Share my “Learning Pyramid”
Editor’s note: This article comes from WeChat public account “Mr. L said” (ID: lxianshengmiao), by Lachel.
I have written many articles related to learning before , But most of them focus on a certain point, lack of systemic.
Today, I want to briefly sort out the problem of “learning” through this detailed article.
Of course, this is a huge topic. I have the opportunity to add it later to form a whole series about learning.
I hope to help you.
1. Framework
A lot of readers and friends have asked me, “I just started a field, I do n’t understand anything, how to learn?” My answer is always the same:
Be sure to start with a framework.
What is a frame? In short, it is to pave the way for your brain to prepare it and tell it: in the coming days, we will absorb a lot of knowledge in this field, please be prepared to understand and store them.
For example: When you are writing a planning plan or report, do you first have an overall idea and outline it: what I write first, then what, and finally what-next Just start doing it?
Learning is the same. Without a framework, all the knowledge you get is just fragmented information. They will be lonelyFloating in the memory at zero, it is difficult to exist firmly, and it is difficult to be called, organized and integrated by you.
So, how to build a framework to make our learning more systematic?
The method I suggest is to search for related classic textbooks in this field, about 3-5 books. Then read it again-without intensive reading, it takes too much time. Roughly read it, read it through, and you’re good.
In the process, you need to think and answer these three questions:
-
What: What is the subject of this field? What are the main schools and branches? What are the common terms?
-
Why: What is the significance of this field? To solve what problem? Where is it going now?
-
How: What is the main method in this area? What are the basic results that are widely recognized and applied?
For example. Many readers ask “How to Get Started with Psychology”, and I always recommend several large books, such as “Psychology and Life”, “Social Psychology”, “Cognitive Psychology”. Many people will start to retreat when they see it:
“Hundreds of pages, when will it be finished, at least one year …”
Do you actually need to read them page by page? Of course it is not needed, and it is not necessary. You first read the first two chapters, you have a preliminary understanding of their origins, and then you can roughly go through the other chapters to understand the branches of psychology, what are they studying, and what are the main results so far; then focus on the bold, Or terms at the end of the chapter, roughly understand their meaning. That’s it.
For another example, to study philosophy, you do n’t need to go through the Big Questions and Introduction to Western Philosophy. What you have to do is to read it through as a whole. Understanding the origin of philosophy is the doubt of nature. The issues of concern are ontology, epistemology, and ethics, which can be broadly divided into ancient Greek philosophy, classic philosophy, modern philosophy, and modern philosophy. What are the characteristics of each stage-for example, modern philosophy was influenced by the Renaissance and Enlightenment, The core of speculation shifted from religion to humanities, began to introduce mature logic, science, began to diversify, and so on-just fine.
What are you doing at this stage? It’s a broad-based view, and builds a picture in my heart. Don’t limit yourself to the “author’s context”, but focus on the picture in your heart, and make up what you lack.
In psychology, this is called “Schema” . It is the foundation on which we perceive and understand things.
For example: you have finished a book, and you know that one of the problems of philosophical research isEpistemology. But you don’t know what epistemology is. Then turn to the relevant part and read it a few more times, or integrate all the epistemology mentioned in the book. You don’t need to dig into what each concept means and how each conclusion is derived. You only need to know what it means.
The first task at this stage is to complete this picture. Once the picture is successfully established, it will play a pivotal role in your future learning.
2. Concepts
After building the framework, all you have to do is refine it and complement it.
During the process of building the framework, you will definitely come across many terms and concepts, staying at the level of “seems to understand but not understand”, and there may be deviations. Well, it’s time to conquer them.
At this stage, the method you want to take is not limited to classic textbooks, but to search extensively.
For example, when you study philosophy, you see a term called “materials”. You turn it over and find that it comes from Aristotle, but it is not detailed in the book because of space. Then, you have to search for the term yourself and find a way to get it through and understood.
For example, you can go to Aristotle’s introduction to philosophy, read it, go to the relevant part, and try to understand its exact meaning. You can find books, you can search on the Internet, you can watch open classes … not restricted to all forms.
What you have to do is: Quickly locate the concept you are in doubt and use as much information as possible to overcome it.
During this process, you will most likely come across new concepts. Then, you may wish to continue to follow the vine and follow the “materials” to include all relevant concepts and understand them together.
A common confusion for many friends is: How do I control this “degree”? How do you prevent yourself from continuously extending and jumping into the new “concept ocean”?
My suggestion is to ask myself in my heart at all times: “Can I explain this concept clearly in my own words? ” If you can, and it does not involve The new concept shows that it is time to stop.
For example: following “Material”, you may see “Material-Form”, skip to “Four Causes” … here you are. Going further, it has nothing to do with “materials”.
Always remember what your purpose is. Purpose-oriented, set yourself a “boundary.”
Once you think you understand a concept enough, put it back into the framework and try to explain it in your own words to see if it is smooth and reasonable. If so, that’s fine, keep looking for the next concept, and so on.
Slowly, when these concepts become clear, your wholeThis framework is even more accurate.
3. Network
At this point, you are officially starting.
After the framework construction and concept clarification, you will find that what you did n’t understand before seems to be able to understand it roughly; where you took it for granted, it turned out that your own understanding was not accurate enough; there also seemed to be vague problems Some thoughts out.
