Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Creativity fundamentally comes from memorization?

shwin.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 372 posts

Re: Creativity fundamentally comes from memorization?

#271

Post by kiba »

Jensson wrote: post #250
ozim wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Without memorizing at first, it is much harder to understand the topic. Memorizing builds fluency, fluency builds proficiency. You cannot build complex electronics without having Ohms law in your mind as something fundamental you don’t have to look up. Yes at some point you build up experience so you never really think of it but for it to become intuitive it needs to be learned by rot repetition

> You cannot build complex electronics without having Ohms law in your mind as something fundamental you don’t have to look up. But I learned Ohms law without learning any formula, or memorizing any picture. I just internalized that electricity are electrons that gets pushed by a force against a resistance, so it is obvious that the amount that gets pushed through is force divided by resistance. I couldn't write down…

Most of the basic electric circuit formulas comes trivially from that fact, so I never had to study for that in physics. And as we know memorizing that fact doesn't mean people know how to do the electric circuit formulas, so memorization isn't enough, rather internalizing concepts is a completely separate process from memorization, and the quality of your internalized structure is the most important part here not how many objects you memorized.

If you mean by rote learning and just remembering information in an arbitrary manner, then that's memorization. I doubt that such a person have even acquired the knowledge, except maybe for the simplest case such as multiplication tables.

I know how multiplication works actually, but I never used them. Instead I go for the memorized answer.

But all knowledge a person have is based on memory. How you acquire it is up to you, preferably in the most efficient way possible so that we actually retain the information and don't have to "study" as often.

Re: Creativity fundamentally comes from memorization?

#272

Post by kiba »

zharknado wrote: post #205
stonemetal12 wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Memorize means "to retain in and quickly recall from memory". Weather that is by synthetic or natural process is irrelevant. From the point of understanding how memory and recall work, yes burning your hand is an act of memorization. Sure there is a natural repetitive process that leads to base learning like L1 you mention. On the other hand no one adds or multiples enough in daily life for natural memory formation.…

I’d say that’s the definition of “remember” rather than “memorize.” To most people I’d wager “memorize” has a strong connotation for the synthetic version only, with an emphasis on a stripping-out of context. I recognize that stripping away context can be valuable—-drilling a tennis serve over and over outside the real-time context of a game is extremely helpful. Flashcards are rarely valuable in the same way. For se…

Actually, my understanding is that contexts in general are hard to transfer.

Re: Creativity fundamentally comes from memorization?

#273

Post by kiba »

barrkel wrote: post #91
Sammi wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"What I find instead, is that by just processing novel information, especially if I focus on analysing it, my brain internalizes insights and builds model of that type of thing" Sorry, but this is memoization.

What do you call it when you remember things so you can repeat them but you can't generalize? E.g. if you learn a poem or phrase in a foreign language, but can't reuse the words in different contexts? Or being able to recite a rule, but not automatically applying it? Is there a word for this? Similarly, we should have a word for knowing how to reuse something in a different context, but not recall its origin or its c…

Transfer learning.

Transferring skills from one context to another is surprisingly hard to do, but not impossible. AFAIK, contexts must be similar to each other for transfer to take place.

Re: Creativity fundamentally comes from memorization?

#274

Post by mionhe »

flir wrote: post #142
anonymoushn wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pollock is often regarded as pushing painting forward, for example

Thanks, I don't know enough about him - does that support my hypothesis or tear it down?

Pollock was obsessed with creating an art style that had no basis in any other style, something truly "original." He felt the abstract style he created fit that aim.

That being said, in some ways you could say that the splatter paintings he's known so well for are in fact influenced by all the art he studied and discarded along the way. They were definitely influenced by the principles of artistic design he learned, even if they looked different from what people were used to.

In my opinion, your hypothesis is supported, though maybe in a bit of a roundabout way.

Re: Creativity fundamentally comes from memorization?

#275

Post by mionhe »

mewpmewp2 wrote: post #90
knighthack wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I completely disagree with your assertion that "...rote memorization is neither necessary nor sufficient to internalize concepts." I would recommend reading the book Moonwalking with Einstein . There is a lot of discussion there on how memory is linked directly to creativity, and to understanding concepts deeply. --- A choice passage: "... If the essence of creativity is linking disparate facts and ideas, then the mo…

Didn't Einstein say that don't memorise what you can look up? E.g. nothing nowadays since we have the Internet.

The internet has so much information we often can't actually find what we're looking for once we get past a certain surface level understanding. Or people don't want to pay to host it anymore. Our people disagree with it and it's taken down.

I don't disagree with Einstein, but I wonder what he would say with the modern internet at his disposal. Maybe the same?

Re: Creativity fundamentally comes from memorization?

