PhilGoetz comments on You don't need Kant - Less Wrong

21 Post author: Andrew 01 April 2009 06:09PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (56)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: PhilGoetz 01 April 2009 10:20:01PM 14 points [-]

We like our physicists to be heroic figures, and our mathematicians to shut up and multiply.

20th-century physics is taught as a series of historical events, taking you through intermediate steps; because if you taught someone relativity and quantum mechanics without explaining the experimental data and the different ways that were tried of reconciling them that failed, they wouldn't believe you.

Comment author: MBlume 01 April 2009 10:57:20PM 8 points [-]

because if you taught someone relativity and quantum mechanics without explaining the experimental data and the different ways that were tried of reconciling them that failed, they wouldn't believe you.

I like this, I'd never thought of it that way. Griffiths also justifies taking a somewhat historical approach by claiming it as a hack for the student's brain -- that our minds are built to process stories, to process narratives, and so by introducing each particle one at a time, through the events that led to its discovery, he can better fix the identity of that particle in the student's mind.

Comment author: John_Maxwell_IV 02 April 2009 03:46:57AM 3 points [-]

Yep. If you can make learning into a story, question, or game, it becomes easier and more fun.

Comment author: AspiringRationalist 24 March 2012 07:43:18AM 0 points [-]

The story hack seems very hit-or-miss. For some students, the progression from the plum pudding model to the Bohr model to quantum mechanics is an engaging story that helps them understand the fundamentals of chemistry. Personally, these stories just made me tune out and wonder when they would get around to teaching me something useful.

That said, in scientific fields that are less well-developed, I think the historical experiments approach really adds to learning. It would be a lot harder to grok the psychology of authority without learning about the Milgram obedience study.

Comment author: MichaelVassar 02 April 2009 12:07:21AM 6 points [-]

At Drexler my wife had the misfortune to get a physics teacher who just taught physics results, no experiments, narrative, history etc. Useless and worse than useless. He did real damage.

Comment author: komponisto 02 April 2009 12:38:27AM 9 points [-]

On the other hand, the usual, historical approach to teaching quantum mechanics is far from optimal.

Comment author: Andrew 02 April 2009 01:20:20AM -1 points [-]

"We like our physicists to be heroic figures, and our mathematicians to shut up and multiply."

Ahahahaha! I'll have to remember that one.