Live data from Hacker News

Interview by a 15 Year Old

paulgraham.com

91–100 of 101 posts

Re: Interview by a 15 Year Old

#91
post #87
post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I say this every time "learn to code" comes up, kids should learn to cook. People who can cook a meal from basic ingredients are healthier (than they would have been living on ready meals and takeaways), wealthier because it's cheaper, more relaxed because they have a hobby and more attractive to whatever is the gender of their preference. Humans have been cooking for thousands and thousands of years, but modern scho…

You can code for $60/h and pay $5-$10 of that to someone else to cook a meal for you and clean up too. Why on earth would you want to be the latter guy?

If everyone can code you won't code for $60/h

Re: Interview by a 15 Year Old

#92

Is there anything else that isn’t taught to young students that you wish would be incorporated into the material, or any other thoughts on education? I can't comment on the US education system, but back home I think one of the most important ingredient missing from my school education was _Critical Thinking_ [0]. I happened to stumble upon this field by happenstance and was baffled why this is not integral to our edu…

There seems to exist this technocratic fancy about "critical thinking." As if it were a discrete group of rules which could be cultivated in students by simply sitting them down in a classroom, lecturing to them about the rules, and then asking them to apply them in practice scenarios. This, of course, is how one teaches grammar, and most normal subjects.

But would such a student actually become a critical thinker? Or would they simply become a regurgitator of logical fallacies, able to spot them in encountered arguments, but not able to discern whether the reasoning was ACTUALLY fallacious? Take, for instance, the "slippery slope" fallacy. Which is not necessarily a fallacy, because "doing A will lead to B" is valid if both A and B stem from the same principle C. If affirming A implies affirming its principle C, and if B is related to principle C in the same manner as A, then yes, "doing A will lead to B" is valid reasoning.

This is certain value in studying philosophy generally, and formal logic specifically. But it is not a fundamental subject in the same way that most HS subjects are, and it will be of no avail to students who have not already reached a high level of reasoning.

The mistake Paul and other technocrats make when calling for "critical thinking" is that they treat it as an actual subject matter. But there is not textbook for "critical thinking," with which a teacher can instruct a class. It is an intellectual virtue, like curiosity, or honesty. It is not taught directly, but indirectly, through other subjects. THROUGH the constraints and methods of science, one learns to think critically about evidence and causation. THROUGH reading and analyzing literature, one learns to detect intentions, both explicit and implicit, in the voices it encounters. THROUGH algebra and calculus, one learns to think about abstract objects and their relationships.

There is no "shortcut" to critical thinking, just like there is no shortcut to teaching children to be responsible or caring or hardworking. It is a skill that has to be practiced in the various arenas of life.

Re: Interview by a 15 Year Old

#93
> Why do you think so many people are hesitant to learn to code, when it is such an incredible opportunity?

For the same reason people don't learn other skills. Accountants, when they hit partner, hit mid-6 figures in their 40s, but unless you enjoy finance and accounting, it's boring as hell.

People on HN might be shocked to find that most of the world finds programming extremely boring. My wife is extremely smart, smarter than me, but she couldn't last a year as a programmer simply because she finds it boring.

In college, I was at the cusp of applying to med school, and just before I stopped myself, because I didn't want the life of a doctor. It represented an incredible opportunity, but it just wasn't for me. Instead, I loved to code and am still doing it 20 years later. It's the passion and interest that matter, not the opportunity.

Re: Interview by a 15 Year Old

#94

Is there anything else that isn’t taught to young students that you wish would be incorporated into the material, or any other thoughts on education? I can't comment on the US education system, but back home I think one of the most important ingredient missing from my school education was _Critical Thinking_ [0]. I happened to stumble upon this field by happenstance and was baffled why this is not integral to our edu…

There seems to exist this technocratic fancy about "critical thinking." As if it were a discrete group of rules which could be cultivated in students by simply sitting them down in a classroom, lecturing to them about the rules, and then asking them to apply them in practice scenarios. This, of course, is how one teaches grammar, and most normal subjects. But would such a student actually become a critical thinker? O…

While I suspect you are correct that there is no 'shortcut' (or syllabus) to critical thinking I think one is able to perceive critical thinking ability in others. If critical thinking is seen to be useful by a potential student, that is likely enough to drive that student to improve that skill. So critical thinking doesn't necessarily need to be taught from a textbook, but could be taught by example. (Of course, this assumes that the teacher is able to do so, which is another can of worms). I propose that it would be possible to have a 'critical thinking' class in schools, where, for example, students are shown critical thinking applied to a range of different problems and are encouraged to apply their own. Yes, you are correct that it is a skill that should be practiced everywhere, but at the moment this is not even addressed.