#276

Post by roncesvalles »

dash2 wrote: post #116

The most striking comment was this: > Growing up with Indian parents in California, I was exposed to both. My mom would write daily Kumon sheets out by hand for me to do, and teach me from Indian textbooks from the same grade (which were much more advanced than the US equivalents). The result was me breezing through the US school system without much thought. Ukrainian refugees I know are finding the same things in th…

Also, this problem is a vicious cycle. Bad math students become bad math teachers. I believe that one has to be significantly good at a subject in order to teach the basics well. In school I got a feeling that many math teachers did not know a chapter of math beyond what was in the textbook.

Doesn't help that in the American economy, good mathematicians can earn 10x more than a math teacher's salary.

Re: Creativity fundamentally comes from memorization?

#277

Post by bawolff »

stonemetal12 wrote: post #166
zharknado wrote: post #132

OP and others here are stretching the definition of “memorize” to mean “anything that leads to something being retained in memory.” I reject this idea. The trauma of burning your hand on a hot pan creates a memory you won’t soon forget, but almost no one would understand it as an act of memorization. Memorization to me refers to a set of cargo-culty “learning” practices wherein we believe that by using language to dr…

Memorize means "to retain in and quickly recall from memory". Weather that is by synthetic or natural process is irrelevant. From the point of understanding how memory and recall work, yes burning your hand is an act of memorization. Sure there is a natural repetitive process that leads to base learning like L1 you mention. On the other hand no one adds or multiples enough in daily life for natural memory formation.…

> On the other hand no one adds or multiples enough in daily life for natural memory formation. Humans consider the skill vital enough that we have developed methods to memorize them.

Isn't that kind of the point for the other side?

Nobody memorizes the answer to 212+457. There are no flash cards for every possible addition up to infinity.

In my experience, the more people think that math is something to memorize, the worse they are at math.

Re: Creativity fundamentally comes from memorization?

#278

Post by bawolff »

shw1n wrote: post #6
galkk wrote: post #3

I will disagree. Creativity comes from applying acquired knowledge (that's where memorization comes into account) in new contexts.

Appreciate you reading! But how do you know how to apply this acquired knowledge in this new context? It's some form of pattern matching right -- which imo is just a less obvious form of memorization i.e. you've memorized the match between inherent traits of the context with a specific application of that knowledge

> It's some form of pattern matching right -- which imo is just a less obvious form of memorization

I don't think that meets the commonly accepted definition of memorization.

E.g. https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/memoriza... Memorization: the act or process of learning something so that you will remember it exactly.

If you are transforming the knowledge, i dont think that is the same as memorizing it. In fact, i think most people would describe that as the opposite of memorization.

Using your definition, everything would be memorization. For example, you could describe picasso as simply pattern matching on other paintings to make something new, but i think it would be crazy to describe his work as an act of memorization (then again, the way AI generated art works... maybe its not so crazy)

Re: Creativity fundamentally comes from memorization?

#279

Post by fragmede »

bawolff wrote: post #277
stonemetal12 wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Memorize means "to retain in and quickly recall from memory". Weather that is by synthetic or natural process is irrelevant. From the point of understanding how memory and recall work, yes burning your hand is an act of memorization. Sure there is a natural repetitive process that leads to base learning like L1 you mention. On the other hand no one adds or multiples enough in daily life for natural memory formation.…

> On the other hand no one adds or multiples enough in daily life for natural memory formation. Humans consider the skill vital enough that we have developed methods to memorize them. Isn't that kind of the point for the other side? Nobody memorizes the answer to 212+457. There are no flash cards for every possible addition up to infinity. In my experience, the more people think that math is something to memorize, th…

Kumon students will be able to get 669 faster than the average non-Kumon student simply due to a large amount of practice though. Students don't memorizate of all the possible combinations, but imo that practice helps tune the mind to be sharp in that particular direction. very useful in some jobs.

it is to be noted that math isn't numeracy though. I have dyscalclia which hurt me with numbers but at the college level there are fewer numbers and more conceptual thinking. ended up with a math minor, though that's due to the CS degree requiring so many classes.

Re: Creativity fundamentally comes from memorization?

#280

Post by WalterBright »

jjk166 wrote: post #209
WalterBright wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The EEs I have known that carried around a card with: V = I * R I = V / R R = V / I because they couldn't remember it were all bad at EE and bad at math. If you can't remember the pieces making up a concept, how are you going to remember the concept? > It’s disproportionately important for passing tests (And getting hired at tech companies!) I don't remember anyone who couldn't pass tests but was really a great engin…

> There are questions like max takeoff weight, fuel burn rate, max dive speeds, etc. Stuff a pilot had better know or he's a dead pilot. You don't want a pilot who is creative when it comes to max takeoff weight. Obviously there are good reasons to memorize certain things, creativity just isn't one of them.

You can't be creative if you don't remember the facts.

BTW, bombers in WW2 were routinely overloaded on takeoff, at high risk to the crews. If one of the 4 engines wasn't delivering the max power, the result was crashing inside a planeload of fuel and bombs.

Post reply on HN