So, at this stage, you can take the following question to read, listen to, and learn.
What’s the problem? Always with the idea of ”connection”, always thinking: What did I learn? What other knowledge points can it be linked to? How do you build this connection?
This is the core of learning: The essence of knowledge is never the information itself, but the connection between the information.
It is this connection that brings out “systematic” beyond the sum of individual information points.
How do you think about “connection”? My own commonly used method is to treat each knowledge point as a “knowledge element”, which has three synapses, which are what, why and how.
-
What: topic, structure, category
-
Why: Principle, cause, origin
-
How: application, interpretation, results
For example. You read Descartes’ “I think, therefore I am”, and you find that he is explaining “ego”-then, you can associate it with “ego”.
After a while, you may read Daniel Dennett’s “Multi-Draft Model”, and you will find that he has proposed a new concept of “self” from the perspective of brain science. Well, it is also connected with “self”.
At this time, you will find that there is some connection between “self”, “I think, therefore I am” and “multi-draft model”. What connection? Obviously, the latter is refuting the former and proposes a non-physical, distributed “self”. Then you can establish a new connection between the two.
Further, you can also think: why are there such differences in their views? If you put Descartes back into the “frame” that was established earlier, it is not difficult to find the foundation of his thought from religion and ontology: his mind-body dualism is essentially a reconciliation of religion and science-then, you You can start from why and extendgo with.
Similarly, the theory of Daniel Dennett can be extended to brain science and cognitive science starting from why.
Like this, the vast and numerous concept nodes can be combined to form a network. A huge network covering a wide range of disciplines and fields, from the bottom and the surface.
This is your system of knowledge.
4. Themes
In the above example, what would happen if we focused on the concept of “self”?
You may think of “I think, therefore I am”, think of “Multiple Drafts”, think of Hume’s “self is just a collection of a series of impressions” … these nodes embedded in your knowledge network will all show up Into your field of vision.
So, let’s think about it: how can these different people and different perspectives be integrated around this theme?
What is their development context? What is the relationship between each other? Why do these differences and common points occur?
This is the “theme”- Focusing on a detail in our vast knowledge network, to come up with a “local network.”
I like the Brain loopholes: How did you get narrow and stubborn? The content written in , “Facts → Conclusions → Concepts → Beliefs” is a local network formed by the theme of “prejudice” in my knowledge network.
Any book mentions this process directly? Has any book proposed the terms “oversimplification” and “isolated memory”? Actually not.
They are not inherent knowledge in psychology. It is the result of refining, summarizing, summarizing, and giving it a name around the core of “bias”.
Similarly, is “confirmation bias” and “information cocoon room” the same domain of knowledge? Actually not. The former is psychologicalThe latter belongs to communication. But it doesn’t matter. Under the theme of “bias,” they complement each other.
This is the power of “theme.” Around a theme, you can refine a complex and abstract process into a new node; you can also put together knowledge points in different fields and summarize them based on their internal similarities and commonalities. New, higher-level conclusions.
Make an analogy. If the knowledge network is like a house, then “theme” is all kinds of activities you can carry out in this house: party, work, eating, watching movies, and so on.
These themes constitute our perception of the world.
5. Migration
Finally speaking about migration.
If the first four points all belong to the “accumulation of knowledge”, then here you have officially entered the “application of knowledge”.
What is migration? What it means is: Migrate old and known laws and patterns to new problems and situations.
What’s most important at this stage? It is the ability to understand and disassemble external situations.
Like this question: The museum is on fire. Should you save a famous painting or a cat? —— When you see this problem, you should think about its essence through appearance:
What is the essence of this question? It’s a dilemma.
What’s the dilemma? On one end is value (famous painting) and on the other is morality (life).
So, you may find out: what is its essence? In fact, it is just a variant of the “tram problem” that has been talked about.
Further, when we face the dilemma of morality and value, how should we think about it? Let us turn to ethics.
Ethics has two perspectives, namely teleology and obligation theory. The former focuses on the “utility” and “value” of things, while the latter focuses on the motivation and behavior of behavior. As long as the starting point is good, behavior is good.
Obviously, when we transfer the knowledge of ethics, we will know that there is no answer to this dilemma. But through this kind of problem, what we can do is to reflect on our own positions and ideas.
For example, if you are a utilitarian, then think about it: can you really accept that a life disappears in front of you? You are an obligator, so why not think about your actions from the heart? Will it be affected and interfered by the outside world?
Of course, if you use other knowledge to transfer, you may draw other conclusions.
This is a migration. Specifically,Just three steps:
1) When accumulating knowledge in the first four steps, reserve an “interface” for the knowledge (refer to how to synapse the fourth point)
2) When encountering a new situation or problem, find out the core behind it by disassembling the problem.
3) Compare the core of the problem with the “interface” and use the existing knowledge to apply it to the new problem.
Similarly, if you are learning programming, what is the most important step? It is to “disassemble” the effects you want to achieve, describe them in a process and mode that the computer can understand, and then use the accumulated programming knowledge to “call” the existing knowledge to solve the problem.
For example. If I want to do a small one-to-one match in a group of people, how can I solve this problem?
Think, what’s the ultimate goal? It is to match similar people as much as possible. So how do you make computers understand “similar”? We know that computers don’t understand languages, they can only understand numbers. Therefore, we can only achieve “similarity” through numbers.
