7 ms·

The problem isn't that these people can't use computers. It's that they can't THINK. They do not understand what critical thinking is, or how it works. They

The problem isn't that these people can't use computers. It's that they can't THINK. They do not understand what critical thinking is, or how it works. They do not know how to approach problems or explore solutions. They don't know how to do it with their computer... or their car, or their vacuuming robot, or their television, or their oven or their relationships or any thing in their life. They don't understand why the world is the way it is, they don't know how to figure it out, and they generally think that trying is a suckers game. You mention that there are always 1 or 2 kids a year who have already picked up programming or know how to build a computer... I think I would live for them. I was one of those kids, and I would be so excited for them that I would bury them in whatever help they needed. For the other kids, I'd put aside the computers for a bit. I'd teach them critical thinking, because it's really the only skill they need to learn (see the documentary "High School" by Wiseman for an excellent example of how reformulating every single class as being centered around critical thinking led a poor latino high schools students to accomplish the highest percentage of students to attain college degrees in the nation... while preserving their youthful exuberance for learning).

VMG 13y ago
> The problem isn't that these people can't use computers. It's that they can't THINK. How do you know? I presume that you believe that you have critical thinking skills and wouldn't make similar mistakes in other areas of life, but what is your evidence? You probably know how to use a computer, maybe even fix a car. But how can you know that you don't have similar blindspots when it comes to health, finance, relationships, education, things that are seemingly easy for some people but inexplicably hard for others? It's too easy to scoff at people being dumb by judging their computer skills on a site called Hacker News. Imagine the analogue article and discussion on a a site called "Fitness News".
- codyb 13y ago
  I think what he was trying to say is that when you've learned critical thinking as a skill you can apply it to anywhere. So, if he was on fitness news instead of saying "I'm not getting buff." He'd say, "Well, here's the work out plan based on X, Y, and Z, and I've been eating 4000 calories a day based on A, B, and C, and I've looked up this that and the other thing but I'm not having any luck still. Does anyone have any ideas or see where I've gone wrong?". I would agree with the original poster that a lot of people simply do not have great critical thinking skills. And it's certainly a skill. It's something which can be extracted and used in any area of life. Of course some people can develop a skill set and be able to critically think about something in particular with out being able to apply that knowledge to other areas of life, but if you can develop that skill set for all areas of life you'll be far better off.
  - VMG 13y ago
    You are underestimating the power of knowledge. I've fixed computers for people who are much smarter then me and have a higher intelligence by every reasonable measure. The reason I can fix computers is that I know about things like DHCP, "The Registry" and BIOS, systems that have very little to do with logic and are only understandable by using them for decades.
    - codyb 13y ago
      Well yes, but that intelligent person probably at least tried something like restarting, checking if another website would open if their internet seemed down, turning their wifi on and off, etc. The DHCP, the registry, and bios certainly take a fair amount of time to learn about fully enough to understand and be able to work with. Not figuring out the monitor isn't turned on on the other hand.
- nathas 13y ago
  I respectfully disagree. The fundamental idea here is that some people learn how to learn, and others need to always be taught. Learning "huh, when I hit this switch my wifi turns on or off" is pretty simple. Some people need to be told, and even then it's just a rote mechanical process - no thought as to why, how, or even that the switch is connected to anything. It's all magic. I wanted to learn to lift even though I've never stepped foot in a gym. I did my research and bought the right books. I went into a gym and did exactly what I set out to do. I need to replace my windshield wipers. I look up the information for it - it's right next to the new blades in Walmart. Dead simple. I bet a lot of people go to Pepboys for that. It's as if the scientific method never existed, life is magic, and knowledge can only be gained by truly extraordinary humans.
