How Do You All Learn?

thinkreadwritecode

Orthodox Inquirer
Remnant
I was inspired to ask the folks here how they learn after I reread a portion of Richard Feynman's book 'Surely You're Joking Mr. Feynman!", found here. Sometimes I think I haven't ever learned how to learn, to not just know things but have understanding. I've read a lot, so I know a lot of things, but I don't have much understanding, as in I cannot explain things as well as I think I should be capable of, given all the input I've had. Thinking is a difficult process that I first began to attempt when I read Henry Hazlitt's book, Thinking As A Science. He wrote it when he was young, but in later life he wrote about what he would change about it. This was in one of his essay collections, I forget which one. That book was influential to me in that it convinced me to learn vocabulary and spend time doing nothing other than thinking about one topic for a long period of time. I didn't get very far.

As I near the end of Tolkien's Fellowship of the Ring, I am asking myself why his story is so good. Not just the story, but also his writing style. He is clear, and although he is lengthy, it is not ponderous or filled with filler, it's all relevant, so much so that the movies made by Peter Jackson had excellent source material from which to draw, which I believe was responsible for making his movies high quality. I considered Tolkien's training in philology, the study of languages. I knew he was big on language, inventing his own languages for Middle-Earth. But there must be something deeper to understanding language as he did that produces clarity and penetration of thought that shined through in his writing, even in his prologues and notes. I am reminded just now of how Evelyn Waugh, who I consider a top writer, was similarly obsessed with the English language. I often felt such types produced the best works.

But getting back to Feynman and non-language arts things, how have any of you taken to learning a thing so that you understand it well? Whether it's your profession or subject matter or hobby. How would you teach your child to learn and think?
 
One thing I have found from experience is that some things are very hard to understand, but if you go over them several times, you can gradually grasp it.

When I was learning to program, I first learned C. In fact I had learned to program in Basic way back in the 80s, but I learned C about 20 years ago when I went back to college. Then I switched to C++. At first I had a very hard time understanding it. There were several concepts around the idea of a class that has variables and functions, and then the way you use them in a Main() function that is the actual program. At the time, it seems like there were about five key concepts, and to understand any one of the concepts you had to understand the other five. However I didn't understand any of them, so I couldn't figure any of them out, because I had to understand the others first.

I had to go over it again and again, and gradually it finally clicked together for me. Once I reached a certain threshold of understanding, the pieces fell into place and I could assimilate all the details. I suspect other people have a much easier time understanding it, but I really had to struggle.

Since then I've periodically ran into other topics that I simply couldn't pick up on a first pass, and I had to go over them again and again to learn them. I consider the idea of going over it again and again until you get it a key learning strategy that took me a long time to recognize.
 
Very interesting thread, as I have embarked on a journey to teach myself how to program and I feel on fire, like nothing is going to stop me from becoming a programmer. It's what @Thomas Moore said. Repetition, dog-headed persistence and dedication to excellence. I found this out in little things early in my journey, while trying to overcome very early hurdles that experienced programmers (my future self) would find trivial.
But it's the mindset you acquire when you make progress and you apply that mindset to all future hurdles.
 
One thing I have found from experience is that some things are very hard to understand, but if you go over them several times, you can gradually grasp it.

When I was learning to program, I first learned C. In fact I had learned to program in Basic way back in the 80s, but I learned C about 20 years ago when I went back to college. Then I switched to C++. At first I had a very hard time understanding it. There were several concepts around the idea of a class that has variables and functions, and then the way you use them in a Main() function that is the actual program. At the time, it seems like there were about five key concepts, and to understand any one of the concepts you had to understand the other five. However I didn't understand any of them, so I couldn't figure any of them out, because I had to understand the others first.

I had to go over it again and again, and gradually it finally clicked together for me. Once I reached a certain threshold of understanding, the pieces fell into place and I could assimilate all the details. I suspect other people have a much easier time understanding it, but I really had to struggle.

Since then I've periodically ran into other topics that I simply couldn't pick up on a first pass, and I had to go over them again and again to learn them. I consider the idea of going over it again and again until you get it a key learning strategy that took me a long time to recognize.