So, a simple idea is: we define several categories in advance, and then let the participating people make a questionnaire, and assign them to different categories based on the results of the questionnaire (post a 1, 2, 3 … tags), and then randomly selected in the same category.
Further, you will find that this is actually similar to the algorithm of the recommendation system. It’s just that the input of the recommendation algorithm has been replaced with various user behavior data, and the algorithm is much more complicated.
In short, combined with these examples, what are our ways to “migrate”?
1) Analogy. You can think about it, which old problems are similar to what we already know, and can be imitated and analogized.
2) Black box. Think of this problem as a black box and think about: what is its input and what is its output.
3) Abstraction. Why not remove the specific situation, try to generalize and abstract it, and refine its structure and skeleton, thinking, what kind of problem is it essentially?
6. Model
When you enter the “migration” phase, the next step is to keep practicing. Keep finding and discovering new situations, practice disassembly and migration.
During this process, you may slowly find out:
In fact, there are some commonalities between many new issues. Although they are different, they can all be migrated using the same set of knowledge models.
At this point, you have created a “model”.
This is also a capability that many people lack. They may know how to migrate, and they also have a lot of practice, but what they lack is the ability to summarize and abstract the “model” from a high-level summary of their experience in solving problems.
Many of what we call “experts” and “smart people” are actually better than us, and that’s exactly what they do: their advantage is not in the knowledge reserve-those are static. Their strength is that they have a large accumulation of “models”.
You will find that when faced with a new problem, they can always disassemble it quickly and call relevant knowledge to solve it-this is what the model does.
For example, in the example “Save Painting or Save Cat” in the fifth point, the wording used is “such problems”-this is actually a “model”.
For another example, I mentioned the “dynamic-resistance” model many times in previous articles. Is there any book on this model mentioned? Actually not. It’s completely original to me.
However, through this model, I can condense a lot of relevant knowledge to deal with a series of problems related to decision-making, behavior, habits, policies, etc., to think about them better and solve them.
I often say that we should strive to create our own methodology. The model is its own methodology. All your knowledge is already existing and known in this world. Only these concentrated “models” obtained through your experience and practice are truly your own wealth.
You will find that the model is very similar to the theme. What is the difference between them? The topic is internal, a series of “explanations” that you develop around a node in the knowledge network; the model is external, and it is the result of transferring the topic to a series of situations.
In short, the essence of the model is the theme + context; the theme focuses on “why”, and the model focuses on “how to do it.”
When you can get through the first five layers and look at new problems and solve new problems from the perspective of a model, you have already entered the “professional” field.
7. Update
The last layer is update.
Learning is endless. A framework is built, a knowledge network is built, and it is always “the past”. But human knowledge is constantly evolving. You must always update it, update old nodes, and update the connections between nodes to keep your knowledge network alive.
How do I update it? Here is the role of fragmentation information. In my life, I will go to various websites, blogs, and magazines, read short articles that focus on a certain point, and use the latest conclusions and opinions to cover and correct my old opinions.
Similarly, in life, if my old ideas are challenged and questioned, I will also think of ways”Find consensus”, find the shortcomings and shortcomings of your own point of view (positive), and integrate (opposite) the views of the other party to achieve a higher level of “combination.”
This is a process of constantly updating the knowledge base and constantly upgrading the brain operating system.
But many people at this level are also particularly prone to a problem: a closed mind.
Many people take different views as an attack on themselves, so they subconsciously activate a defense mechanism to maintain their correctness and stability.
(specific mechanism, I The loophole in the brain: how did you go narrow and stubborn? It’s written very clearly)
Remember: Only an open mind can keep us alive.
When your heart becomes closed and you close the door to acceptance and consensus, you are truly “old”.
Finally, a few common questions are asked.
1) Some people may think “I don’t seem to have a frame.” In fact, a framework must exist. The reason you feel “no frame” is simply because it was not realized by you.
But what could easily happen? The framework is incomplete, inaccurate and fragmented. As a result, your reception and storage of new knowledge is also broken.
So, “explicitly” your own framework is also a very important ability.
2) This theory is applicable to most studies. It’s just that for different areas of learning, the proportion of each level will be different.
For example, the proportion of theoretical knowledge areas (such as philosophy, history, art), frame-concept-network-theme may be heavier; and the practice-skilled knowledge areas (such as programming), framework -Concept, migration- The proportion of the model will be larger.
3) What is the problem for most people? BeingDynamic learning.
What do you mean? Open a book, see the end from the beginning, and busy thinking about “what the author said” and “what is the structure of the book”, take it all; listen to a course, busy sort out the structure and context of the course, and then remember And recite …
Is this useful? Maybe there is, but not much. You are just copying the minds of others. No matter how much you learn, you are just repeating it. It is difficult to really “use” it.
Don’t think that following others is a shortcut. There are no shortcuts to learning.
4) Many people will be confused in the first few layers: But how do I know if the framework I have built and the concepts I understand are correct? What if it’s wrong?
You don’t have to worry too much. On the one hand, the construction of the framework and the understanding of the concepts do not originate from speculation-you have to consult the data to overcome them. This can ensure that no deviation in directionality occurs.
On the other hand, this is a robust system. The framework and concept are combined together and interact with each other. If the deviation is too large, then this framework must have inherent contradictions and it is easy to find out by us.
