I was just wondering, what is a specialty? If we consider knowledge in a specific academic field to be a "specialty", we humans cannot match AI. Now that having detailed knowledge and skills is no longer considered a ``specialty,'' when I think about ``specialty'' again, I suddenly realize that the ``mono'' of a specialty is a ``gate.'' In a hurry, I collected the words of great people from all over the world about their studies...

　``It must be a general rule that all divisions of knowledge are to be recognized as lines and threads rather than as cutting and separating, and that the continuity and wholeness of knowledge are preserved.'' For, because this is not the case, the individual sciences (specialties) are not nourished and supported by a common source, and therefore become unfruitful, frivolous, and error-filled. It's because it's gone."
Francis Bacon (1605)

　``In other words, it is to consider how everything that actually exists is composed of a variety of properties. Only a small portion of these properties can be revealed by individual sciences and individual research methods. When all of them are taken into account, we can truly know what is real, not as an abstraction, but as a fact of nature.　
J.S. Mill (1865)

　“All specialties serve one truth, and if they lose their connection to the whole, they disappear.”　
Paul Tillich (1923)

　``By the way, what does ``academic'' mean in this case? As we will see below, it is a ``systematic totality of propositions.'' For either by combining propositions a component of reality can be thought of in its completeness, or by combining propositions a field of human activity can be ordered. ”
Dilthey (1923)

　``As an expert, it is natural that you come into contact with basic philosophy, and in order to better reflect on the meaning of your specialty by standing outside of it, or to understand the comprehensive power and influence of the principles you hold.'' One that tests one's skills in various fields and is forced to come into contact with other fields.
Kiyoshi Miki (1937)

　``The fundamental desire for knowledge is something that exists in the beginning and eventually reaches out to the whole. It is always embodied only in the particular, that is, in the manual labor of expertise. However, that specialty only takes on a spiritual life when it is part of a whole."　
Jaspers (1945)

　That's certainly the case!　

　In today's world, we tend to think of specialization as a "field", but that is a big mistake. It was not a closed area, but rather a gateway to the whole (universal). If we could replace our current professional views with the original ones, what would change? This is a completely possible consideration, since the cultural barrier can only be traced back to the 19th century in Japan.

　First of all, the words "cross-border", "interdisciplinary", and "interdisciplinary collaboration", which were created because (we believe) that each specialized field exists in isolation, will disappear in the blink of an eye. If what is taken for granted in one's (one's) specialty is actually the result of exploration in other specialties, then what exactly is it and how is it intertwined with the paths of other specialties? My questions exist within the historical and multi-layered relationships that ground each other, sometimes apart, and sometimes together... Specialization as a path allows us to consciously grasp our position on the great mountain of inquiry by intersecting with others. This is because the purpose of aiming for the top of a mountain is not to seek some definite answer (truth), but to get a bird's-eye view of the path one has walked. By entering from the local perspective and perceiving the big picture, you can tell a story that is you but not yourself as a whole, and you can live your life as a story. It is at this point that research (individual sciences) becomes scholarship (the whole), and through research called academic theory, I aim for universities to regain scholarship, or for scholarship to return to its rightful place. (Continue)