3 ms·
> But how do you know how to apply this acquired knowledge in this new context? That question has a false precondition baked in. If you know how, it's not crea
by drewcoo 2y ago
> But how do you know how to apply this acquired knowledge in this new context?
That question has a false precondition baked in. If you know how, it's not creative.
> It's some form of pattern matching right -- which imo is just a less obvious form of memorization
No. Sensing and matching patterns does not imply memorization. Everything you're saying is completely loaded.
Did you just discover memorization? Because the pattern I see in your words is similar to anyone who's just learned a new tool or technique - they overapply it everywhere as they learn to use it.
- shw1n 2y agoBut you must have knowledge of the basic units of your chosen art to apply that to the new situation right? E.g. if you're an artist, at the very least you need the knowledge of how to draw a line From other comments here it seems the definition of "memorization" seems to be where disagreements are Maybe this is a better explanation: once I started trying to make whatI just learned is called "tacit knowledge" more explicit and then committing it to memory, I was able to cut learning times down significantly
- Sakos 2y agoI think the disagreements are largely from this weird cultural bias against any form of explicit "memorization". It's very, very strange.
- Jensson 2y ago> E.g. if you're an artist, at the very least you need the knowledge of how to draw a line But no artist memorize how to draw a line. They learn how to draw a line, but learning isn't the same thing as memorizing.