Finally, there is no need to pursue 100% correctness, which is neither necessary nor possible. The key is to keep an open mind, and to check and update your knowledge at all times in subsequent studies. That’s it.
What we want to pursue is never “absolutely correct”, but “better than our past self.”
Finally, look back at this picture.
It will be 2020 soon. Hope to inject some momentum into your new year.
New year, come on. 🙂
What: What is the subject of this field? What are the main schools and branches? What are the common terms?
Why: What is the significance of this field? To solve what problem? Where is it going now?
How: What is the main method in this area? What are the basic results that are widely recognized and applied?
For example. Many readers ask “How to Get Started with Psychology”, and I always recommend several large books, such as “Psychology and Life”, “Social Psychology”, “Cognitive Psychology”. Many people will start to retreat when they see it:
“Hundreds of pages, when will it be finished, at least one year …”
Do you actually need to read them page by page? Of course it is not needed, and it is not necessary. You first read the first two chapters, you have a preliminary understanding of their origins, and then you can roughly go through the other chapters to understand the branches of psychology, what are they studying, and what are the main results so far; then focus on the bold, Or terms at the end of the chapter, roughly understand their meaning. That’s it.
For another example, to study philosophy, you do n’t need to go through the Big Questions and Introduction to Western Philosophy. What you have to do is to read it through as a whole. Understanding the origin of philosophy is the doubt of nature. The issues of concern are ontology, epistemology, and ethics, which can be broadly divided into ancient Greek philosophy, classic philosophy, modern philosophy, and modern philosophy. What are the characteristics of each stage-for example, modern philosophy was influenced by the Renaissance and Enlightenment, The core of speculation shifted from religion to humanities, began to introduce mature logic, science, began to diversify, and so on-just fine.
What are you doing at this stage? It’s a broad-based view, and builds a picture in my heart. Don’t limit yourself to the “author’s context”, but focus on the picture in your heart, and make up what you lack.
In psychology, this is called “Schema” . It is the foundation on which we perceive and understand things.
For example: you have finished a book, and you know that one of the problems of philosophical research isEpistemology. But you don’t know what epistemology is. Then turn to the relevant part and read it a few more times, or integrate all the epistemology mentioned in the book. You don’t need to dig into what each concept means and how each conclusion is derived. You only need to know what it means.
The first task at this stage is to complete this picture. Once the picture is successfully established, it will play a pivotal role in your future learning.
2. Concepts
After building the framework, all you have to do is refine it and complement it.
During the process of building the framework, you will definitely come across many terms and concepts, staying at the level of “seems to understand but not understand”, and there may be deviations. Well, it’s time to conquer them.
At this stage, the method you want to take is not limited to classic textbooks, but to search extensively.
For example, when you study philosophy, you see a term called “materials”. You turn it over and find that it comes from Aristotle, but it is not detailed in the book because of space. Then, you have to search for the term yourself and find a way to get it through and understood.
For example, you can go to Aristotle’s introduction to philosophy, read it, go to the relevant part, and try to understand its exact meaning. You can find books, you can search on the Internet, you can watch open classes … not restricted to all forms.
What you have to do is: Quickly locate the concept you are in doubt and use as much information as possible to overcome it.
During this process, you will most likely come across new concepts. Then, you may wish to continue to follow the vine and follow the “materials” to include all relevant concepts and understand them together.
A common confusion for many friends is: How do I control this “degree”? How do you prevent yourself from continuously extending and jumping into the new “concept ocean”?
My suggestion is to ask myself in my heart at all times: “Can I explain this concept clearly in my own words? ” If you can, and it does not involve The new concept shows that it is time to stop.
For example: following “Material”, you may see “Material-Form”, skip to “Four Causes” … here you are. Going further, it has nothing to do with “materials”.
Always remember what your purpose is. Purpose-oriented, set yourself a “boundary.”
Once you think you understand a concept enough, put it back into the framework and try to explain it in your own words to see if it is smooth and reasonable. If so, that’s fine, keep looking for the next concept, and so on.
Slowly, when these concepts become clear, your wholeThis framework is even more accurate.
3. Network
At this point, you are officially starting.
After the framework construction and concept clarification, you will find that what you did n’t understand before seems to be able to understand it roughly; where you took it for granted, it turned out that your own understanding was not accurate enough; there also seemed to be vague problems Some thoughts out.
So, at this stage, you can take the following question to read, listen to, and learn.
What’s the problem? Always with the idea of ”connection”, always thinking: What did I learn? What other knowledge points can it be linked to? How do you build this connection?
This is the core of learning: The essence of knowledge is never the information itself, but the connection between the information.
It is this connection that brings out “systematic” beyond the sum of individual information points.
How do you think about “connection”? My own commonly used method is to treat each knowledge point as a “knowledge element”, which has three synapses, which are what, why and how.
-
What: topic, structure, category
-
Why: Principle, cause, origin
-
How: application, interpretation, results
For example. You read Descartes’ “I think, therefore I am”, and you find that he is explaining “ego”-then, you can associate it with “ego”.
After a while, you may read Daniel Dennett’s “Multi-Draft Model”, and you will find that he has proposed a new concept of “self” from the perspective of brain science. Well, it is also connected with “self”.
At this time, you will find that there is some connection between “self”, “I think, therefore I am” and “multi-draft model”. What connection? Obviously, the latter is refuting the former and proposes a non-physical, distributed “self”. Then you can establish a new connection between the two.
