Difference between revisions of "Learning from scattered resources"

From Learning
Jump to: navigation, search
 
Line 14: Line 14:
 
* the identities of the people giving the info are numerous and difficult to verify, so one must rely on one's assessment of the object-level details (as well as cues like grammar and punctuation)
 
* the identities of the people giving the info are numerous and difficult to verify, so one must rely on one's assessment of the object-level details (as well as cues like grammar and punctuation)
 
* many topics are not explained well, and have to be pieced together by the [[learner]]
 
* many topics are not explained well, and have to be pieced together by the [[learner]]
* there can exist a "grapevine" or various private discussions where people give frank thoughts, in contrast to the public discussions
+
* there can exist a "grapevine" or various private discussions where people give frank thoughts, in contrast to the public discussions (note: even in more established disciplines this happens, e.g. search "secret paper passing network")
  
 
==References==
 
==References==
  
 
<references/>
 
<references/>

Latest revision as of 04:18, 14 February 2019

By learning from scattered resources I mean the kind of learning that effective altruists or rationalists do to catch up on the state-of-the-art in EA/rationalist thinking, or the kind of learning that Duncan Sabien mentions of how he learned parkour: "Speaking as someone who pieced together the discipline of parkour back in 2003, from scattered terrible videos (pre Youtube) and a few internet comment boards—pulling together a cohesive and working practice from even the best writeups is a tremendously difficult task."[1]

This kind of learning, where one (1) actively goes searching for many resources (each of which contains only a small amount of information) and (2) receives relatively little feedback from people who know about the topic, seems different from the kind of learning that happens in other situations:

  • in school or apprenticeships, there is usually a teacher/mentor or textbook that contains the vast majority of the information that is to be learned
  • when learning on the job, there are again coworkers/bosses, but also there's constant feedback on job performance

I think maybe a lot of learning that happens in various subcultures is like this. As of 2019, I think learning how to use spaced repetition software is like this.

Various tricky things that can happen in this kind of learning:

  • there are multiple people giving little bits of info, and different people can have different opinions and can contradict each other
  • depending on the discipline, the majority of the people can be untrustworthy or unreliable in other ways
  • the identities of the people giving the info are numerous and difficult to verify, so one must rely on one's assessment of the object-level details (as well as cues like grammar and punctuation)
  • many topics are not explained well, and have to be pieced together by the learner
  • there can exist a "grapevine" or various private discussions where people give frank thoughts, in contrast to the public discussions (note: even in more established disciplines this happens, e.g. search "secret paper passing network")

References