Live data from Hacker News

Creativity fundamentally comes from memorization?

shwin.co

301–310 of 372 posts

Re: Creativity fundamentally comes from memorization?

#301
post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You don't want a pilot who is creative when it comes to max takeoff weight. In certain combat situations, or when smuggling coke across South and Central America, you certainly do.

Gravity works just as well if you're in combat or smuggling coke. They don't suddenly give you the ability to takeoff under too much load

The max takeoff weight in the book isn't the actual maximum. It's the "certified" maximum. Anything beyond that may cause structural issues during takeoff, but probably won't be that big of a problem until you land. You'll need to be especially creative on getting very low on fuel, so you don't crash through your landing gear.

Re: Creativity fundamentally comes from memorization?

#302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like you totally missed the point and then reiterated exactly what they said in another way.

Not really. Their point was that you need to lick a lot of objects. My point is that it doesn't need to be a lot, just enough to be able to form generalisations based on other observable characteristics. It's about the degree of "a lot".

I don't think they were being serious about licking. After all, you cannot "lick" a computer program.

And I actually disagree with you. My son went through a period where he put nearly everything in his mouth, bugs, bottle caps, spices, food, phones, credit cards, toys, rocks. Pretty sure we all did that at some point.

Re: Creativity fundamentally comes from memorization?

#303
post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Here’s a weird fact: if you look around the room you’re in now, I bet you know what it would feel like on your tongue to lick everything you see. We probably learned that in the “put everything in your mouth” baby phase. You are an expert. But if you wanted to, how would you teach that? I think the learner would just have to go lick a lot of things for themself. This is such a weird and amazing analogy. Thank you f…

> [H]ow would you teach that? I think the learner would just have to go lick a lot of things for themself. Actually, I don't agree with that. If I look around the room I'm in now, there are a LOT of different objects, and I can imagine what they'd feel like on my tongue, even though I've never physically licked the vast majority of those types of objects. To give a couple of examples: a partly used candle, the "light…

> even though I've never physically licked the vast majority of those types of objects

Are you sure you never licked those materials as a child?

I'm not sure when my earliest memories date from any more — some of what I thought were memories turned out to be dreams of things that never happened, others have mutated with each re-recollection — but one thing I can be sure of is that I don't remember any of the "stick random things in mouth" stage of my life.

When I look around my room, I find there are indeed things I cannot imagine what it would be like to lick them, but they're all made of materials I didn't have access to as a kid: soft touch rubber.

Re: Creativity fundamentally comes from memorization?

#304
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…

> Ukrainian refugees I know are finding the same things in the UK school system, where the maths is much less advanced. This doesn't appear to be reflected in PISA scores (489 UK, 441 Ukraine)

Maybe because UK education system knows about this PISA and Ukraine and other countries don't even care?

For example one thing that puzzles me in western education is this reading comprehension. What exactly is this for? I studied in Russian school/university and we had nothing like that.

Reading means you should understand what you are reading, reading without comprehension is just nonsense for me.

Re: Creativity fundamentally comes from memorization?

#305
post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point they are trying to make is it comes from memorizing the right things. You don't become a chess master by memorizing opening moves, you become one by memorizing strong and weak states on the board. The ability to memorize opening moves may lead you into a stronger mid game, but it's not creativity. Creativity is searching for patterns where they can mate in three, or spotting positions where the bishop can a…

> The point they are trying to make is it comes from memorizing the right things No it doesn't, understanding a concept doesn't come from memorizing N facts, if it did we could easily make everyone understand math in school but we can't. Some people understand math trivially with no effort and no work memorizing (they wont remember the formulas, but they can explain how it works and can reproduce something similar to…

Memorizing is clearly a necessary, but not sufficient part of learning. If you are to become an expert in any subject whatsoever, from math to football fandom, you will need to develop an ability for remembering huge amounts of raw facts. One of the first hurdles in a math education is memorizing the multiplication tables. In biology or medicine you have to learn literally hundreds of systems that happen to exist in a certain way, and from all of the raw facts, could very well be a different way.

> Some people understand math trivially with no effort and no work memorizing (they wont remember the formulas, but they can explain how it works and can reproduce something similar to the formulas), others don't understand even with massive amounts of effort and memorizing every formula.

Sure, you can wing it at a primary or high school level if your teachers are impressed by your understanding. But you will never become a math expert if you don't remember the specific formulae, and many other more complex things. Even if you are fully able to deduce the theorems from scratch, you won't be able to function if you have to invent and then prove every single theorem you want to use.

> Memorizing board states is deep blue, it is much worse than AlphaGo etc, so that is for sure not the best way to get good, and for sure not the way humans get good, humans get good similar to how AlphaGo gets good, not how deep blue did it.