  - angersock 13y ago
    It's as if the scientific method never existed, life is magic, and knowledge can only be gained by truly extraordinary humans. That's exactly the problem with this. We get to support the idea that all humans are created equally and deserve the same rights and freedoms, or we get to have that mindset. It's a bad spot to be in.
    - icebraining 13y ago
      There's no such dichotomy; the other choice is, supporting the idea that humans are not all created equally, but still consider they deserve the same rights and freedoms. And I'd rather have a mass of idiots (which I don't think most people are) ruling than an elite of people who consider themselves superior to others. At least the former are less likely to successfully torment me for my own good.
      - angersock 13y ago
        "supporting the idea that humans are not all created equally, but still consider they deserve the same rights and freedoms." So, er, why? If you acknowledge that people aren't equally capable and endowed, what sort of sense does it make to place the same legal requirements on them? Why should I be required to see as far as somebody else when driving? Why should I be prevented from making API requests on a public system (when I know how to do so safely) when somebody less trained or malicious would bring on down time? It's far better simply to say that either everyone has the same capabilities, or to say that they ought be afforded benefits and restrictions that match their talents and deficiencies. Doing neither is unfair nonsensical from a societal standpoint. As for the mass of idiots, no. I'd rather have a ruling elite, because they presumably be reasoned with--or removed in favor of a better elite. A mass of morons weighs heavily upon us, especially in the disinformation age.
jonrx 13y ago
For your first sentence, I would rather say that they DON'T want to think when it comes to computer/maths/etc. "I don't like it, hence I'm not good at it." gives them an easy reason to avoid the problem.
Finster 13y ago
I pretty much agree with you, but I think the point is that focusing on technical education and incentivizing that learning (like the WPA2 key hidden in a 10,000 line text file) can help build critical thinking skills. If instead of putting the computers to the side, actually building positive learning experiences involving computers, the critical thinking will be a natural outgrowth of that, IMHO.
area51org 13y ago
Related, relevant issue: I know people — in Silicon Valley! — who are proud of the fact that their elementary schools (private) have no computers, and avoid the subject entirely. Apparently they believe computing too early will change, for the worse, a child's brain. I suspect it would do the opposite: help their children be better critical thinkers than their parents obviously are. You know, books change the way the mind works, too. That's bad. Better keep books out of the hands of children before their minds are warped.
- BruceIV 13y ago
  There are possible good reasons for this - I wouldn't give elementary students calculators, because they won't learn their math; similarly, in an educational environment (that's not teaching computing), computers are often more distracting than useful - the CS department at the university where I did my undergrad banned computers in first year lectures (not labs), because the students were playing games and browsing the web instead of paying attention in class; I think they made the right decision.
  - area51org 13y ago
    Calculators are not computers, and no one who understands what a computer is would suggest that one would somehow prevent a student from learning. We're talking about basic computer skills here: mousing, menus, command line, and some introductory coding. Those aren't nice-to-haves; they're necessities for elementary school students. the students were playing games and browsing the web instead of paying attention in class Sure, understood, but that's a red herring here. I'm not suggesting we outfit a whole classroom of second graders with laptops so they can play Angry Birds. I'm suggesting that children need computer skills.
    - BruceIV 13y ago
      Fair, I agree - and I think that basic computer literacy should be taught in schools - my point was just that if the way to teach the children computer literacy is to give them laptops to use in every class (it's trendy these days), they'll find a way to play Angry Birds, and will learn neither computer literacy nor their other lessons.
300bps 13y ago
