My idea would be to give a truncated version of a point made in Truly Part of You.

The different sound-bite ways to say it are:

• True knowledge regenerates.
• Only believe something once you recognize how you would learn it some other way.
• Your beliefs should be unaffected by your choice of labels.

Low inferential distance explanation: When learning about something, the most important thing is to notice what you've been told. Not understand, but notice: what kinds of things would you expect to see if you believed these claims, versus if you did not? Are you being told about some phenomenon, or just some labels? Once you've noticed what you're being told, think about how it plugs in with the rest of your knowledge: what implications does this body of knowledge have for other fields, and vice versa? What discoveries in one area would force you to believe differently in the others? When you can answer these questions, you have a meaningful, predictive model of the world that can be phrased under any choice of labels.

(Aside: When you are at the stage where most of your knowledge regenerates, I call that the highest level of understanding.)

Btw, I had seen this in open thread and been thinking about a response, and this is what I settled on.