Further, you can also think: why are there such differences in their views? If you put Descartes back into the “frame” that was established earlier, it is not difficult to find the foundation of his thought from religion and ontology: his mind-body dualism is essentially a reconciliation of religion and science-then, you You can start from why and extendgo with.
Similarly, the theory of Daniel Dennett can be extended to brain science and cognitive science starting from why.
Like this, the vast and numerous concept nodes can be combined to form a network. A huge network covering a wide range of disciplines and fields, from the bottom and the surface.
This is your system of knowledge.
4. Themes
In the above example, what would happen if we focused on the concept of “self”?
You may think of “I think, therefore I am”, think of “Multiple Drafts”, think of Hume’s “self is just a collection of a series of impressions” … these nodes embedded in your knowledge network will all show up Into your field of vision.
So, let’s think about it: how can these different people and different perspectives be integrated around this theme?
What is their development context? What is the relationship between each other? Why do these differences and common points occur?
This is the “theme”- Focusing on a detail in our vast knowledge network, to come up with a “local network.”
I like the Brain loopholes: How did you get narrow and stubborn? The content written in , “Facts → Conclusions → Concepts → Beliefs” is a local network formed by the theme of “prejudice” in my knowledge network.
Any book mentions this process directly? Has any book proposed the terms “oversimplification” and “isolated memory”? Actually not.
They are not inherent knowledge in psychology. It is the result of refining, summarizing, summarizing, and giving it a name around the core of “bias”.
Similarly, is “confirmation bias” and “information cocoon room” the same domain of knowledge? Actually not. The former is psychologicalThe latter belongs to communication. But it doesn’t matter. Under the theme of “bias,” they complement each other.
This is the power of “theme.” Around a theme, you can refine a complex and abstract process into a new node; you can also put together knowledge points in different fields and summarize them based on their internal similarities and commonalities. New, higher-level conclusions.
Make an analogy. If the knowledge network is like a house, then “theme” is all kinds of activities you can carry out in this house: party, work, eating, watching movies, and so on.
These themes constitute our perception of the world.
5. Migration
Finally speaking about migration.
If the first four points all belong to the “accumulation of knowledge”, then here you have officially entered the “application of knowledge”.
What is migration? What it means is: Migrate old and known laws and patterns to new problems and situations.
What’s most important at this stage? It is the ability to understand and disassemble external situations.
Like this question: The museum is on fire. Should you save a famous painting or a cat? —— When you see this problem, you should think about its essence through appearance:
What is the essence of this question? It’s a dilemma.
What’s the dilemma? On one end is value (famous painting) and on the other is morality (life).
So, you may find out: what is its essence? In fact, it is just a variant of the “tram problem” that has been talked about.
Further, when we face the dilemma of morality and value, how should we think about it? Let us turn to ethics.
Ethics has two perspectives, namely teleology and obligation theory. The former focuses on the “utility” and “value” of things, while the latter focuses on the motivation and behavior of behavior. As long as the starting point is good, behavior is good.
Obviously, when we transfer the knowledge of ethics, we will know that there is no answer to this dilemma. But through this kind of problem, what we can do is to reflect on our own positions and ideas.
For example, if you are a utilitarian, then think about it: can you really accept that a life disappears in front of you? You are an obligator, so why not think about your actions from the heart? Will it be affected and interfered by the outside world?
Of course, if you use other knowledge to transfer, you may draw other conclusions.
This is a migration. Specifically,Just three steps:
1) When accumulating knowledge in the first four steps, reserve an “interface” for the knowledge (refer to how to synapse the fourth point)
2) When encountering a new situation or problem, find out the core behind it by disassembling the problem.
3) Compare the core of the problem with the “interface” and use the existing knowledge to apply it to the new problem.
Similarly, if you are learning programming, what is the most important step? It is to “disassemble” the effects you want to achieve, describe them in a process and mode that the computer can understand, and then use the accumulated programming knowledge to “call” the existing knowledge to solve the problem.
For example. If I want to do a small one-to-one match in a group of people, how can I solve this problem?
Think, what’s the ultimate goal? It is to match similar people as much as possible. So how do you make computers understand “similar”? We know that computers don’t understand languages, they can only understand numbers. Therefore, we can only achieve “similarity” through numbers.
So, a simple idea is: we define several categories in advance, and then let the participating people make a questionnaire, and assign them to different categories based on the results of the questionnaire (post a 1, 2, 3 … tags), and then randomly selected in the same category.
Further, you will find that this is actually similar to the algorithm of the recommendation system. It’s just that the input of the recommendation algorithm has been replaced with various user behavior data, and the algorithm is much more complicated.
In short, combined with these examples, what are our ways to “migrate”?
1) Analogy. You can think about it, which old problems are similar to what we already know, and can be imitated and analogized.
2) Black box. Think of this problem as a black box and think about: what is its input and what is its output.
3) Abstraction. Why not remove the specific situation, try to generalize and abstract it, and refine its structure and skeleton, thinking, what kind of problem is it essentially?
6. Model
When you enter the “migration” phase, the next step is to keep practicing. Keep finding and discovering new situations, practice disassembly and migration.
During this process, you may slowly find out:
In fact, there are some commonalities between many new issues. Although they are different, they can all be migrated using the same set of knowledge models.
