Knowing More By Knowing Less (or, How Do You Learn?)

October 16th, 2006

Remember when it was important to remember things?

This used to be so critical that education was (is?) based around learning to remember.

The game’s different now. The way we can learn has changed and if you’re still learning to remember then you don’t understand the biggest lesson of the past few years:

We can now know more by knowing less.

Knowing more by knowing less. If you don’t already realize this it’s because you’re wasting too much time remembering.

Our learning has been limited (forever) by what we can remember and this has impacted the structure of our world and ourselves. We’ve always known more by knowing more - with limits and forced tradeoffs introduced by finite brain space.

Traditionally brain space has been consumed by remembering; an evolved necessity borne from no other option. If you wanted to know you learned to remember.

However, technology, especially the internet, has destroyed the need to remember. We can, for the first time in history, truly know more by knowing less.

Things to think about:

- Memory doesn’t account for the evolution of knowledge. Technology frees us from referenced memory mistakes (and ‘me-vehn-se-nup’-like mnemonics).

- My only phoneline for 3 years has been a cellphone. I now know ~ zero phone numbers. Why would I?

- Remember trying to remember Black-Scholes? Why would anyone remember it now when in a second you can find over three million reference points?

- Do you know Dunbar’s number? I’m guessing you don’t. The number isn’t as important as understanding the concept well enough to articulate a compelling idea (of say, network growth).

Spend time learning how to use and how to understand the concept. That’s where the valuable learning occurs. There’s a big difference between learning to remember, learning to use, and learning to understand.

Here’s a simple illustration: The Pythagorean Theorem, a2 + b2 = c2. Everyone, including math dropouts, knows it. However, I bet many people don’t know how to solve for c and even less understand the concept well enough to know how to apply it to a problem.

It’s the aggregation of concepts where one can really extend their learning. An imagination filled with an understanding of concepts creates value in today’s world.

Learn to effectively use the tools that allow you to forget.

Free your mind to understand concepts.

Leverage concepts against each other.
Create value.

If you want to be blown away, considering the anecdote is true, give some thought to what a mind like Einstein’s could do if he had access to today’s tools that enable forgetfulness:

One of Einstein’s colleagues asked him for his telephone number one day. Einstein reached for a telephone directory and looked it up. “You don’t remember your own number?” the man asked, startled.”No,” Einstein answered. “Why should I memorize something I can so easily get from a book?”

Viewing 10 Comments

    • ^
    • v
    Working off of the einstein qutoe, you can take this further, though. Some things that appear very different from each other at first generalize down to the same things but different trimmings. Stuff like programming languages, for example. With a few exceptions (the biggest being LISP) once you have used about five or six programming languages, you realize that they are all basically the same except for syntax, and whether you have to use objects or not.

    I learned C# in about an hour because I didn't have to learn the language, just remember vaguely java-like syntax and class structures, and Intellisense has all the class libraries at the end of my tab key. Perl I never remember the syntax for because it's all in perldoc and the libraries in CPAN.

    Then again, you might have to be a good programmer for all of this to work out, but I don't really think so. If you can't learn six languages you probably aren't a good programmer to start with.
    • ^
    • v
    Working off of the einstein qutoe, you can take this further, though. Some things that appear very different from each other at first generalize down to the same things but different trimmings. Stuff like programming languages, for example. With a few exceptions (the biggest being LISP) once you have used about five or six programming languages, you realize that they are all basically the same except for syntax, and whether you have to use objects or not. I learned C# in about an hour because I didn't have to learn the language, just remember vaguely java-like syntax and class structures, and Intellisense has all the class libraries at the end of my tab key. Perl I never remember the syntax for because it's all in perldoc and the libraries in CPAN. Then again, you might have to be a good programmer for all of this to work out, but I don't really think so. If you can't learn six languages you probably aren't a good programmer to start with.
    • ^
    • v
    Very interesting post Fraser. I have thought the same thing for a while now but more on the subconscious level. Now that you bring it to the surface it makes complete sense.
    • ^
    • v
    I can see how the two, proposition and prescriptive, feed each other in a loop.

