171–180 of 196 posts
I now always try to skim the index of a book or chapter before reading it. Also try to study in smaller sessions, every day, instead of cramming a ton of info in just one day.
Can anyone of you report any long term benefits from these kind of courses? Personally, I think those classes (haven't looked into the coursera one) only present obvious stuff. I've once worked through "Make it stick", a book that is often recommended when it comes to learning. What I've found is that there is nothing wrong with the content but it did not really help. I imagine that most people who struggle with lear…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The problem of low information density isn't new. Most of the "classics" of western literature have the same problem. I would submit that you may not be tuned into the value in them, if you think that. Maybe it's true of some, but most are just an acquired taste of the same sort as, say, the freer-form varieties of jazz, or classical music. It takes some work and some experience before you get what they're doing, b…
I've spent a lot of time digging through the major works of post enlightenment philosophers. Even fairly "concise" (by the standards of the day) writers like Hume, Nietzsche and Bertrand Russell belabor points far beyond what was necessary for me to apprehend their meaning. I'm of the opinion that if you have to be "trained" to find a work aesthetically appealing, it isn't inherently aesthetic. By analogy, some women…
This course revolutionized my views on learning. After taking it and applying the suggested techniques I've seen an amazing increase not just in my competence but my confidence. It left me feeling empowered. I was almost a bit sad when I reached the end.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The problem of low information density isn't new. Most of the "classics" of western literature have the same problem. I would submit that you may not be tuned into the value in them, if you think that. Maybe it's true of some, but most are just an acquired taste of the same sort as, say, the freer-form varieties of jazz, or classical music. It takes some work and some experience before you get what they're doing, b…
I've spent a lot of time digging through the major works of post enlightenment philosophers. Even fairly "concise" (by the standards of the day) writers like Hume, Nietzsche and Bertrand Russell belabor points far beyond what was necessary for me to apprehend their meaning. I'm of the opinion that if you have to be "trained" to find a work aesthetically appealing, it isn't inherently aesthetic. By analogy, some women…
I don't see how this is tenable, given how much aesthetic taste is learned regardless.
A lifetime's journey through arts, if done with any thought at all, is certainly a process of learning, of training. Efforts to defend old favorites in light of new knowledge will be attempted, sometimes succeed and allow new levels of appreciation of already-experienced work, sometimes fail when one discovers that the work lacks the substance on which to defend it. Maybe one continues to like the work anyway, but understands its limitations, its shortcomings. Learning, or training, happens, taste refines, horizons widen, new works become accessible, and the process repeats. Sensitivity to the arts develops, informs other areas of life. This doesn't even need to be the result of some kind of formal arts crit/appreciation training; informally and casually but thoughtfully engaging with art will allow (perhaps slower) progress of the same sort.
However, a similar journey taken thoughtlessly is trained just the same, but arrested. The hardened aesthetic taste of the latter is still "trained", just poorly, probably in part accidentally, and with training halted or slowed at some point, leaving the remaining guiding tastes and opinions unchallenged, surviving favorites unexamined and unexaminable as the approaches and knowledge required to even begin are undeveloped and unknown. Why did the author include this particular character? Dunno, never thought about it. Must have wanted to is all. Did you feel the prose itself change pace as the action waxed and waned? Sure didn't, this book sucks and was boring. headdesk. OK, how about Encyclopedia Brown? WTF no, I used to like that but now it's boring too, give me some good fiction for adults like Stephen King. Not Dan Brown though, he's terrible. Oh, and why is he terrible? Just boring is all, and I don't like the way he writes. Ah, OK.
So, trained, advanced to a point, but arrested. Which is fine, we all pick our battles, but I'm not going to take the latter subject's aesthetic judgement very seriously or consider that anything they fail to enjoy is necessarily aesthetically lacking.
I guess we can quibble over your use of "inherent" but I can't see that ending anywhere other than "nothing a 2-year-old doesn't find aesthetically pleasing is inherently aesthetic" which doesn't strike me as a productive direction to go, however valuable the beauty of nature and child-like wonder may be.
Point conceded on philosophy though. Some of the most painful reads I've managed to complete were philosophy—More's Utopia in particular nearly broke me, and definitely wasn't worth the effort.
For those who read her book and did the course, is there anything in the course that isn't covered by the book? what's the advantage of the course over the book? As a side note, I have found that the most powerful technique for me is recalling.
Which of her books are you referring to?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>> A lot of it is cruft and motivation for the underlying core ideas. Someone else made the exact same remark about Cal Newport's book "Deep Work" earlier this week in another thread. I find this to be true about a lot of books/courses/content of a "self-help" nature that are designed to be practical and applicable - the real helpful stuff boiled down to its essence could fit in a tri-fold pamphlet (or a 350-line pas…
A more charitable interpretation could be that all that "filler" is used to motivate you, because just reading about this methods won't be enough to actually help most people.
"Research by Gabriele Oettingen and her colleagues has shown that thinking about the benefits of success can actually make you less likely to achieve your goals. They can reduce the amount of effort that you want to put into achieving your aims."
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/ulterior-motives/201302...
Can anyone of you report any long term benefits from these kind of courses? Personally, I think those classes (haven't looked into the coursera one) only present obvious stuff. I've once worked through "Make it stick", a book that is often recommended when it comes to learning. What I've found is that there is nothing wrong with the content but it did not really help. I imagine that most people who struggle with lear…
> Can anyone of you report any long term benefits from these kind of courses? None. It's like all self help books or "learning to read" books or etc. The only thing it does is make you feel like you are accomplishing something and actually "learning". But you are just wasting time. The title is even self-defeating. "Learning how to learn". How can you learn to learn without already knowing how to learn in the first p…
The goal is long-term retention and learning. The course addresses bad habits that people use for learning that don't accomplish this goal, and suggests better methods.
I haven't taken the course but I'm familiar with some of the methods, such as spaced-repetition. Spaced-repetition hasn't falsely "made me feel like I am accomplishing something" and I've been surprised with the results over time. There is a body of research and evidence showing positive results.
> How can you learn to learn without already knowing how to learn in the first place.
This might feel like a clever comment but it's pedantic and doesn't contribute to the discussion. Most people have some minimal capacity to learn new things, and can also improve how they learn.
Can anyone of you report any long term benefits from these kind of courses? Personally, I think those classes (haven't looked into the coursera one) only present obvious stuff. I've once worked through "Make it stick", a book that is often recommended when it comes to learning. What I've found is that there is nothing wrong with the content but it did not really help. I imagine that most people who struggle with lear…
> Can anyone of you report any long term benefits from these kind of courses? None. It's like all self help books or "learning to read" books or etc. The only thing it does is make you feel like you are accomplishing something and actually "learning". But you are just wasting time. The title is even self-defeating. "Learning how to learn". How can you learn to learn without already knowing how to learn in the first p…
Are you under the impression that everyone in the world has had access to decent education their entire lives?
Are you under the impression that motivation is the sole factor in determining one's ability to learn?
>How can you learn to learn
By not taking everything hyper-literally. The course is educating people on strategies they can use to help retain and learn information. How is that self-defeating?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've spent a lot of time digging through the major works of post enlightenment philosophers. Even fairly "concise" (by the standards of the day) writers like Hume, Nietzsche and Bertrand Russell belabor points far beyond what was necessary for me to apprehend their meaning. I'm of the opinion that if you have to be "trained" to find a work aesthetically appealing, it isn't inherently aesthetic. By analogy, some women…
Minus the weird and out-of-place analogy about sexual role playing and bdsm, this kinda sounds like a child talking about the bitter taste of coffee or beer, when soda is so much sweeter.