The problem isn't that these people can't use computers. It's that they can't THINK. I find it's more specific than and not as serious as that. I got my first computer in 1982, first modem in 1985 (hence my username). I find that people who proudly state how not-technical they are actually purposely turn their brain off around computers. It's not that they can't think. They can and often do around non-technical things. But they automatically assume they're unable to fix anything computer-related so they don't even try. My wife is a perfect example of that. If I hear, "Printer is not working" again I think I'm going to throw it out the window. The latest time, she unplugged the printer USB cable to plug in her iPhone and then called me to fix the printer. If this was a "can't think" problem, she would belong in a group home. Instead it's a "won't think about technical things" problem. I was one of those kids, and I would be so excited for them that I would bury them in whatever help they needed. I was one of those kids too. Only my computer teacher was in his first year of teaching computers, having been drafted from the math program because "computers use math". He was completely just learning about computers. He would ask me, "Is that right, 300bps?" after almost everything he taught the class. He ended up just having me do special projects doing things like creating math games on the Apple ][e.
- demallien 13y ago
  Hmmm, it's an interesting point. I think the reason people don't even try is because they recognize that they can't tell the difference between something that might take them 15 minutes of monkeying around to fix, and something that is beyond their competency. Worse, they are not sure that they won't make things when trying to fix the problem. I'm sure it must be similar to the feeling I get when I'm working on a new code base that I'm not familiar with, and I need to make a modification in a function so that it calls another module correctly for some new functionality. But I can't tell if that change isn't going to break something somewhere else, so making that change becomes quite scary. In the software development world, we handle this by creating suites of automatic tests that we can run after the change to make sure that what we just did doesn't break things. We also use config managent software so that we can back out any erroneous changes. These things aren't available to nontechnical users - they can't verify that they haven't broken anything, and if they have broken something, they may not be able to put things back the way they were. This pretty much guarantees that people won't experiment with their computer.
ctdonath 13y ago
There's a difference between can't and won't. This issue is the latter, as exemplified by the example where a kid was hitting OK so fast the actual error message couldn't be read. As a professor, I was astounded at how many students failed just because they wouldn't do the work. A large fraction were certainly capable of doing so (some spectacularly capable), but just...didn't. Having and increasing a vast array of educational resources available wasn't the solution because they wouldn't take the first step, no matter how simple.
PavlovsCat 13y ago
It's that they can't THINK. They do not understand what critical thinking is, or how it works. They do not know how to approach problems or explore solutions. http://arachnoid.com/lutusp/crashcourse.html http://arachnoid.com/lutusp/crashcourse.html
wisty 13y ago
> I'd teach them critical thinking, because it's really the only skill they need to learn Metacognition isn't really possible to teach. It doesn't really transfer. Everyone talks about how important it is that students "learn how to learn", but it's 99% bullshit which only refuses to die because people want it to be true. Now, there are a few things which work. A few examples from memory (it's worth googling a bit though, as I may be wrong): - Thinking of the brain as a "muscle", to encourage students to improve incrementally. (OK, this is new, and it's hard, but if you work on it you'll get much better with time). - Plan, Do, Check, Act. - Setting goals (maybe). - Picking out a small number of key ideas for any topic (typically 3, in English speaking countries - we like 3, I think Chinese speakers like 4 but there's nothing magic, it's just a cultural preference). But I'll reiterate - when people say "learn critical thinking", they often don't know exactly what they are talking about. Mostly, they mistake their own narrow expertise with "deep" thinking, when in reality their own "critical thinking" skills wouldn't get them very far in an army boot camp, or a chess club, or a debating team, or any other environment which they aren't already well adapted to. When most people say "learn critical thinking", they mean "get really good at it, like I am, so you don't get all bogged down by trivial details".