    For me, ideas seem to grow at some network growth rate connected to knowledge/experience (definitely not following Reed's law, but that would be nice!).

    Assume the mix of propositional knowledge and prescriptive knowledge sit as nodes on my knowledge network - the freely formed connections between the nodes (leveraging an understanding of a concept in one area to seemingly disconnected disciplines) is where I see myself creating the most value as a result from learning.

    The fact that you can find facts in seconds to flesh out the connection your knowledge network creates is the reason I think it's important to forget (as well as remember how to use the tools that enable forgetfulness)
    • ^
    • v
    Very interesting post Fraser. I have thought the same thing for a while now but more on the subconscious level. Now that you bring it to the surface it makes complete sense.
    • ^
    • v
    "Mokyr begins by dividing useful knowledge into two categories: “propositional knowledge” and “prescriptive knowledge”. Propositional knowledge is general, theoretical knowledge—for example, knowledge of the properties and effects of atmospheric pressure or knowledge of the theory of flight. Prescriptive knowledge is knowledge of technique—for example, how to build a steam engine or how to build a jet plane. According to Mokyr, economic growth springs in large part from institutions and norms that encourage an active, rational search for propositional knowledge and the use of such knowledge for the discovery of prescriptive knowledge."

    http://www.independent.org/publications/tir/art...

    “The driving force behind progress was not just that more was known, but also that institutions and culture collaborated to create better and cheaper access to the knowledge base”

    [looks like a great read, I'm going to order it online - thanks for the pointer]
    • ^
    • v
    I can see how the two, proposition and prescriptive, feed each other in a loop. For me, ideas seem to grow at some network growth rate connected to knowledge/experience (definitely not following Reed's law, but that would be nice!). Assume the mix of propositional knowledge and prescriptive knowledge sit as nodes on my knowledge network - the freely formed connections between the nodes (leveraging an understanding of a concept in one area to seemingly disconnected disciplines) is where I see myself creating the most value as a result from learning. The fact that you can find facts in seconds to flesh out the connection your knowledge network creates is the reason I think it's important to forget (as well as remember how to use the tools that enable forgetfulness)
    • ^
    • v
    "Mokyr begins by dividing useful knowledge into two categories: “propositional knowledge” and “prescriptive knowledge”. Propositional knowledge is general, theoretical knowledge—for example, knowledge of the properties and effects of atmospheric pressure or knowledge of the theory of flight. Prescriptive knowledge is knowledge of technique—for example, how to build a steam engine or how to build a jet plane. According to Mokyr, economic growth springs in large part from institutions and norms that encourage an active, rational search for propositional knowledge and the use of such knowledge for the discovery of prescriptive knowledge."http://www.independent.org/publications/tir/artic... “The driving force behind progress was not just that more was known, but also that institutions and culture collaborated to create better and cheaper access to the knowledge base” [looks like a great read, I'm going to order it online - thanks for the pointer]
    • ^
    • v
    The physicist in me likes the idea of focusing on reusable prescriptive knowledge. However, an interesting feedback mechanism exists between the more mundane propositional knowledge and the prescriptive stuff. Joel Mokyr does a great job explaining how these feed each other in his book "The Gifts of Athena". For me, the more experience and knowledge I gain, the more hangars I have for new stuff.
    • ^
    • v
    The physicist in me likes the idea of focusing on reusable prescriptive knowledge. However, an interesting feedback mechanism exists between the more mundane propositional knowledge and the prescriptive stuff. Joel Mokyr does a great job explaining how these feed each other in his book "The Gifts of Athena". For me, the more experience and knowledge I gain, the more hangars I have for new stuff.
 
close Reblog this comment
Powered by Disqus · Learn more
blog comments powered by Disqus

What's this?

You are currently reading Knowing More By Knowing Less (or, How Do You Learn?) at Disruptive Thoughts.

meta