= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Vaniver comments on Calibrate your self-assessments - LessWrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (117)
Yeah, the actual Socratic method is designed more to instill doubt than it is to explain concepts. (The student takes a position, then you shred it with pointed questions.)
The 'modern' Socratic method of asking leading questions doesn't work all that well because of inferential distances and awkwardness. You standing there expectantly waiting while they think something through is oftentimes an unpleasant experience for them.
In any form of teaching, expecting an appropriate inferential distance is important. I wonder to what degree that can be trained explicitly.
That's why I think that the basic concept of "building block" schooling works-you essentially keep the distance constant, but teach them ever more challenging topics. The one time where there is a large gap is in the introduction of completely new ideas or subjects. For example, in physics when people first learn of general relativity there is a large inferential distance, which is very hard to remedy.
Amount you need to understand to get from what you currently understand to also understanding the new thing.
Eliezer talks about it in a piece well worth reading.