Why the Modern Renaissance Man?

The term renaissance man was much easier to define during the age of Leonardo Da Vinci, the archetypal renaissance man, when the scope of human knowledge was narrower and the accessibility to that knowledge was limited. Having expertise in the various areas of science, music, art, history and philosophy was easier to contain and manage; we now manage to live in a world where information is available at our fingertips, the internet has exceeded the great project of the encyclopedia by more than a thousandfold and the age of hyperspecialization has meant that it is nearly impossible to have expert knowledge about several fields of endeavor.  All due respect to Mr. Da Vinci, but he had it easier than modern man.

The media has labelled James Franco the modern renaissance man, (apologies if you got to this blog by searching for him, this is neither a blog by him or about him) because he acts, writes, paints, reads poetry,  and now apparently directs and of course he plays gay in the movies . Now I don't want to take anything away from James, I've never met him nor am I likely to, so I can not speak to his character (although celebrities these days in general don't seem to have a whole lot of character), or even to whether he is indeed a renaissance man or not, but I think there is a bit more to being a renaissance man than having a series of artistic interests. A thespian yes, an artist yes, a renaissance man I am not sure. 

There are lots of people in the world with multiple interests and lots of artists who are multi-talented, what defines the renaissance man is his character, it is not his treasure trove of information, his library or his self-reflective poetry. The renaissance man when striped of his interests is something more; and that more I would argue is based on moral view of the world.  That moral view is built, created and influenced by his multitude of interests but is not defined by it. 

Wikipedia defines the Renaissance man as having a universal knowledge and that the attainment of such knowledge was to develop one's full potential. But within that definition there is a moral imperative; that developing one's full potential is a good thing to do and ought to be the goal of man. By implication other moral theories are excluded. On the extreme, hedonism, or living for pleasure, is excluded, and more mainstream utilitarianism and materialism are given the same treatment.

To be a renaissance man is not just about being able to paint and write poetry (not that I have anything against either, I may start a second blog on my own interest in poetry) but it implies a moral view of the world. This is the first part of the question I am exploring. The second part is how this has changed in the modern world, Da Vinci had it easier not only in the limitation of the transfer of knowledge and information but also in the world view of the time that was deeply concerned with the moral state of man. These days to be a true modern renaissance man is challenging not only because of the wealth of information in the world but because of the antipathy towards moral advancement that results from a technological view of the world. 

 Next Post on "The Great Reveal" followed by a broader interpretation of technology