VMG 13y ago

> The problem isn't that these people can't use computers. It's that they can't THINK. How do you know? I presume that you believe that you have critical thinking skills and wouldn't make similar mistakes in other areas of life, but what is your evidence? You probably know how to use a computer, maybe even fix a car. But how can you know that you don't have similar blindspots when it comes to health, finance, relationships, education, things that are seemingly easy for some people but inexplicably hard for others? It's too easy to scoff at people being dumb by judging their computer skills on a site called Hacker News. Imagine the analogue article and discussion on a a site called "Fitness News".

codyb 13y ago
I think what he was trying to say is that when you've learned critical thinking as a skill you can apply it to anywhere. So, if he was on fitness news instead of saying "I'm not getting buff." He'd say, "Well, here's the work out plan based on X, Y, and Z, and I've been eating 4000 calories a day based on A, B, and C, and I've looked up this that and the other thing but I'm not having any luck still. Does anyone have any ideas or see where I've gone wrong?". I would agree with the original poster that a lot of people simply do not have great critical thinking skills. And it's certainly a skill. It's something which can be extracted and used in any area of life. Of course some people can develop a skill set and be able to critically think about something in particular with out being able to apply that knowledge to other areas of life, but if you can develop that skill set for all areas of life you'll be far better off.
- VMG 13y ago
  You are underestimating the power of knowledge. I've fixed computers for people who are much smarter then me and have a higher intelligence by every reasonable measure. The reason I can fix computers is that I know about things like DHCP, "The Registry" and BIOS, systems that have very little to do with logic and are only understandable by using them for decades.
  - codyb 13y ago
    Well yes, but that intelligent person probably at least tried something like restarting, checking if another website would open if their internet seemed down, turning their wifi on and off, etc. The DHCP, the registry, and bios certainly take a fair amount of time to learn about fully enough to understand and be able to work with. Not figuring out the monitor isn't turned on on the other hand.
nathas 13y ago
I respectfully disagree. The fundamental idea here is that some people learn how to learn, and others need to always be taught. Learning "huh, when I hit this switch my wifi turns on or off" is pretty simple. Some people need to be told, and even then it's just a rote mechanical process - no thought as to why, how, or even that the switch is connected to anything. It's all magic. I wanted to learn to lift even though I've never stepped foot in a gym. I did my research and bought the right books. I went into a gym and did exactly what I set out to do. I need to replace my windshield wipers. I look up the information for it - it's right next to the new blades in Walmart. Dead simple. I bet a lot of people go to Pepboys for that. It's as if the scientific method never existed, life is magic, and knowledge can only be gained by truly extraordinary humans.
- angersock 13y ago
  It's as if the scientific method never existed, life is magic, and knowledge can only be gained by truly extraordinary humans. That's exactly the problem with this. We get to support the idea that all humans are created equally and deserve the same rights and freedoms, or we get to have that mindset. It's a bad spot to be in.
  - icebraining 13y ago
    There's no such dichotomy; the other choice is, supporting the idea that humans are not all created equally, but still consider they deserve the same rights and freedoms. And I'd rather have a mass of idiots (which I don't think most people are) ruling than an elite of people who consider themselves superior to others. At least the former are less likely to successfully torment me for my own good.
    - angersock 13y ago
      "supporting the idea that humans are not all created equally, but still consider they deserve the same rights and freedoms." So, er, why? If you acknowledge that people aren't equally capable and endowed, what sort of sense does it make to place the same legal requirements on them? Why should I be required to see as far as somebody else when driving? Why should I be prevented from making API requests on a public system (when I know how to do so safely) when somebody less trained or malicious would bring on down time? It's far better simply to say that either everyone has the same capabilities, or to say that they ought be afforded benefits and restrictions that match their talents and deficiencies. Doing neither is unfair nonsensical from a societal standpoint. As for the mass of idiots, no. I'd rather have a ruling elite, because they presumably be reasoned with--or removed in favor of a better elite. A mass of morons weighs heavily upon us, especially in the disinformation age.

jonrx 13y ago

For your first sentence, I would rather say that they DON'T want to think when it comes to computer/maths/etc. "I don't like it, hence I'm not good at it." gives them an easy reason to avoid the problem.

Finster 13y ago

I pretty much agree with you, but I think the point is that focusing on technical education and incentivizing that learning (like the WPA2 key hidden in a 10,000 line text file) can help build critical thinking skills. If instead of putting the computers to the side, actually building positive learning experiences involving computers, the critical thinking will be a natural outgrowth of that, IMHO.

area51org 13y ago

Related, relevant issue: I know people — in Silicon Valley! — who are proud of the fact that their elementary schools (private) have no computers, and avoid the subject entirely. Apparently they believe computing too early will change, for the worse, a child's brain. I suspect it would do the opposite: help their children be better critical thinkers than their parents obviously are. You know, books change the way the mind works, too. That's bad. Better keep books out of the hands of children before their minds are warped.

BruceIV 13y ago
There are possible good reasons for this - I wouldn't give elementary students calculators, because they won't learn their math; similarly, in an educational environment (that's not teaching computing), computers are often more distracting than useful - the CS department at the university where I did my undergrad banned computers in first year lectures (not labs), because the students were playing games and browsing the web instead of paying attention in class; I think they made the right decision.
- area51org 13y ago
  Calculators are not computers, and no one who understands what a computer is would suggest that one would somehow prevent a student from learning. We're talking about basic computer skills here: mousing, menus, command line, and some introductory coding. Those aren't nice-to-haves; they're necessities for elementary school students. the students were playing games and browsing the web instead of paying attention in class Sure, understood, but that's a red herring here. I'm not suggesting we outfit a whole classroom of second graders with laptops so they can play Angry Birds. I'm suggesting that children need computer skills.
  - BruceIV 13y ago
    Fair, I agree - and I think that basic computer literacy should be taught in schools - my point was just that if the way to teach the children computer literacy is to give them laptops to use in every class (it's trendy these days), they'll find a way to play Angry Birds, and will learn neither computer literacy nor their other lessons.

