
A depiction of German polymath and last universal genius Gottfried Leibniz, during his last stay in Vienna (1712-14), battling the forces of knowledge: physics, chemistry, medicine, and the salient but deadly ‘biology’, sneaking in from below, prior to his 1716 reaction end, working on his monad theory, in aims to solve the difficult ‘mind body problem’, i.e. how to situate mind and morality in a materialist universe; a hydraism reconceptualization of the famous Hercules versus the Lernaean Hydra statue (Ѻ) in Vienna, Austria. [5]

A depiction of German polymath and last universal genius Gottfried Leibniz, during his last stay in Vienna (1712-14), battling the forces of knowledge: physics, chemistry, medicine, and the salient but deadly ‘biology’, sneaking in from below, prior to his 1716 reaction end, working on his monad theory, in aims to solve the difficult ‘mind body problem’, i.e. how to situate mind and morality in a materialist universe; a hydraism reconceptualization of the famous Hercules versus the Lernaean Hydra statue (Ѻ) in Vienna, Austria. [5]

In terminology, hydraism, or "idiot savant" thinking syndrome, refers to dangers, symptoms, tensions, and repercussions associated with growing knowledge fragmentation, i.e. "specialization", lack or decline thereof of interdisciplinarity-based universal education, resulting in universal genius decline and or potential extinction, and the subsequent helplessness of the individual in respect to the big questions of existence.

Overview
The term "hydraism" derives from the 1995 statement, shown below, by German scholar Hans-Wolff Graf, from his discussion of how “We Need a New World View”, in respect to the dangers associated with knowledge growth and over specialization. Graf, an economic, financial, business consultant turned sociology, education, and psychology global political theory and child welfare scholar and advocate, in short, argues that a new universal education system is needed so to rehumanize society.

Etymology
The Graf quote was found in 2012, via search for “universal geniuses”, thereafter finding its way into four Hmolpedia pages, and into the position of the opening quote (page one) of the drafting state Chemical Thermodynamics: with Applications in the Humanities, universal education textbook, as a lead into how the last universal genius is now an extinct or potentially extent breed—the 1920 reaction end of so-called “last universal genius of social science” Max Weber, the 1954 reaction end of so-called “last universal physicist” Enrico Fermi, and the 1956 reaction end of last person chronologically known to be called a “universal genius” John Neumann being the cusp of the lineage. [2]

On 13 Apr 2013, on the universal genius page, a section devoted to the phenomena was added, referring to the phenomena as “idiot savant syndrome”. On 11 Dec 2013, the term “hydraism” to the above essential phenomena, was employed as a needed term in the scientific humanism article, in reference to American philosopher Oliver Reiser’s discussions of the difficulties associated with the hypothetical establishment of global “Institute of Scientific Humanism”, that would “function as kind of global brain for our developing [country-connective] social organism.”

Discussion
Nearly everyone suffers from some form of hydraism; the closer, however, one is to being a "one nature" thinker, scholar, philosopher, polymath, polyintellect, genius, universal genius, or last universal genius, in contrast to a "two natures" thinker, the closer one is to ridding the mind of hydraism and mental incongruity. Some of the quotes below give evidence to this logic.

Quotes
The following are related quotes:

“In all our academies we attempt far too much. ... In earlier times lectures were delivered upon chemistry and botany as branches of medicine, and the medical student learned enough of them. Now, however, chemistry and botany are become sciences of themselves, incapable of comprehension by a hasty survey, and each demanding the study of a whole life, yet we expect the medical student to understand them. He who is prudent, accordingly declines all distracting claims upon his time, and limits himself to a single branch and becomes expert in one thing.”
— Johann Goethe (c.1820) [3]

“In this age of specialization men who thoroughly know one field are often incompetent to discuss another. The great problems of the relations between one and another aspect of human activity have for this reason been discussed less and less in public. When we look at the past great debates on these subjects we feel jealous of those times, for we should have liked the excitement of such argument. The old problems, such as the relation of science and religion, are still with us, and I believe present as difficult dilemmas as ever, but they are not often publicly discussed because of the limitations of specialization.”
— Richard Feynman (1956), “The Relation of Science and Religion” [6]

“In these days of specialization there are too few people who have such a deep understanding of two departments of our knowledge that they do not make fools of themselves in one or the other.”
— Richard Feynman (1963), on religion, politics, and religion; in: The Meaning of it All: a Scientist Looks as Society [7]

“Since my name is not Socrates or Einstein and I hold only one of the seven or eight PhD degrees [organic chemistry] this problem requires, readers are quite justified in questioning my qualifications to testify as such a multidisciplinary expert.”
— George Scott (1985), on the ethics and physical chemistry of will [4]

“The trend towards the already mentioned diversified society of ‘specialists’ and the related danger of narrower way of thinking (idiot savant) necessarily leads to a growing helplessness of the individual. Related to this is a growing blind belief in science. Since Leibniz, probably the last universal genius, we know more and more about a shrinking area of knowledge. Biology and physics, chemistry and medicine are divided already today into dozens of individual disciplines, which like a ‘hydra’, keep dividing into other individual disciplines.”
— Hans-Wolff Graf (1995), “We Need a New World View” [1]

References
1. (a) Graff, Hans-Wolff. (1995). “Conclusion: We Need a New World View” (pgs. 228-36), in The Path Toward Global Survival: A Social and Economic Study of 162 Countries (editor: Hans-Wolff Graf) (pg. 229). Gordon and Breach Publishers.
(b) Hans Graf Wolff (German → English) – Efv-ag.de.
(c) Hans Graf Wolff (German → English) – Goldseiten.de.
2. Thims, Libb. (2013-14/15). Chemical Thermodynamics: with Applications in the Humanities (85-page version: pdf). Publisher.
3. Baas, Johann Hermann. (1889). Outlines of the History of Medicine and the Medical Profession (translator: Henry Handerson) (pg. 842-843). J.H. Vail.
4. Scott, George P. (1985). Atoms of the Living Flame: an Odyssey into Ethics and the Physical Chemistry of Free Will (pg. viii). University Press of America.
5. (a) Lernaean Hydra – Wikipedia.
(b) Monadology – Wikipedia.
(c) Photo: copyright (Ѻ) of Krister P.
6. Feynman, Richard. (1956). “The Relation of Science and Religion” (Ѻ), Caltech YMCA, lunch forum, May 2.
7. Feynman, Richard. (1963). “A Scientist Looks at Society”, John Danz Lecture Series, University of Washington, Seattle, Apr; in: The Meaning of it All (pdf) (specialization, pg. 3). Addison-Wesley, 1998.