Great points, I definitely agree with going over something many times. Preferably in different formats, like reading, watching and listening, practicing if it's a practical skill.

Trying to teach someone else is also a great way to cement understanding and find holes in your knowledge. If you can't explain something in simple and clear terms to a novice then you probably don't fully understand it yourself.
 
From a skiing perspective, I am a blend of a visual and kinesthetic learner.

For example I have a good 'eye' and I can analyse and detect faults and their causes pretty easily and see movement patterns and replicate them if I want to. However, I get a deeper connection to new movement patterns and ideas if I can feel them, so I have to feel the movement internally and connect it to the visual.

In non skiing and new things, like for example, I recently took up ice skating because I want to play hockey, I look at what other people do and then try and replicate it. The kinesthetic thing is present here too because I'm trying to connect what I'm feeling with what I see good skaters doing.

Every now and then I ask someone who knows more than me if I'm on the right track. If I was taking it really seriously, if get a lesson, but I'm not.
 
Trying to teach someone else is also a great way to cement understanding and find holes in your knowledge. If you can't explain something in simple and clear terms to a novice then you probably don't fully understand it yourself.
Perhaps doing something like rubber duck debugging with everything would be a good habit to build?

Simply explain the matter to an inanimate object. Fully and properly articulate it in natural language, explained from the basics. Sounds like a great idea to help you organize your thoughts and develop the ability to explain a topic concisely to someone unfamiliar.

I've recently realized that I can't explain a lot of the things I know without stuttering or going off on tangents and things like that. I'm thinking I should try this.


Doesn't need to be a rubber duck. Maybe this is the excuse I've been waiting for to buy a Megumin figurine or some other character from my Chinese cartoons.
 
Last edited:
One thing I have found from experience is that some things are very hard to understand, but if you go over them several times, you can gradually grasp it.

When I was learning to program, I first learned C. In fact I had learned to program in Basic way back in the 80s, but I learned C about 20 years ago when I went back to college. Then I switched to C++. At first I had a very hard time understanding it. There were several concepts around the idea of a class that has variables and functions, and then the way you use them in a Main() function that is the actual program. At the time, it seems like there were about five key concepts, and to understand any one of the concepts you had to understand the other five. However I didn't understand any of them, so I couldn't figure any of them out, because I had to understand the others first.

I had to go over it again and again, and gradually it finally clicked together for me. Once I reached a certain threshold of understanding, the pieces fell into place and I could assimilate all the details. I suspect other people have a much easier time understanding it, but I really had to struggle.

Since then I've periodically ran into other topics that I simply couldn't pick up on a first pass, and I had to go over them again and again to learn them. I consider the idea of going over it again and again until you get it a key learning strategy that took me a long time to recognize.
I C what you did there.
+, that language is hard to learn.

1710767172777.webp
 
Perhaps doing something like rubber duck debugging with everything would be a good habit to build?

Simply explain the matter to an inanimate object. Fully and properly articulate it in natural language, explained from the basics. Sounds like a great idea to help you organize your thoughts and develop the ability to explain a topic concisely to someone unfamiliar.

I've recently realized that I can't explain a lot of the things I know without stuttering or going off on tangents and things like that. I'm thinking I should try this.


Doesn't need to be a rubber duck. Maybe this is the excuse I've been waiting for to buy a Megumin figurine or some other character from my Chinese cartoons.
One thing I have taken to doing is recording myself making videos explaining books I've read or I attempt to talk while playing games, acting the part of entertaining host. Beyond journaling, I find forcing my thoughts into words to be difficult to sustain for long periods of time, but the act of recording makes me focus my mind and put forth more effort. I know about the rubber-ducky method and I have a few small figurines in front of my desk that can be used. I haven't actually tried it, though, so I'm about to try that today when I get a chance to debug something other than code.
 
I talk to myself, out loud, a lot.

If there is a topic I am interested in, I will generally read a book or two first to get a feel for it, then mess around and learn on my own. Sometimes you learn too much information through reading and it hampers your ability to actually apply what you know.