At this point, you have created a “model”.
This is also a capability that many people lack. They may know how to migrate, and they also have a lot of practice, but what they lack is the ability to summarize and abstract the “model” from a high-level summary of their experience in solving problems.
Many of what we call “experts” and “smart people” are actually better than us, and that’s exactly what they do: their advantage is not in the knowledge reserve-those are static. Their strength is that they have a large accumulation of “models”.
You will find that when faced with a new problem, they can always disassemble it quickly and call relevant knowledge to solve it-this is what the model does.
For example, in the example “Save Painting or Save Cat” in the fifth point, the wording used is “such problems”-this is actually a “model”.
For another example, I mentioned the “dynamic-resistance” model many times in previous articles. Is there any book on this model mentioned? Actually not. It’s completely original to me.
However, through this model, I can condense a lot of relevant knowledge to deal with a series of problems related to decision-making, behavior, habits, policies, etc., to think about them better and solve them.
I often say that we should strive to create our own methodology. The model is its own methodology. All your knowledge is already existing and known in this world. Only these concentrated “models” obtained through your experience and practice are truly your own wealth.
You will find that the model is very similar to the theme. What is the difference between them? The topic is internal, a series of “explanations” that you develop around a node in the knowledge network; the model is external, and it is the result of transferring the topic to a series of situations.
In short, the essence of the model is the theme + context; the theme focuses on “why”, and the model focuses on “how to do it.”
When you can get through the first five layers and look at new problems and solve new problems from the perspective of a model, you have already entered the “professional” field.
7. Update
The last layer is update.
Learning is endless. A framework is built, a knowledge network is built, and it is always “the past”. But human knowledge is constantly evolving. You must always update it, update old nodes, and update the connections between nodes to keep your knowledge network alive.
How do I update it? Here is the role of fragmentation information. In my life, I will go to various websites, blogs, and magazines, read short articles that focus on a certain point, and use the latest conclusions and opinions to cover and correct my old opinions.
Similarly, in life, if my old ideas are challenged and questioned, I will also think of ways”Find consensus”, find the shortcomings and shortcomings of your own point of view (positive), and integrate (opposite) the views of the other party to achieve a higher level of “combination.”
This is a process of constantly updating the knowledge base and constantly upgrading the brain operating system.
But many people at this level are also particularly prone to a problem: a closed mind.
Many people take different views as an attack on themselves, so they subconsciously activate a defense mechanism to maintain their correctness and stability.
(specific mechanism, I The loophole in the brain: how did you go narrow and stubborn? It’s written very clearly)
Remember: Only an open mind can keep us alive.
When your heart becomes closed and you close the door to acceptance and consensus, you are truly “old”.
Finally, a few common questions are asked.
1) Some people may think “I don’t seem to have a frame.” In fact, a framework must exist. The reason you feel “no frame” is simply because it was not realized by you.
But what could easily happen? The framework is incomplete, inaccurate and fragmented. As a result, your reception and storage of new knowledge is also broken.
So, “explicitly” your own framework is also a very important ability.
2) This theory is applicable to most studies. It’s just that for different areas of learning, the proportion of each level will be different.
For example, the proportion of theoretical knowledge areas (such as philosophy, history, art), frame-concept-network-theme may be heavier; and the practice-skilled knowledge areas (such as programming), framework -Concept, migration- The proportion of the model will be larger.
3) What is the problem for most people? BeingDynamic learning.
What do you mean? Open a book, see the end from the beginning, and busy thinking about “what the author said” and “what is the structure of the book”, take it all; listen to a course, busy sort out the structure and context of the course, and then remember And recite …
Is this useful? Maybe there is, but not much. You are just copying the minds of others. No matter how much you learn, you are just repeating it. It is difficult to really “use” it.
Don’t think that following others is a shortcut. There are no shortcuts to learning.
4) Many people will be confused in the first few layers: But how do I know if the framework I have built and the concepts I understand are correct? What if it’s wrong?
You don’t have to worry too much. On the one hand, the construction of the framework and the understanding of the concepts do not originate from speculation-you have to consult the data to overcome them. This can ensure that no deviation in directionality occurs.
On the other hand, this is a robust system. The framework and concept are combined together and interact with each other. If the deviation is too large, then this framework must have inherent contradictions and it is easy to find out by us.
Finally, there is no need to pursue 100% correctness, which is neither necessary nor possible. The key is to keep an open mind, and to check and update your knowledge at all times in subsequent studies. That’s it.
What we want to pursue is never “absolutely correct”, but “better than our past self.”
Finally, look back at this picture.
It will be 2020 soon. Hope to inject some momentum into your new year.
New year, come on. 🙂
At this point, you are officially starting.
After the framework construction and concept clarification, you will find that what you did n’t understand before seems to be able to understand it roughly; where you took it for granted, it turned out that your own understanding was not accurate enough; there also seemed to be vague problems Some thoughts out.
So, at this stage, you can take the following question to read, listen to, and learn.
What’s the problem? Always with the idea of ”connection”, always thinking: What did I learn? What other knowledge points can it be linked to? How do you build this connection?
This is the core of learning: The essence of knowledge is never the information itself, but the connection between the information.
It is this connection that brings out “systematic” beyond the sum of individual information points.