Re: Interview by a 15 Year Old

#95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

as I understand you, you think learning a programming language will do more good for 90% of students than being exposed to chemistry, physics, algebra, history, literature, and whatever other nonesense, which I take you to mean other things commonly studied in high school like art, psychology, a foreign language, economics, etc. where, may I ask, did you ever hear about Hooke's law, chemical bonds, quadratics or Kakf…

>If you weren't the recipient of such an education, you couldn't prove your point. Or I could have just googled "spring physics" as that's one of the few things I vaguely remember from highschool, named Kafka because that's one of the only two books I've actually read before deciding literature is boring/waste of time, chemical bonds - the same thing as "spring physics" and quadratics I actually needed in my day job…

"that's one of the only two books I've actually read before deciding literature is boring/waste of time"

man i feel so sorry for you. its amazing how sweeping ignorance is so easily transformed into arrogance.

Re: Interview by a 15 Year Old

#96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If you weren't the recipient of such an education, you couldn't prove your point. Or I could have just googled "spring physics" as that's one of the few things I vaguely remember from highschool, named Kafka because that's one of the only two books I've actually read before deciding literature is boring/waste of time, chemical bonds - the same thing as "spring physics" and quadratics I actually needed in my day job…

"that's one of the only two books I've actually read before deciding literature is boring/waste of time" man i feel so sorry for you. its amazing how sweeping ignorance is so easily transformed into arrogance.

Don't be, I learned trough being pushed in to art classes from young age that most of "high culture" boils down to pretentious people trying to show how superior they are to uneducated plebeians.

Re: Interview by a 15 Year Old

#97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"that's one of the only two books I've actually read before deciding literature is boring/waste of time" man i feel so sorry for you. its amazing how sweeping ignorance is so easily transformed into arrogance.

Don't be, I learned trough being pushed in to art classes from young age that most of "high culture" boils down to pretentious people trying to show how superior they are to uneducated plebeians.

[deleted]

Re: Interview by a 15 Year Old

#98
> "And even for those few, it's a mistake to start too young. If a startup succeeds, it takes over your life in a way that cuts off lots of other opportunities."

Curious for more of an explanation here. I am 27. When is too young? As someone who sold their company, I can attest that it takes over your life, but the amount of things I have learned is insane and I wouldn't trade that.

Re: Interview by a 15 Year Old

#99
post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The funny thing is that pretty much every single curriculum says this in the liner notes and syllabus. It's just as much of a buzzword these days as "synergy" and "outside-the-box." Critical thinking is simultaneously hard to teach and uncomfortable to teach. For one, when you teach someone to think critically, you now have them questioning everything else that you're teaching them. Many, many people define "critical…

> Many, many people define "critical thinking" as "thinking like I do." This should be emphasized more. I was dating a guy who claimed to be a critical thinker, which actually was worse than what you described here. Essentially, his definition of critical thinking was "agreeing with me." This--among ample other reasons--is why he is an ex. But later in life I realised it wasn't just him, a lot of other "intellectuals…

I do agree that anyone who calls himself an intellectual is probably a pompous idiot, but I'm mixed regarding calling other people intellectuals.

The definition of "intellectual," as I see it, seems to be "Someone who studies society and proposes solutions for its problems." In and of itself, I think that this is a completely neutral concept, and I can name plenty of people who occupy that position. The issue is that intelligence (which is required to be an intellectual) is an intrinsically desirable trait, meaning that someone who is smart (even if they are nothing else) is often seen as more desirable or worth more than a less smart individual. More importantly, having this position implies leadership. If you're going to propose solutions, you're not very good at your job if no one is actually listening to you. And since we value leaders over followers, it follows that intellectuals are considered more valuable.

This means that calling someone an intellectual doesn't just define them as "someone who studies society and proposes solutions for its problems" - it defines them as someone who has insight regarding society and proposes worthwhile solutions for its problems.

This makes things weird. I can still call a shitty artist an artist. I can still call a shitty programmer a programmer. But when I call someone an intellectual, it's making a positive judgment regarding his ideas. After all, a shitty intellectual is just a guy with stupid ideas. And who am I, Omegaham, a random electron microscope technician from Oregon, to say that Noam Chomsky or Thomas Sowell has worthwhile ideas? I mean, I have opinions, but saying so definitively is way above my pay grade.

As a result, the term is so screwed up by connotation that I tend to use "intellectual" exactly the same as you - sarcastically. For me, an "intellectual" is "someone who would call himself an intellectual," with all of the misguided arrogance that doing so implies.

Re: Interview by a 15 Year Old

#100
post #91
post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can code for $60/h and pay $5-$10 of that to someone else to cook a meal for you and clean up too. Why on earth would you want to be the latter guy?

If everyone can code you won't code for $60/h

If everyone can code we will automate the economy to such an extent that goods and services will be practically free.
Post reply on HN