4 ms·

Nice point. I've modified the post, adding a footnote pointing out your objection, and suggesting an amendment in response: to offer a dollar to whoever of Ali

Nice point. I've modified the post, adding a footnote pointing out your objection, and suggesting an amendment in response: to offer a dollar to whoever of Alice and Bob offers the best summary of the talk at the end. I'm confident this will work to make the point needed for the post. On a few occasions friends have asked me in advance to summarize a talk they know I will attend, but which they cannot; this certainly makes me focus on the talk much more effectively.

psykotic 16y ago
Don't IQ-raising points of view usually have this dark side? For example, the methods of analytic geometry and calculus let you solve problems mechanically that would be difficult or even impossible by other means. That's great if you're just trying to get an answer. It's not so great when you realize after executing a rigorous calculus proof of Snell's Law that you are not an inch closer to understanding why Snell's Law is really true. You turned yourself into an unthinking piece of machinery. This applies not only to calculus. Most people who can execute the algorithms for calculating with fractions or solving linear equations don't actually understand what they're doing. They want an answer and they get it.
- michael_nielsen 16y ago
  I think it's true that when you adopt one perspective you (momentarily, at least) often suppress other perspectives. The trick seems to be to have ways of generating lots of different perspectives.
  - psykotic 16y ago
    Absolutely. The problem is that the most powerful points of view are so effective they're easy to confuse with reality. That's the upside and downside of reductionism in a sentence. :)
- khafra 16y ago
  When you can do the proof, you actually do understand; you just may not understand your understanding (viz. the SMBC comic on Polish Hand Math; I think this is it: http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=1917 http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=1917)

psykotic 16y ago

Don't IQ-raising points of view usually have this dark side? For example, the methods of analytic geometry and calculus let you solve problems mechanically that would be difficult or even impossible by other means. That's great if you're just trying to get an answer. It's not so great when you realize after executing a rigorous calculus proof of Snell's Law that you are not an inch closer to understanding why Snell's Law is really true. You turned yourself into an unthinking piece of machinery. This applies not only to calculus. Most people who can execute the algorithms for calculating with fractions or solving linear equations don't actually understand what they're doing. They want an answer and they get it.

michael_nielsen 16y ago
I think it's true that when you adopt one perspective you (momentarily, at least) often suppress other perspectives. The trick seems to be to have ways of generating lots of different perspectives.
- psykotic 16y ago
  Absolutely. The problem is that the most powerful points of view are so effective they're easy to confuse with reality. That's the upside and downside of reductionism in a sentence. :)
khafra 16y ago
When you can do the proof, you actually do understand; you just may not understand your understanding (viz. the SMBC comic on Polish Hand Math; I think this is it: http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=1917 http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=1917)