How do you think about “connection”? My own commonly used method is to treat each knowledge point as a “knowledge element”, which has three synapses, which are what, why and how.
-
What: topic, structure, category
-
Why: Principle, cause, origin
-
How: application, interpretation, results
For example. You read Descartes’ “I think, therefore I am”, and you find that he is explaining “ego”-then, you can associate it with “ego”.
After a while, you may read Daniel Dennett’s “Multi-Draft Model”, and you will find that he has proposed a new concept of “self” from the perspective of brain science. Well, it is also connected with “self”.
At this time, you will find that there is some connection between “self”, “I think, therefore I am” and “multi-draft model”. What connection? Obviously, the latter is refuting the former and proposes a non-physical, distributed “self”. Then you can establish a new connection between the two.
Further, you can also think: why are there such differences in their views? If you put Descartes back into the “frame” that was established earlier, it is not difficult to find the foundation of his thought from religion and ontology: his mind-body dualism is essentially a reconciliation of religion and science-then, you You can start from why and extendgo with.
Similarly, the theory of Daniel Dennett can be extended to brain science and cognitive science starting from why.
Like this, the vast and numerous concept nodes can be combined to form a network. A huge network covering a wide range of disciplines and fields, from the bottom and the surface.
This is your system of knowledge.
4. Themes
In the above example, what would happen if we focused on the concept of “self”?
You may think of “I think, therefore I am”, think of “Multiple Drafts”, think of Hume’s “self is just a collection of a series of impressions” … these nodes embedded in your knowledge network will all show up Into your field of vision.
So, let’s think about it: how can these different people and different perspectives be integrated around this theme?
What is their development context? What is the relationship between each other? Why do these differences and common points occur?
This is the “theme”- Focusing on a detail in our vast knowledge network, to come up with a “local network.”
I like the Brain loopholes: How did you get narrow and stubborn? The content written in , “Facts → Conclusions → Concepts → Beliefs” is a local network formed by the theme of “prejudice” in my knowledge network.
Any book mentions this process directly? Has any book proposed the terms “oversimplification” and “isolated memory”? Actually not.
They are not inherent knowledge in psychology. It is the result of refining, summarizing, summarizing, and giving it a name around the core of “bias”.
Similarly, is “confirmation bias” and “information cocoon room” the same domain of knowledge? Actually not. The former is psychologicalThe latter belongs to communication. But it doesn’t matter. Under the theme of “bias,” they complement each other.
This is the power of “theme.” Around a theme, you can refine a complex and abstract process into a new node; you can also put together knowledge points in different fields and summarize them based on their internal similarities and commonalities. New, higher-level conclusions.
Make an analogy. If the knowledge network is like a house, then “theme” is all kinds of activities you can carry out in this house: party, work, eating, watching movies, and so on.
These themes constitute our perception of the world.
5. Migration
Finally speaking about migration.
If the first four points all belong to the “accumulation of knowledge”, then here you have officially entered the “application of knowledge”.
What is migration? What it means is: Migrate old and known laws and patterns to new problems and situations.
What’s most important at this stage? It is the ability to understand and disassemble external situations.
Like this question: The museum is on fire. Should you save a famous painting or a cat? —— When you see this problem, you should think about its essence through appearance:
What is the essence of this question? It’s a dilemma.
What’s the dilemma? On one end is value (famous painting) and on the other is morality (life).
So, you may find out: what is its essence? In fact, it is just a variant of the “tram problem” that has been talked about.
Further, when we face the dilemma of morality and value, how should we think about it? Let us turn to ethics.
Ethics has two perspectives, namely teleology and obligation theory. The former focuses on the “utility” and “value” of things, while the latter focuses on the motivation and behavior of behavior. As long as the starting point is good, behavior is good.
Obviously, when we transfer the knowledge of ethics, we will know that there is no answer to this dilemma. But through this kind of problem, what we can do is to reflect on our own positions and ideas.
For example, if you are a utilitarian, then think about it: can you really accept that a life disappears in front of you? You are an obligator, so why not think about your actions from the heart? Will it be affected and interfered by the outside world?
Of course, if you use other knowledge to transfer, you may draw other conclusions.
This is a migration. Specifically,Just three steps:
1) When accumulating knowledge in the first four steps, reserve an “interface” for the knowledge (refer to how to synapse the fourth point)
2) When encountering a new situation or problem, find out the core behind it by disassembling the problem.
3) Compare the core of the problem with the “interface” and use the existing knowledge to apply it to the new problem.
Similarly, if you are learning programming, what is the most important step? It is to “disassemble” the effects you want to achieve, describe them in a process and mode that the computer can understand, and then use the accumulated programming knowledge to “call” the existing knowledge to solve the problem.
For example. If I want to do a small one-to-one match in a group of people, how can I solve this problem?
Think, what’s the ultimate goal? It is to match similar people as much as possible. So how do you make computers understand “similar”? We know that computers don’t understand languages, they can only understand numbers. Therefore, we can only achieve “similarity” through numbers.
So, a simple idea is: we define several categories in advance, and then let the participating people make a questionnaire, and assign them to different categories based on the results of the questionnaire (post a 1, 2, 3 … tags), and then randomly selected in the same category.
Further, you will find that this is actually similar to the algorithm of the recommendation system. It’s just that the input of the recommendation algorithm has been replaced with various user behavior data, and the algorithm is much more complicated.