No, it is precisely the other way around. DeepBlue is deducing how good a board state is by trying to calculate all possible follow-up moves up to a depth of 13 or something. In contrast, AlphaGo has memorized patterns occuring in billions of games (in a lossy archive format, of course) and basically can recall games that are close enough to the current game and what you need to do to win from the current position. And this is exactly how chess masters mostly work as well, to the extent that it has been studied, and based on their own reporting. They just recognize positions or certain aspects of a position, and can recall how the game works from that position.

Re: Creativity fundamentally comes from memorization?

#306

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…

> I don't remember anyone who couldn't pass tests but was really a great engineer. But there are plenty of people who can pass tests and are terrible engineers. When people talk about memorization they talk about remembering the words without understanding the concepts, such a person is no better off than the person carrying around a text note with the concept written down. When you understand these concepts you will…

Creativity comes from a deep understanding of concepts

Re: Creativity fundamentally comes from memorization?

#307
post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> [H]ow would you teach that? I think the learner would just have to go lick a lot of things for themself. Actually, I don't agree with that. If I look around the room I'm in now, there are a LOT of different objects, and I can imagine what they'd feel like on my tongue, even though I've never physically licked the vast majority of those types of objects. To give a couple of examples: a partly used candle, the "light…

> even though I've never physically licked the vast majority of those types of objects Are you sure you never licked those materials as a child? I'm not sure when my earliest memories date from any more — some of what I thought were memories turned out to be dreams of things that never happened, others have mutated with each re-recollection — but one thing I can be sure of is that I don't remember any of the "stick r…

You're right that there's a problem with recollection. I can't remember going through such a phase either, but I know I did because there are photos of me as a baby sticking things in my mouth (although in the photos these are things designed for babies, like plastic cubes big enough to not be swallowed, but small enough to be easily handled by a kid, etc). In fact, I had no idea of the ages involved, so I searched online and found that most babies start this phase around 6 months and usually stop by 12 months, although some kids continue on until 3 or 4 years old.

But yeah, materials like the rubber in my inner tube... I'm pretty sure my parents wouldn't have allowed such stuff near me as a baby, likewise I wouldn't have been allowed near boxes of matches etc. I also can't imagine I'd ever have decided as an older child that I should try licking a bike tube or the striking surface of a matchbox. And so, I'm about as confident as I can be that I'd never have licked an inner tube in my life, but I can make a good guess from feeling it with my fingers what it'd likely feel like on my tongue.

There's very little where I'd go as far as to say "I cannot imagine what it'd be like", except maybe for things that would involve a chemical reaction, and where I might have some idea from extrapolation with foods - e.g. fizzing, an exothermic reaction, etc., but wouldn't necessarily be able to guess from looking or feeling with my fingers what the result might be. Most of the interesting ones are turned into food anyway, e.g. sherbert dip or sour sweets.

I definitely have had some surprises in later life - I remember first having ox-tongue when I was in my 20s and finding the texture quite uncomfortable, and since high single-digit ages, I've never been able to correlate the texture of liver with something that's edible.

I guess another example is with unfamiliar "exotic" fruits - there are some that would surprise everyone with their taste, but you can guess most of the texture characteristics of a fruit just by looking at it and cutting it into pieces, and you might be able to have a guess at taste from its smell.

Re: Creativity fundamentally comes from memorization?

#308
post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't remember anyone who couldn't pass tests but was really a great engineer. But there are plenty of people who can pass tests and are terrible engineers. When people talk about memorization they talk about remembering the words without understanding the concepts, such a person is no better off than the person carrying around a text note with the concept written down. When you understand these concepts you will…

The point they are trying to make is it comes from memorizing the right things. You don't become a chess master by memorizing opening moves, you become one by memorizing strong and weak states on the board. The ability to memorize opening moves may lead you into a stronger mid game, but it's not creativity. Creativity is searching for patterns where they can mate in three, or spotting positions where the bishop can a…

I think memorization is a tool to deep understanding

Re: Creativity fundamentally comes from memorization?

#309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Ukrainian refugees I know are finding the same things in the UK school system, where the maths is much less advanced. This doesn't appear to be reflected in PISA scores (489 UK, 441 Ukraine)

Maybe because UK education system knows about this PISA and Ukraine and other countries don't even care? For example one thing that puzzles me in western education is this reading comprehension. What exactly is this for? I studied in Russian school/university and we had nothing like that. Reading means you should understand what you are reading, reading without comprehension is just nonsense for me.

I am Spanish. We call it text analysis and it is quit common at all levels in school and university.

Re: Creativity fundamentally comes from memorization?

#310

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…

Drilling vocabulary flashcards is very helpful in learning a language. As is reading, listening, or talking to someone. To learn a language well, you need to do both. Although children ultimately reach the level of being a native speaker, they do not do this very quickly considering that they say their first words when they are about 1 year old.
Post reply on HN