Yvain comments on Applied Picoeconomics - Less Wrong

46 Post author: Yvain 17 June 2009 04:08PM

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

Comments (76)

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

Comment author: Yvain 19 June 2009 01:17:16PM *  7 points [-]

Did you go to school, did you go to school for a while and then leave, or are you entirely self-taught?

Your method is clearly better if you are able to think like that successfully, and my method is mostly born from the observation that I can't. I've heard it said that one of the effects of spending a decade or two in the school system is that it twists your mind to think more in the way typical of my system and less in the way typical of yours. And I find that people who managed to avoid school almost entirely, like Eliezer, radiate a sort of psychological healthiness I can only dream of.

I had the same feelings about school as you did, my parents refused to let me leave, and I ended out, over a few years, becoming the sort of person who could tolerate the school experience. Sometimes I worry that the process made me less able to do a lot of other things, like strive for excellence in the way you're describing.

Comment author: Vladimir_Nesov 19 June 2009 04:03:05PM *  7 points [-]

Scott Aaronson writes about A Mathematician’s Lament by Paul Lockhart.
For example, a quote about school geometry:

Posing as the arena in which students will finally get to engage in true mathematical reasoning, this virus attacks mathematics at its heart, destroying the very essence of creative rational argument, poisoning the students’ enjoyment of this fascinating and beautiful subject, and permanently disabling them from thinking about math in a natural and intuitive way.

Comment author: RobinZ 08 November 2009 09:39:32PM *  4 points [-]

I haven't even finished reading Lockhart, and I am already unspeakably glad that I was homeschooled by a mom who cared about what math really was.

To add something of substance to the conversation: coming at math from an understanding of the game of it instead of the rote work, I've noticed that I'm better at applying it than most of my classmates in my (well-regarded state university) engineering school. I can't say how much of that is "innate" "talent", with all the sarcasm that the quotation marks imply, but I can't help but see how little of the rubbish that Lockhart describes was inflicted upon me and wonder if there's a correlation.

Comment author: MichaelBishop 08 November 2009 08:45:47PM 1 point [-]

compared to what? evidence?

Comment author: arundelo 25 June 2009 12:44:15AM 0 points [-]

Scott Aaronson writes about A Mathematician’s Lament by Paul [Lockhart].

The Lockhart piece is great and deserves to be much better known. The only bad thing about it is that it pisses the reader off.

Thanks for the link to Aaronson's commentary; I hadn't seen it.

Comment author: SoullessAutomaton 25 June 2009 10:15:13AM 3 points [-]

The only bad thing about it is that it pisses the reader off.

It does? I thought it was more heartbreakingly tragic than anything else.

Comment author: Z_M_Davis 19 June 2009 10:42:24PM 1 point [-]

Did you go to school, did you go to school for a while and then leave, or are you entirely self-taught?

The second; high school diploma and fifty-five credits at UCSC.

Comment author: Vladimir_Nesov 19 June 2009 03:07:52PM *  1 point [-]

If you naturally like learning, school doesn't take away the opportunity to continue learning naturally, despite the school assignments. I always studied stuff obsessively, and school/university topics rarely correlated with what I was obsessing about at the time. If, on the other hand, you prefer other extracurricular activities, I doubt the absence of school would likely change your course.