3 ms·
That's a very impressive and tactile answer, thanks for taking the time to put it together. This seems to tie into the old debate of top-down versus bottom-up
by bangonkeyboard 8y ago
That's a very impressive and tactile answer, thanks for taking the time to put it together.
This seems to tie into the old debate of top-down versus bottom-up pedagogies. A high-level map of a topic is indisputably valuable, but I personally find it most useful as a guide for where to dive deep and back out, to make concrete the abstractions; a more directed patching-together of competencies, as you put it.
- motohagiography 8y agoThank you. Indeed, the top-down/bottom-up view of education is analogous to the efficiency of breadth-first vs. depth-first searches in different problems. Depends on what you want to achieve. The reason I use these is I think a lot of suffering comes from (or can be defined as) churning on deep-node problems without information from higher level concepts, and a notation that "locates" meaning in an broader ontology can relieve some of it, and yield new understanding. I think this is a theme Ted Chiang is on to as well, as it appears in the literary world as well as STEM.