or interest is implied, which is not generally the case for Scanners.

This characteristic makes Renaissance Souls also similar to Renaissance People—but it lacks the latter’s historic connotation.

In contrast to Polymaths and similarly to Renaissance Men, there is also no consensus on how many skills or fields Renaissance Souls need to master, and in which domains (business, academia, sports) they should be.

5. Multipassionate Person

The term “Multipassionate” (sometimes also multi-passionate) has been popularized over the past couple of years by Marie Forleo in particular.

Although I couldn’t find any sources for this term, it’s often described as being related to Multipotentialites, Scanners and Renaissance Persons on the one hand in that they have multiple, often unrelated areas of interest, and to Polymaths on the other hand in that these areas of interest don’t necessarily change over time.14

Also, the ‘passion’ part is emphasized – so they aren’t merely interested, they are passionate. In that, they are clearly different from the Scanners and the Jack-of-all-trades, among others.

In contrast to a Polymath, however, a Multipassionate person doesn’t necessarily have to master any set number of interests or skills. It’s enough that they are passionate about engaging in them.

There is also a similarity to the Synthesizer (see #6), in that the label is often used in relation to creators and entrepreneurs. So it is the creativity aspect of Openness to Experience that is emphasized here.

6. Synthesizer

“Synthesizer” is a relatively new label that’s being thrown around, mainly among digital creators like Dan Koe and Andrew Kirby.

According to Dan Koe:

“[A] synthesizer is someone who takes a unique path with curiosity as their compass, connects ideas to actualize a self-generated goal, and distribute their synthesis to help like-minded people achieve similar goals. A synthesizer is an obsessive reality explorer. They understand that reality cannot be compartmentalized into school classes like biology, chemistry, philosophy, and literature. They understand that those aspects of reality have been well documented, and if we want to achieve better results, we must view reality as the connected whole it is. Synthesizers create holistic solutions to profitable problems”.15

He likens Synthesizers to “a DJ but with ideas” and states that they are value creators. Furthermore, they reach “breakthroughs not by following a regimented curriculum, but by synthesizing what they discovered on the path of curiosity”.16

Synthesizers are mixing ideas like a DJ mixes music. Photo by Marcela Laskoski on Unsplash

So the emphasis here is on the synthesis of ideas and knowledge with the goal of innovation and value creation—that is, on business.

You could say that Synthesizers are innovators at the edges between disciplines or different fields of knowledge. Also, self-directed learning and following your curiosity are emphasized as core traits in the definition above.

To me, this term sits somewhere at the intersection of the Renaissance Man, the Generalist, and the Polymath, but closest to the Renaissance Man: There is less emphasis on intellectual achievements than with the Polymath, and more emphasis on monetizing your knowledge and skills.

Similar to the Generalist, there is some emphasis on the work context. In contrast to that term, however, with the Synthesizer there is a larger emphasis on value creation, and most people who follow Dan Koe and others who use this term probably aim to build independent digital businesses, rather than being employees.

A synthesizer could therefore be seen as a self-employed Generalist, since “Generalist” usually comes with the connotation that the person is an employee.17

Compared to the Renaissance Man, they clearly share the expectation of mastering multiple fields, in particular business.

As much sense as this term makes and as much as I love and respect the work of Dan Koe in particular, I cannot help but chuckle every time I read “Synthesizer”. Because as a fan of 1970s progressive rock, the first thing I think of is the musical instrument.

7. Generalist

“Generalist” is the label that might be the most easily understandable of them all.

It’s also the one that is the most context-specific of them all—it’s usually applied in the area of work, as websites such as generalist.world show.

The reason is that Generalists are defined as the opposite of Specialists—and that’s a distinction that’s usually easy to make when it comes to jobs.

Basically, Generalists have breadth of knowledge (but lack depth), whereas Specialists have depth of knowledge (but lack breadth). That puts them into positions to solve different kinds of problems. It also means both Generalists and Specialists are valuable and necessary.

*Generalists are great at connecting the dots and seeing the bigger picture. Photo by Katya Ross on Unsplash*

Personally, I don’t really like this label—precisely because it is defined as the opposite of a Specialist.

The problem is that we live in a world that still idolizes Specialists, and therefore, to most people, a Generalist will always look bad in comparison. This is also reflected in some of the synonyms for Generalists (like Dilettantes, Jack-of-all-trades, or Dabblers—see #8), all of which have negative connotations.

The term also obscures the edge that Generalists can have over specialists—namely, the integration of different perspectives, skills, and fields of knowledge to solve problems that would be unsolvable to a Specialist.