Effort matters more than knowledge with some pursuits and with those it is better to apply limited knowledge with 100% intensity than it is to take it easy with the greatest plan ever. You will likely be wrong but at least you know where wrong goes.

For example, I went through many years learning about fitness this way and I honestly believe that my book knowledge slowed me down, usually through program hopping and "ooh look at this shiny new thing". That and 99% of fitness related material out there drums up their program as the greatest thing ever, but seldom do they ever show a complete picture. Without doing all the things, which you can't do, it's basically impossible to have a complete picture, not to mention the utter complication that diet brings. Everyone has an opinion, everyone has a program, almost none of those people got to where they are now exclusively through that program.

With regards to maintenance and repair, it was through about a year of shadowing someone who was far better than me, then I was comfortable enough to apply what I learned and do new things. Now I do 90% of my job by feel and it is very difficult to teach that.
 
The hard way, most of the time.
I try to repair cycles (doing cars as well), and it's exactly what you say.

Hard. Frustrating.

I hear a crack in my cycle. I look at it. I think I understand. I order new parts. The parts don't fit. I get angry. I research what I had wrong, I order new parts, and think I really understand now, I receive it, I install it, it still doesn't fit, I get frustrated, order new parts. And everything fits. I bike and I hear a crack, i wonder what I did wrong. Turns out it was my saddle cracking and it just needed some tigthening. I'm angry and destroy my screw. I don't have the size screw at home, and need to get it somewhere, the shop doesn't have it. I order online. Fixed.

The week after I'm still frustrated. Then after 2 weeks, I sense some happiness, actually it was kind of a cool journey. I now know real well how everything works down to the little bolt.

Last week I met a colleague (who is like me) and we shared for an hour how we make wrong decisions all the time, how we spent way too much money, time on this.

But all in all there is such a strange joy in it. It's humbling to learn and do. And see how my ideas are wrong all the time. And at a certain point you become quite good at it, you can not imagine you didn't know. It feels automatic. People come to me with their cycles. With quite some accuracy I can diagnose now what's wrong. Often just tightening, some lube, a bolt, a small cheap part.

I think to learn you need to have a masochistic tendency and a certain pride; I'm not giving up. While you know there is a shop a mile down the road that would probably know the problem and solution within 5 minutes.

And then also to go there, if you can't solve it.

Here I am having spend hundreds of euros. Not solving my problem. And the guy looks at it for 5 minutes, and he tells me my bottom bracket was broken. (I didn't check that)

It's humbling to learn. And it's fun to share with others. I know quite some guys who love this.

And seemingly easy things as cars and cycles are extremely complex pieces of technology. (and simple at the same time)

For the lovers:

This is a great book.
 
Combination of things. You need to understand what the scientific method is first of all. Most people don't have the faintest idea what it is, ironically the most ignorant being the folks who are in the cult of "scientism" which basically thinks "the science" is determined by "experts" and not something anyone else can have an opinion on. Feynman and Sagan describe the scientific method better than anyone else. Many posters here will not like Sagan, but he really had a great mind. I urge anyone to read "Demon Haunted World", it's an incredible read.

You also need a philosophy, not an ideology. I myself have learned philosophies from various sources, the main 4 that I find useful are Stoicism (Seneca, Aurealius, Epictetus), Existentialism (mostly Kiekegaard, who was heavily inspired by Christianity to boot; emphatically NOT Satre, a french clown from the 20th century who gets lumped in with the others for some reason), Zen/Taoism (Alan Watts + various other minor sources), and Empiricism/Rationalism (notably David Hume and some other Enlightenmen era philosophers such as John Locke or Kant).


Practical > theory
Yup, this is why modern philosophy is a joke. "Life philosophy" used to be the default form of philosophy in ancient Greece and was almost entirely based on how to live your life in accordance with your values. Among them, I found Stoicism to be the most effective, and the Roman Stoics made it even more practical by removing the "physics" and most of the "logic" (not that logic isn't important, but it was too abstract and esoteric to be relevant) and focusing purely on the ethics, which was effectively the morality of your life choices. Extremely practical.

I second "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance" btw, excellent book.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top