3 ms·
I don't think Feynman laid out that technique, as such? It seems inferred, indirectly supported by a patchwork of quotes about other things. Doesn't mean it's
by hyperpallium2 4y ago
I don't think Feynman laid out that technique, as such? It seems inferred, indirectly supported by a patchwork of quotes about other things. Doesn't mean it's not true or useful, of course!
Another Feynmann Technique (also not actually said by him, but of him. https://wikiquote.org/wiki/Richard_Feynman https://wikiquote.org/wiki/Richard_Feynman
You write down the problem.
You think very hard.
Then you write down the answer.
Even this facetiousness includes getting so clear on the problem that you can write it down (I think this also implies looking at the problem detials, not assuming). Douglas Adams based a whole trilogy on its importance.
In my experience, for ordinary problems, this is so important that it often directly reveals the solution in itself.
- dSebastien 4y agoI need to update the article with a bit more background I stumbled upon today: https://medium.com/taking-note/learning-from-the-feynman-technique-5373014ad230#:~:text=This%20technique%20is%20derived%20from,disassembled%2C%20translated%2C%20and%20recorded https://medium.com/taking-note/learning-from-the-feynman-tec....
- hyperpallium2 4y ago> This technique is derived from Feynman’s studying methods when he was a student at Princeton. A compelling essay would be to rigorously argue that this indeed was his technique. It would be a lot of work, long, and I suspect you won't find support for some elements; you'd have to modify your proposition. In particular, although he does do each of these things, I don't think they are chronological or form a systematic "technique". It may be easier to argue for them separately, as e.g. The Four Feynman Techniques. Then, reference that essay from a shorter, lighter overview, like the one submitted here.