6 ms·

Do you mean to say that being able to think in abstractions or keep a lot of state knowledge in short-term memory are skills that cannot be learned? So where di

Do you mean to say that being able to think in abstractions or keep a lot of state knowledge in short-term memory are skills that cannot be learned? So where did we acquire these skills, if not by learning?

toasterlovin 9y ago
They're built in, like most cognitive abilities. After all, you never learn how to take a 2 dimensional pattern of light hitting your retina and turn it into a 3 dimensional model of your environment. Ditto for locating the source of sounds. And, while you learn a specific language, none of us have to develop the general skill of learning a language from scratch as toddlers.
anarchimedes 9y ago
Paging Gwern? [1] [1] http://www.gwern.net/DNB-FAQ http://www.gwern.net/DNB-FAQ
btilly 9y ago
Your calling them "skills" prejudices the answer. My best understanding is that they aren't skills, they are hardwired abilities. My best guess based on research that I've seen on IQ is that about half of the hardwiring is genetic and half is a result of childhood upbringing, but by adulthood they are not readily changed. That said, we build concrete skills around how to make the best use of those abilities. We build memory skills to be able to quickly bring things out of short term memory back in. We build abstractions and concepts that allow us to efficiently analyze complex situations. We learn to think better with the capacity that we have. However our capacity doesn't seem to be readily changed. As a concrete anecdotal example, several who have taught CS for decades tell me that most students simply can't "get" pointer arithmetic or recursion. Their brains don't go that way no matter how much they try. People who do master it learn those things fairly quickly and then can move on. The specific abstractions can be taught, the ability to think through those types of abstractions seems innate. None of this minimizes the effort needed to become a good programmer even if we have the capacity. However the fact that most humans can't become programmers is why there is a job that typically pays 6 figures where many who are successful in it are self-taught with no more than a high school degree or GED.
- itamarst 9y ago
  > several who have taught CS for decades tell me that most students simply can't "get" pointer arithmetic or recursion Or maybe they're just bad teachers.
  - cchubitunes 9y ago
    For those of us who didn't grow up coding at age 7, this is golden!!!! The amount of terrible CS teachers out there would amaze you!! I mean "blow your mind away" amaze you. I almost gave up CS because of my absolutely terrible professors. I couldn't even understand simple Classes and object!!! It was that bad!!! Luckily, since I really wanted to learn, I had to seek alternate resources. I was fortunate to stumble on Stanford's Cs106a taught by Mehran Sahami and it changed my life forever. That man is the gold standard for what a teacher should be. He broke down complex ideas and made them look so simple. Since then, I use a combination of different resources to learn said "difficult concepts". Recursion, got it...pointers, got it too. I have used Standford courses, Berkeley course, udemy, Udacity, Coursera and even youtube to learn. These sites have some really good teachers. I have since come to understand that CS is really not that difficult. All is takes is a willingness to learn and a good resource to learn from.
  - btilly 9y ago
    Or maybe they're just bad teachers. Maybe so, maybe not. However I never had trouble when they tried to teach me things. And have heard good things from others who they taught. One of the people who expressed this basic opinion to me is https://www.amazon.com/Randal-Schwartz/e/B000APA744 https://www.amazon.com/Randal-Schwartz/e/B000APA744. He is also someone whose expository abilities are widely recognized as being excellent. And he is also an example of a self-taught programmer with no degrees beyond graduating from high school.
    - YeGoblynQueenne 9y ago
      To be fair, "bad teachers" is the simplest explanation. The alternative is to go chasing intricate definitions of exceptional intelligence and long-tailed aptitude disributions that take hella lot of explaining.
EpicEng 9y ago
I don't think it's nurture v nature, it's both. Anyone can learn, and anyone can get better at something. That does not mean anyone can be Einstein. I could study physics all day and all night and I would never be on his level or the level of his contemporaries.

toasterlovin 9y ago

They're built in, like most cognitive abilities. After all, you never learn how to take a 2 dimensional pattern of light hitting your retina and turn it into a 3 dimensional model of your environment. Ditto for locating the source of sounds. And, while you learn a specific language, none of us have to develop the general skill of learning a language from scratch as toddlers.

anarchimedes 9y ago

Paging Gwern? [1] [1] http://www.gwern.net/DNB-FAQ http://www.gwern.net/DNB-FAQ

btilly 9y ago

Your calling them "skills" prejudices the answer. My best understanding is that they aren't skills, they are hardwired abilities. My best guess based on research that I've seen on IQ is that about half of the hardwiring is genetic and half is a result of childhood upbringing, but by adulthood they are not readily changed. That said, we build concrete skills around how to make the best use of those abilities. We build memory skills to be able to quickly bring things out of short term memory back in. We build abstractions and concepts that allow us to efficiently analyze complex situations. We learn to think better with the capacity that we have. However our capacity doesn't seem to be readily changed. As a concrete anecdotal example, several who have taught CS for decades tell me that most students simply can't "get" pointer arithmetic or recursion. Their brains don't go that way no matter how much they try. People who do master it learn those things fairly quickly and then can move on. The specific abstractions can be taught, the ability to think through those types of abstractions seems innate. None of this minimizes the effort needed to become a good programmer even if we have the capacity. However the fact that most humans can't become programmers is why there is a job that typically pays 6 figures where many who are successful in it are self-taught with no more than a high school degree or GED.

itamarst 9y ago
> several who have taught CS for decades tell me that most students simply can't "get" pointer arithmetic or recursion Or maybe they're just bad teachers.
- cchubitunes 9y ago
  For those of us who didn't grow up coding at age 7, this is golden!!!! The amount of terrible CS teachers out there would amaze you!! I mean "blow your mind away" amaze you. I almost gave up CS because of my absolutely terrible professors. I couldn't even understand simple Classes and object!!! It was that bad!!! Luckily, since I really wanted to learn, I had to seek alternate resources. I was fortunate to stumble on Stanford's Cs106a taught by Mehran Sahami and it changed my life forever. That man is the gold standard for what a teacher should be. He broke down complex ideas and made them look so simple. Since then, I use a combination of different resources to learn said "difficult concepts". Recursion, got it...pointers, got it too. I have used Standford courses, Berkeley course, udemy, Udacity, Coursera and even youtube to learn. These sites have some really good teachers. I have since come to understand that CS is really not that difficult. All is takes is a willingness to learn and a good resource to learn from.
- btilly 9y ago
  Or maybe they're just bad teachers. Maybe so, maybe not. However I never had trouble when they tried to teach me things. And have heard good things from others who they taught. One of the people who expressed this basic opinion to me is https://www.amazon.com/Randal-Schwartz/e/B000APA744 https://www.amazon.com/Randal-Schwartz/e/B000APA744. He is also someone whose expository abilities are widely recognized as being excellent. And he is also an example of a self-taught programmer with no degrees beyond graduating from high school.
  - YeGoblynQueenne 9y ago
    To be fair, "bad teachers" is the simplest explanation. The alternative is to go chasing intricate definitions of exceptional intelligence and long-tailed aptitude disributions that take hella lot of explaining.

EpicEng 9y ago

I don't think it's nurture v nature, it's both. Anyone can learn, and anyone can get better at something. That does not mean anyone can be Einstein. I could study physics all day and all night and I would never be on his level or the level of his contemporaries.