Understanding is not what it is

  • But what it has to be.
    • When we explain some phenomenon, even to ourselves, usually we are describing the things the way they are, instead of looking a different direction.
    • As some said, look not the way the arrow points.
    • Understanding is the process of matching certain phenomenon or theory of problem to an explanation.
      • Common caveat is that we tend to fall to description, though it’s not understanding.
    • Understanding happens when, through what we see, we know what must be.
  • There are two types of understanding.
    • Strong.
      • Deductive inference. Where one of the premises is:
        • A common evaluation: Tragedy must invoke a catharsis.
        • Another one is a statement about initial condition: Shakespeare’s play “Hamlet” is a tragedy.
        • In a conclusion, common evaluation spread over a special case, thus getting to understanding why certain object must have certain qualities.
    • Weak.
      • Plausible inference.
        • The first premise speaks about means that are needed to get a result: If we start a fire in the house, then it will be warm.
        • The second premise is an opinion statement, that presents the result as a goal and in the process changes cause and effect into goal – mean: A home must be warm.
        • In a conclusion, this type of understanding describes the action which is required to achieve the goal.
        • Weak understanding is a goal-oriented understanding.
    • Beware of weak understanding because it doesn’t have long-standing resilience to changing conditions and different environments.
      • Common mistake in habits verbalization is the same, we tend to set a goal, which is good in a short run, but bad for lifelong habits.
      • The same could be stated about a goal in [[Logical thinking tools in Jedi]], it mustn’t be a weak understanding, but to be fulfilled it has to be a strong one.

Оставить комментарий

Ваш адрес email не будет опубликован. Обязательные поля помечены *