300bps 13y ago

The problem isn't that these people can't use computers. It's that they can't THINK. I find it's more specific than and not as serious as that. I got my first computer in 1982, first modem in 1985 (hence my username). I find that people who proudly state how not-technical they are actually purposely turn their brain off around computers. It's not that they can't think. They can and often do around non-technical things. But they automatically assume they're unable to fix anything computer-related so they don't even try. My wife is a perfect example of that. If I hear, "Printer is not working" again I think I'm going to throw it out the window. The latest time, she unplugged the printer USB cable to plug in her iPhone and then called me to fix the printer. If this was a "can't think" problem, she would belong in a group home. Instead it's a "won't think about technical things" problem. I was one of those kids, and I would be so excited for them that I would bury them in whatever help they needed. I was one of those kids too. Only my computer teacher was in his first year of teaching computers, having been drafted from the math program because "computers use math". He was completely just learning about computers. He would ask me, "Is that right, 300bps?" after almost everything he taught the class. He ended up just having me do special projects doing things like creating math games on the Apple ][e.

demallien 13y ago
Hmmm, it's an interesting point. I think the reason people don't even try is because they recognize that they can't tell the difference between something that might take them 15 minutes of monkeying around to fix, and something that is beyond their competency. Worse, they are not sure that they won't make things when trying to fix the problem. I'm sure it must be similar to the feeling I get when I'm working on a new code base that I'm not familiar with, and I need to make a modification in a function so that it calls another module correctly for some new functionality. But I can't tell if that change isn't going to break something somewhere else, so making that change becomes quite scary. In the software development world, we handle this by creating suites of automatic tests that we can run after the change to make sure that what we just did doesn't break things. We also use config managent software so that we can back out any erroneous changes. These things aren't available to nontechnical users - they can't verify that they haven't broken anything, and if they have broken something, they may not be able to put things back the way they were. This pretty much guarantees that people won't experiment with their computer.

ctdonath 13y ago

There's a difference between can't and won't. This issue is the latter, as exemplified by the example where a kid was hitting OK so fast the actual error message couldn't be read. As a professor, I was astounded at how many students failed just because they wouldn't do the work. A large fraction were certainly capable of doing so (some spectacularly capable), but just...didn't. Having and increasing a vast array of educational resources available wasn't the solution because they wouldn't take the first step, no matter how simple.

PavlovsCat 13y ago

It's that they can't THINK. They do not understand what critical thinking is, or how it works. They do not know how to approach problems or explore solutions. http://arachnoid.com/lutusp/crashcourse.html http://arachnoid.com/lutusp/crashcourse.html

wisty 13y ago

> I'd teach them critical thinking, because it's really the only skill they need to learn Metacognition isn't really possible to teach. It doesn't really transfer. Everyone talks about how important it is that students "learn how to learn", but it's 99% bullshit which only refuses to die because people want it to be true. Now, there are a few things which work. A few examples from memory (it's worth googling a bit though, as I may be wrong): - Thinking of the brain as a "muscle", to encourage students to improve incrementally. (OK, this is new, and it's hard, but if you work on it you'll get much better with time). - Plan, Do, Check, Act. - Setting goals (maybe). - Picking out a small number of key ideas for any topic (typically 3, in English speaking countries - we like 3, I think Chinese speakers like 4 but there's nothing magic, it's just a cultural preference). But I'll reiterate - when people say "learn critical thinking", they often don't know exactly what they are talking about. Mostly, they mistake their own narrow expertise with "deep" thinking, when in reality their own "critical thinking" skills wouldn't get them very far in an army boot camp, or a chess club, or a debating team, or any other environment which they aren't already well adapted to. When most people say "learn critical thinking", they mean "get really good at it, like I am, so you don't get all bogged down by trivial details".