[Errors in Understanding

  • Some people are quick to assume they “get it” without delving into difficult concepts.

It is natural to want to argue “that’s not true,” especially when a newcomer rejects a concept that you have previously appreciated.

  • However, “understanding” is not a subject.
  • Just bouncing that “subjectivity” off each other is not beneficial.
  • The appropriate attitude is, “You understand it that way, but that’s not how I understand it.”
    • If you claim “you are wrong” here, you have the burden of proving that you are wrong.
    • Just because you’ve known about it before is no guarantee that your understanding of it is correct.

So how can we do this?

  • Answer: “understanding” should be verified through experimentation.
    • If you acted on your understanding and it brought good results, then your understanding was correct.
    • This is precisely the subject in which we should invest our time and attention!
    • People who do not have sufficient knowledge and are not willing to research to gain knowledge are not attractive subjects to invest time in
    • If you feel that their “understanding” is a “strange understanding” in your subjective view, you should not substantiate it by argument, but by results of action!

2023-07-30 ver. 4 Co-authored with GPT4nishio.icon

ver.3

Rewrite ver.1 with reference to ver.2.

gpt.icon Mistakes in understanding are often made by those who prematurely assume they "get it" without delving into difficult concepts.

It is natural to be tempted to argue “that’s not true,” especially when a newcomer denies a concept that you have previously appreciated. It is important to understand, however, that “understanding” is subjective, and that simply bouncing “senses” off each other will not lead to a solution. Just because you already know something does not guarantee that your understanding is correct.

The appropriate degree is, “That’s how you understand it; it’s not how I understand it.” If you insist here that “you are wrong,” the burden of proving the error arises.

So how can we do this? The answer is that “understanding” should be tested through experimentation. If you act on your understanding and it produces positive results, then you can assume that your understanding was correct. This is the subject in which we should invest our time and attention.

However, people who engage in “conclusions that are unreasonable from their point of view,” without sufficient context and without sufficient willingness to investigate, are not attractive subjects in which to invest time.

ver.2

  • Vector search with ver.1 contents
    • You should only ask for understanding when you need understanding.
    • Improvement for English version (~1 chapter)
    • We often misunderstand our own understanding. We often feel that we understand a concept when we really do not. It is important to recognize this misunderstanding and examine our understanding in order to improve our understanding.
    • Feeling like you understand something is no guarantee that you really understand it. The feeling of understanding occurs when a provisional model is created in your brain. Whether that model is correct or not needs to be verified. Verification is done by actually using that model and observing the results.
    • How to learn to teach others
    • Subjective feelings of “understanding” are often wrong.
    • Understanding is a hypothesis” and if you don’t do “experiments to test your hypothesis” you don’t know if you really understand it or not.
    • Writing an explanation of what you think you understand is useful for this experiment.
    • As a result of our experiments in trying to explain, we often find ourselves saying, “Huh? This is a bit fuzzy in my understanding. As we find and eliminate such vague points, a “dense network of interconnected information” is created in our brains. Once this is in place, it is useful to be able to trace the connections and pull them out as needed.
  • Hatena2012-10-20
    • The only way to confirm understanding is to output and observe whether the system outside of you reacts as you understand. If it does not respond as understood, the error of understanding is confirmed. Reacting as you understand does not guarantee that your understanding is correct. It may be a fluke. No matter how hard you try, you will never achieve 100% understanding.
    • This is a story on a different layer. Each individual has a finite amount of resources (money, time, etc.), so he or she must decide for himself or herself what and how much to allocate resources to. How best to allocate them depends on your objectives and the amount of resources you have.
    • This is not to say that consulting with others about resource allocation strategies is entirely futile, but it is difficult to have a useful discussion without clarifying the resources you have and the objectives you want to achieve.
    • Let’s say I want to understand X. Is this “understanding of X” the end goal? Is this “understanding of X” the ultimate goal? If the devil appeared to you and said, “I will give you the understanding of X, but you will die as soon as you understand X,” would you sign the contract? However, as soon as you understand X, you will die. Would you not? Then “understanding X” is not the final goal. It is merely a means to another end.
    • The suffering of “there are so many things I should learn that I can’t catch up with my understanding” stems from one’s mind pursuing an unrealistic ideal. The gap between the real me and the image of “the me who understands difficult books smoothly” is the same composition as the gap between “the me who lives forever” and “the me who does not grow old”.
    • People who are angry at not being understood have never been on the cutting edge.
      • People who run cutting-edge have experiences that are not [understood
      • Taking it as “common” or “just a fact” that many people don’t understand your ideas.
        • Don’t get angry at someone who doesn’t understand when “[They don’t understand.
    • From this, we can derive that “a person who gets angry at someone who doesn’t understand his/her point of view when it is not understood is a person who has never been on the cutting edge”.
    • When someone else expresses an opinion about something, many people are going to be angry if you say, “Wow, so that’s your opinion. I don’t understand it and I may not devote the resources to understand it.” a lot of people are going to get angry.

ver.1

You can’t just look up a difficult concept and say, “Okay, I get it! That’s how it is!” about a difficult concept without doing much research.

When that “understanding” is at odds with your own understanding, especially when someone who has recently learned about something you have appreciated positively for a longer time is evaluating it negatively, you want to say, “That’s not so.

But after all, the “sense of understanding” is subjective, so bumping into it in a subjective state won’t make things better.

  • Know first” is no basis for correctness.
  • It is appropriate to go as far as “You understand it that way - that’s not how I understand it.” If you say “You’re wrong” here, you carry the burden of proof of being wrong.

Then what should we do? “Understanding” should be verified by experimentation.

  • If you acted on your understanding and achieved a good result, then that understanding was correct.
  • You should invest time and attention in this.
  • People who jump to “crazy conclusions from their point of view” without enough context and without the desire to properly investigate are not attractive time investment targets.

This page is auto-translated from /nishio/ç†è§ŁăŻäž»èŠł using DeepL. If you looks something interesting but the auto-translated English is not good enough to understand it, feel free to let me know at @nishio_en. I’m very happy to spread my thought to non-Japanese readers.