In short, combined with these examples, what are our ways to “migrate”?
1) Analogy. You can think about it, which old problems are similar to what we already know, and can be imitated and analogized.
2) Black box. Think of this problem as a black box and think about: what is its input and what is its output.
3) Abstraction. Why not remove the specific situation, try to generalize and abstract it, and refine its structure and skeleton, thinking, what kind of problem is it essentially?
6. Model
When you enter the “migration” phase, the next step is to keep practicing. Keep finding and discovering new situations, practice disassembly and migration.
During this process, you may slowly find out:
In fact, there are some commonalities between many new issues. Although they are different, they can all be migrated using the same set of knowledge models.
At this point, you have created a “model”.
This is also a capability that many people lack. They may know how to migrate, and they also have a lot of practice, but what they lack is the ability to summarize and abstract the “model” from a high-level summary of their experience in solving problems.
Many of what we call “experts” and “smart people” are actually better than us, and that’s exactly what they do: their advantage is not in the knowledge reserve-those are static. Their strength is that they have a large accumulation of “models”.
You will find that when faced with a new problem, they can always disassemble it quickly and call relevant knowledge to solve it-this is what the model does.
For example, in the example “Save Painting or Save Cat” in the fifth point, the wording used is “such problems”-this is actually a “model”.
For another example, I mentioned the “dynamic-resistance” model many times in previous articles. Is there any book on this model mentioned? Actually not. It’s completely original to me.
However, through this model, I can condense a lot of relevant knowledge to deal with a series of problems related to decision-making, behavior, habits, policies, etc., to think about them better and solve them.
I often say that we should strive to create our own methodology. The model is its own methodology. All your knowledge is already existing and known in this world. Only these concentrated “models” obtained through your experience and practice are truly your own wealth.
You will find that the model is very similar to the theme. What is the difference between them? The topic is internal, a series of “explanations” that you develop around a node in the knowledge network; the model is external, and it is the result of transferring the topic to a series of situations.
In short, the essence of the model is the theme + context; the theme focuses on “why”, and the model focuses on “how to do it.”
When you can get through the first five layers and look at new problems and solve new problems from the perspective of a model, you have already entered the “professional” field.
7. Update
The last layer is update.
Learning is endless. A framework is built, a knowledge network is built, and it is always “the past”. But human knowledge is constantly evolving. You must always update it, update old nodes, and update the connections between nodes to keep your knowledge network alive.
How do I update it? Here is the role of fragmentation information. In my life, I will go to various websites, blogs, and magazines, read short articles that focus on a certain point, and use the latest conclusions and opinions to cover and correct my old opinions.
Similarly, in life, if my old ideas are challenged and questioned, I will also think of ways”Find consensus”, find the shortcomings and shortcomings of your own point of view (positive), and integrate (opposite) the views of the other party to achieve a higher level of “combination.”
This is a process of constantly updating the knowledge base and constantly upgrading the brain operating system.
But many people at this level are also particularly prone to a problem: a closed mind.
Many people take different views as an attack on themselves, so they subconsciously activate a defense mechanism to maintain their correctness and stability.
(specific mechanism, I The loophole in the brain: how did you go narrow and stubborn? It’s written very clearly)
Remember: Only an open mind can keep us alive.
When your heart becomes closed and you close the door to acceptance and consensus, you are truly “old”.
Finally, a few common questions are asked.
1) Some people may think “I don’t seem to have a frame.” In fact, a framework must exist. The reason you feel “no frame” is simply because it was not realized by you.
But what could easily happen? The framework is incomplete, inaccurate and fragmented. As a result, your reception and storage of new knowledge is also broken.
So, “explicitly” your own framework is also a very important ability.
2) This theory is applicable to most studies. It’s just that for different areas of learning, the proportion of each level will be different.
For example, the proportion of theoretical knowledge areas (such as philosophy, history, art), frame-concept-network-theme may be heavier; and the practice-skilled knowledge areas (such as programming), framework -Concept, migration- The proportion of the model will be larger.
3) What is the problem for most people? BeingDynamic learning.
What do you mean? Open a book, see the end from the beginning, and busy thinking about “what the author said” and “what is the structure of the book”, take it all; listen to a course, busy sort out the structure and context of the course, and then remember And recite …
Is this useful? Maybe there is, but not much. You are just copying the minds of others. No matter how much you learn, you are just repeating it. It is difficult to really “use” it.
Don’t think that following others is a shortcut. There are no shortcuts to learning.
4) Many people will be confused in the first few layers: But how do I know if the framework I have built and the concepts I understand are correct? What if it’s wrong?
You don’t have to worry too much. On the one hand, the construction of the framework and the understanding of the concepts do not originate from speculation-you have to consult the data to overcome them. This can ensure that no deviation in directionality occurs.
On the other hand, this is a robust system. The framework and concept are combined together and interact with each other. If the deviation is too large, then this framework must have inherent contradictions and it is easy to find out by us.
Finally, there is no need to pursue 100% correctness, which is neither necessary nor possible. The key is to keep an open mind, and to check and update your knowledge at all times in subsequent studies. That’s it.
What we want to pursue is never “absolutely correct”, but “better than our past self.”
Finally, look back at this picture.
It will be 2020 soon. Hope to inject some momentum into your new year.
New year, come on. 🙂