Live data from Hacker News

How to Understand Things

nabeelqu.co

101–110 of 121 posts

Re: How to Understand Things

#101
From the article:

> Visualizing something, in three dimensions, can help you with a concrete “hook” that your brain can grasp onto and use as a model; understanding then has a physical context that it can “take place in”.

I'm still sore at the educational system in my country (Serbia) for ignoring and occasionally discouraging this kind of visual thinking. Remembering words and reproducing them at the time of examination was rewarded far more than constructing a mental model of how things work at the abstract level, and then deriving conclusions from that. Some teachers were exception, of course, and I remember them vividly and fondly to this day, but the rest are like some amorphous gray mass that barely existed somewhere in may past.

I still remember being told to memorize the Schrödinger's equation in high school, before we even covered, let alone understood the underlying maths. And I still don't. The funny thing is that this teacher was one of the "good ones" and she actually apologized to us for forcing us do this. But her hands were tied by the teaching "plan and program" that was obviously created by a committee whose members didn't talk to each other.

At the university (maths + CS), we would write-down (to our notebooks) the computer programs scribbled onto the blackboard by the professor, then memorize them for the exam, which was taken on paper. Nobody ever asked any questions. I still remember a colleague who didn't understand the concept of a pointer. That was in the third year and she had good grades.

I honestly hope things have improved in the meantime (the above was in the '90s).

Re: How to Understand Things

#102

Great post. Personal anecdote: I don't think I really understood anything in school, but I was decent at going through the motions of carrying out certain methods and recalling certain facts when I needed to. I went on to study Maths at university, and for most of my first year, I had the same surface level "methods + facts" knowledge that got me through school. After some studying, I could recite definitions and the…

Yes this. In grade school I had trouble memorizing the formula for the area of a right angled triangle. But one day I bisected a rectangle diagonally and was blown away how it all of a sudden made sense: The same thing happened with circles and even calculus stuff. Putting it into diagrams suddenly made it make sense.

So now I try to “do” instead of memorize and it makes all the difference in the world.

Even I can’t learn new programming languages unless I make a real project with them. That’s why I don’t believe in things like code katas or reading programming books cover to cover. It’s a bad representative for using a tool in real life to learn its principles, techniques and methods.

Re: How to Understand Things

#103

The points about education really resonate with me. In my engineering undergrad, it was frustrating to see in our applied math courses that the mechanical plugging and chugging of equations was the approach that most of my peers took in their studies. They got better grades than me. I wanted to understand concepts more deeply, but there was no time, and the tests rewarded those who could simply go through the motions…

I was one of those people and I regret it. However, the course load was just so great that I'm not sure how I'd done it the "slow" way. I wish I had the time to go back to school and do it right.

Re: How to Understand Things

#104

> This quality of “not stopping at an unsatisfactory answer” deserves some examination. > This requires a lot of intrinsic motivation, because it’s so hard; so most people simply don’t do it. It also requires self-confidence, persuasiveness, and social power. Without these traits, your attempts to really understand something will be dismissed as "overthinking things" or "trying to understand the universe". Those arou…

I don’t agree because I still do this all the time. Sure some people get annoyed, assholes will try to make you feel bad for asking dumb questions, or even mock you publicly. The fact is, your understanding grows so quickly when you ask questions that this doesn’t matter.

Re: How to Understand Things

#105
post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The university I went to offered open book/note exams for almost all courses. It literally didn't even matter how much you memorized... open book tests didn't make anything easier. you need to understand or fail. I'm not into showing off ranking or pedigree but I do genuinely believe that the higher the pedigree your school the more likely the exams will be harder and require total understanding and even creativity o…

> Students able to get into any top school will likely all easily achieve full score on an ordinary tests. The professors at top schools need to make these tests brutally hard in order to produce a bell curve. This is no longer how “high pedigree” schools function in the US. There is too much blowback from helicopter parents and the kids who haven’t ever had to deal with critical feedback before. Lookup “grade inflat…

You got a good point. My school is listed as a school that has grade inflation but anecdotally I feel my engineering department was pretty brutal. Average GPA was below 3 when I was there.

It could be my personal situation was not representative of the norm.

Re: How to Understand Things

#106

Great post. Personal anecdote: I don't think I really understood anything in school, but I was decent at going through the motions of carrying out certain methods and recalling certain facts when I needed to. I went on to study Maths at university, and for most of my first year, I had the same surface level "methods + facts" knowledge that got me through school. After some studying, I could recite definitions and the…

> It turned out that a simple drawing could capture the entire statement of the theorem, and from that drawing, the proof was trivial to derive.

Couldn't agree more. Some of the best CS books I've read have been ones with a tonne of illustrations, like the Head First series.

Re: How to Understand Things

#107

Great post. Personal anecdote: I don't think I really understood anything in school, but I was decent at going through the motions of carrying out certain methods and recalling certain facts when I needed to. I went on to study Maths at university, and for most of my first year, I had the same surface level "methods + facts" knowledge that got me through school. After some studying, I could recite definitions and the…

> It turned out that a simple drawing could capture the entire statement of the theorem, and from that drawing, the proof was trivial to derive. Couldn't agree more. Some of the best CS books I've read have been ones with a tonne of illustrations, like the Head First series.

And _why’s poignant guide! I’m still a rank amateur, but that little PDF helped me truly understand, not just memorize.

Humans are wired to enjoy and remember stories. So much education is done narrativelessly and as such neglects to harness one of our most potent capabilities.

Re: How to Understand Things

#108

> This quality of “not stopping at an unsatisfactory answer” deserves some examination. > This requires a lot of intrinsic motivation, because it’s so hard; so most people simply don’t do it. It also requires self-confidence, persuasiveness, and social power. Without these traits, your attempts to really understand something will be dismissed as "overthinking things" or "trying to understand the universe". Those arou…

Your points about social context are great ones and 100% valid, but I want to make a case for "stop thinking just do the task": --- Often, trying (and potentially failing) to do a task is the best way to learn about it. The key is to be very explicit about what parts of that task you actually understand and which ones you're pulling out of your ass. This is especially true when creating software. It's super rare to h…

Agree with this. I think of education as a "series of increasingly smaller lies". If you try to explain everything right away with complete fine-grained truthfulness, you quickly get to molecular dynamics, and don't have to stop there.

A common unspoken theme in the post is, the art of learning is knowing "what" to care about and "when".

Re: How to Understand Things

#110
post #49
post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> says you need to master each step on the track before moving onto the next one. this is poisonous and borderline evil What’s wrong with it? You do need to understand calculus before classical mechanics, classical mechanics before quantum mechanics, quantum mechanics before quantum field theory, and quantum field theory before the Standard Model. I’ve seen tons of people disregard this and the result is always confu…

I suspect you and GP are talking about slightly different things. GP is probably more opposed to artificial compartmentalizing of things. As an example: > You do need to understand calculus before classical mechanics Yes, but how much calculus? Do you need all of Calc I, II and III before even attempting classical mechanics? And should calculus even be treated independently of classical mechanics? There are various t…

>And should calculus even be treated independently of classical mechanics?

Thank you. The value of calculus didn't really click for me until the next year in physics, at which point I wished I had paid more attention.

It's really unfortunate that you first have to drill high-speed high-precision symbol manipulation, devoid of any meaning, for so long before getting any indication of why you'd want to be able to do it.

I like Lockhart's analogy: mastering musical notation, transposition, etc. before being allowed to play your first note.

https://www.maa.org/external_archive/devlin/LockhartsLament....

Post reply on HN