3 ms·

> People only really learn when they’re surprised. This is a nice sensationalist punchline, but I don't think it's true at all. Most of what people learn is no

> People only really learn when they’re surprised. This is a nice sensationalist punchline, but I don't think it's true at all. Most of what people learn is not bang, a new thing unlocked, but rather repetitions and small incremental improvements to truly hone and understand an idea or activity. Think of learning a language for example. You wouldn't say you've only ever learned something when you hear a new word for the first time. The real learning is remembering it, using it in different contexts, understanding how other people use it, seeing it in slang, etc.

janvdberg 3y ago
I agree repetition is key. But here's what I noticed from personal experience. When I first read something interesting, it might not stick. When reading it again (say: the same book a year later), knowing I must have read this very interesting thing before, but apparently forgot I more or less have the same reaction as being SURPRISED. And more often than not THAT is when it really sticks. This is from anecdotal, personal experience, but being surprised sort of unlocks things in the brain that make things stick (I could go on, on how this would be a biological advantage etc. but that is reaching) and I guess that is what Sivers is pointing at?
- shard 3y ago
  I read somewhere that it takes ten exposures to a new word before you learn it. After reading that, I started tracking how many times I see a new word before I recall what it means. Unsurprisingly, it falls along a distribution, but for harder words it does take me quite a few exposures before learning it. By the time I learn it, the feeling is often recognition that I have trouble with this word, and boredom that it's this word again. =)
- cruano 3y ago
  “I cannot remember the books I've read any more than the meals I have eaten; even so, they have made me.” - Ralph Waldo Emerson
monooso 3y ago
> This is a nice sensationalist punchline, but I don't think it's true at all. Most of what people learn is not bang, a new thing unlocked, but rather repetitions and small incremental improvements... The article is specifically about writing talks, or possibly articles. In that context, using surprise to ensure your idea lands makes sense.
- ilyt 3y ago
  > The article is specifically about writing talks, or possibly articles. In that context, using surprise to ensure your idea lands makes sense. The article literally says "Use this rule in all your public writing. " It's garbage article.
brigadier132 3y ago
> This is a nice sensationalist punchline, but I don't think it's true at all It's only not true because the qualified it with "only". But "surprise" and "shock" are some of the heuristics the brain uses to prioritize the retention of knowledge. "Competitive memorizers" (people that compete in memorizing things) often use techniques of associating dull information with shocking mental images that help with knowledge recall.
WaitWaitWha 3y ago
In my experience it is partially true. Topics punctuated with surprise will help people learn the material presented.
marcosdumay 3y ago
Yeah, if you take it out of context, it's not an universal rule. People don't get small improvements or practice from reading an article. The advice is spot on in the context it's presented.

janvdberg 3y ago

I agree repetition is key. But here's what I noticed from personal experience. When I first read something interesting, it might not stick. When reading it again (say: the same book a year later), knowing I must have read this very interesting thing before, but apparently forgot I more or less have the same reaction as being SURPRISED. And more often than not THAT is when it really sticks. This is from anecdotal, personal experience, but being surprised sort of unlocks things in the brain that make things stick (I could go on, on how this would be a biological advantage etc. but that is reaching) and I guess that is what Sivers is pointing at?

shard 3y ago
I read somewhere that it takes ten exposures to a new word before you learn it. After reading that, I started tracking how many times I see a new word before I recall what it means. Unsurprisingly, it falls along a distribution, but for harder words it does take me quite a few exposures before learning it. By the time I learn it, the feeling is often recognition that I have trouble with this word, and boredom that it's this word again. =)
cruano 3y ago
“I cannot remember the books I've read any more than the meals I have eaten; even so, they have made me.” - Ralph Waldo Emerson

monooso 3y ago

> This is a nice sensationalist punchline, but I don't think it's true at all. Most of what people learn is not bang, a new thing unlocked, but rather repetitions and small incremental improvements... The article is specifically about writing talks, or possibly articles. In that context, using surprise to ensure your idea lands makes sense.

ilyt 3y ago
> The article is specifically about writing talks, or possibly articles. In that context, using surprise to ensure your idea lands makes sense. The article literally says "Use this rule in all your public writing. " It's garbage article.

brigadier132 3y ago

> This is a nice sensationalist punchline, but I don't think it's true at all It's only not true because the qualified it with "only". But "surprise" and "shock" are some of the heuristics the brain uses to prioritize the retention of knowledge. "Competitive memorizers" (people that compete in memorizing things) often use techniques of associating dull information with shocking mental images that help with knowledge recall.

WaitWaitWha 3y ago

In my experience it is partially true. Topics punctuated with surprise will help people learn the material presented.

marcosdumay 3y ago

Yeah, if you take it out of context, it's not an universal rule. People don't get small improvements or practice from reading an article. The advice is spot on in the context it's presented.