A fertile mind or a fertile idea?
If one pursues a fertile idea, does one consign themselves to personal and intellectual staleness?
Conversely, does the fertile mind say anything about its activity? Is the fertile mind eclectic, studious, or the polymath.
I suppose having strong elements of both will always be ideal, but coming down to one; what is more important? Can we continue to argue of old issues and debates to the effect of having overly technical terminology so as to prevent the kind of repetition that is inevitable from being age-old issues; or does intellectual fertility as a mindset allow for a freshness and interplay of perspectives in such a way that invokes originality?
It would seem that there is a subtle difference between one who seems to have depth as the scholar of the fertile idea, and one who appears to have depth as the one with a fertile mind.
With the former, depth in a specific issue is a well-rehearsed and tired routine.
With the latter, depth comes not necessarily out of expertise, but the surprising depth, clarity, and summation that comes from the sporadic and spontaneous entertainment of the idea itself.