The idea of a “renaissance man” suggests individuals like Leonardo Da Vinci, who not only dabbled in but was himself the pinnacle of the art in painting, physics, engineering and other fields. His depth and breadth of knowledge allowed him to achieve meaningful breakthroughs that might not have been apparent to anyone functioning in any other way. The 21st century demands we reach these kind of insights with unprecedented efficacy, so we find ourselves with the question: how does one train for this way of life?

Da Vinci was a genius who had patrons and whose reputation allowed him to pursue the work he most valued, dedicating himself entirely to learning and doing. In the 21st-century, we have evolved into a society that urges generalism at times, but intense specialization in the professions. A physician with more than one specialization, for example, is often seen as an anomaly, or a surprising case of natural talent or bold ambition.

The idea of a shift to “lifelong learning” as a standard for education funding emerges from an understanding of the need to address this problem: assume people will need to change specializations, learn new skills, throughout their adult lives, and the educational system can be adapted to allow for a more flexible, more open kind of intellectual development, which also turns out to be economically more vibrant.

Can we conceive of the human intellect in general as being designed to operate across disciplines and across cultures, to gather experience and expertise in a dynamic way that allows for rapid adaptability and reframing of technical and social context? Can we, in short, achieve a public policy position on education funding where the human individual is understood as not only free to pursue a life determined by choice and ability, but also intended to pursue a life experience made up of deep experience in distinct and even competing disciplines?

How do we get started on the funding component, to give today’s students the opportunity to grow and develop in such a way, to be the renaissance figures the 21st century demands they be?

The 21st-century “renaissance”, if there is one underway, must include the favoring of methods of education that allow students to learn about judging quality of information and checking source material. If we cannot read critically and intelligently, we cannot be whole people in the Information Age.

The idea of privileging not only informational freedom but the ability to apply a critical eye to the information one deals with means we could think about the role media play in the educational process. We could look at ways to license media content and to build a media studies component of basic education into the broader educational system.