David Epstein

wrote an entire book about this. You could even say that “Generalists are specialists at integration”.18

Some authors emphasize this edge by adding an adjective. For example, Hans Eibe Sørensen uses the term “Integrating Generalist” to emphasize Generalists’ ability to connect the dots and see the bigger picture—something that eludes specialists and that will become increasingly more valuable in the near future.19

Thankfully, there are communities who work hard to improve the image of the generalist, such as generalist.world. Similarly, books like David Epstein’s “Range” have already done a lot of good to put generalists in a more positive light in the eyes of the general public.

8. Dabbler/dilettante/jack-of-all-trades

There’s not too much to say about these terms.

A “Jack-of-all-trades” is basically a synonym for a Generalist—only the negative connotation is even worse. Maybe it’s just me, but when I hear ‘Jack-of-all-Trades’, I mentally add “master of none” automatically.

The “Dabbler” and the “Dilettante” are used more as synonyms for Multipotentialites and especially for Scanners. They, too, emphasize the curiosity aspect of Openness to Experience and apply less specifically to the world of work than Jack-of-all-trades. But their connotation is worse than those of the latter.

Again, maybe it’s just me, but when I hear “Dabbler” or “Dilettante”, I think of somebody with a useless and superficial skillset.

9. Polymath

As Michael Araki explains in his paper “Polymathy: A new outlook”, the etymologic root of the word “Polymath” is “mathema”—an Ancient Greek word that can mean “science”, “knowledge” (learned from experience, and often with the implication of reflection), “something that is learned”, but also “mental effort needed to think something through”. “Poly” simply means “various” or “many”.20

Accordingly, if we consider the root of the word, a Polymath is someone with many learnings or various knowledge.21

But how many learnings are enough to qualify as a Polymath? And how do you decide if someone has enough knowledge in a given field to qualify?

These are difficult questions for which there isn’t any straightforward answer. For practical purposes, the best thing we have are working definitions like that of Angela Cotellessa, who in her Ph.D. thesis defined a Polymath as “someone who has great knowledge, skill, or command of two disparate areas (i. e., in the arts and sciences).”22

Another useful definition I frequently come across is of a Polymath as “one who is proficient in or who has made significant accomplishments in at least two widely disparate fields or three less disparate fields.”23

A dragon can be seen as a symbol for polymathy, since it’s not bound to any sphere – neither water, earth, nor sea. Photo by Alyzah K on Unsplash

But probably the most important quality of Polymaths is that they transcend the dichotomy between Generalists and Specialists.

As I explained above, generalists have breadth of knowledge but lack depth of knowledge, whereas for specialists it’s the other way round: They have depth of knowledge, but lack breadth.

This is where polymaths come in: they have BOTH breadth AND depth—and on top of this, they can integrate the different fields they know with each other.24

This allows them to come up with creative ideas and solutions, and to solve complex and multidisciplinary problems.25

In that, they are similar to Sørensen’s Integrating Generalist I mentioned above (see #7). Likewise, Daniel Schmachtenberger uses the term “Deep Generalist” to emphasize the ability to integrate ideas and knowledge, generalize principles across domains and connect the dots this way.26

And like with the Generalist, the label “Polymath” also emphasizes the work context, but transcends it to some degree—so there’s a little less emphasis on this specific context. Like I mentioned above, with “Polymath” there is also typically a connotation of intellectual achievements, rather than achievements in business or athletics, for example.

Another difference is sometimes made between active and passive Polymaths: active Polymaths are people who actively contribute to their chosen fields, whereas passive Polymaths are experts who keep current in their field of expertise, but don’t actively contribute to them.27

Conclusion

My goal in this article was to explain what each of the different labels I mentioned here actually mean, and to show in which ways they differ, and in which ways they are similar.

But in the introduction, I also mentioned that I believe there is something almost all people who identify with any of these labels have in common: Namely, curiosity, openness, a hunger for learning, self-directedness, and creativity.

That’s why my favorite label of all is #10, which I didn’t mention so far:

10. Adventurers of life

I see it as a catchall term for the nine other, more specific labels.

*Adventurers of life let themselves be guided by their curiosity – wherever it may lead them. Photo by NEOM on Unsplash*

This is a term I came across in Angela Cotellessa’s PhD thesis.28 And I love it because it emphasizes the courage to follow their curiosity wherever it may lead instead of following a beaten path, to keep learning in order to get around any obstacles they may encounter as they do so, and their willingness to stay open to new information that may change the course of their adventure.

The Unlived Life

Discussion about this post