I’ve had a bit of an odd idea that I’ve been developing for a while. I’ve bounced it off of M.D.s, teachers, engineers, and psychologists and each of them hums and haws, can’t point out anything SPECIFIC they disagree with, but are cautious about agreeing with it. This makes me suspicious that this might be a somewhat unique idea (or at least not a particularly well known idea) and perhaps its true (since no one immediately debunked it as people enthusiastically do with most of my ideas).
The basic gist is that all knowledge (not skills, but knowledge) is vocabulary. When two surgeons are having an argument and they throws lots of big words at each other, reach a consensus and then move on with a new plan of action, its very easy to say “wow, those guys are smart, I could never understand what they do”. I’m suspicious that you could. Basically their specialized vocabulary lets them have a high level discussion in a short time, because they don’t have to explain the meaning of words to each other. If you tape recorded the conversation, then sat down with one of them, over the course of a couple of hours he could probably explain what each part of the conversation meant, in terms you’d understand. The benefit of their years of training and experience is they don’t need to explain all the background to each other, they can quickly have a conversation that focuses on the new elements of the situation and get to a decision.
Computer nerds love to do the same thing. I realize when I geek out with a fellow nerd that someone overhearing our conversation will be scratching their head in confusion. Its a very specialized vocabulary, but none of the concepts are particularly difficult (if you were willing to stop a patient nerd and get him to explain in detail what he’s talking about, I think anyone could follow the entire conversation).
When I started my master’s, meetings blew me away as people were throwing around terms I’d never heard before and I couldn’t follow the conversations to save my life. The best suggestion I got, right at the beginning of my grad work, was to keep a notebook, write down any new words or terms I heard, then figure out what they were later on. Once I had the vocabulary to interact with the rest of the group, it became quite simple to follow the conversation, identify the areas that were still up for debate, and throw in my two-cents on the subject in terms that the rest of the group could follow.
I don’t pretend that you can learn ANYTHING this way (just all knowledge). If you wanted to learn how to sail, you’re going to have to get out on a boat (learning all the vocabulary involved isn’t going to cut it). HOWEVER, I’m convinced that if you learned all the vocabulary first (port, starboard, trim, cut, etc, etc) you’d be in a position to learn the practical skills MUCH more quickly.
This leads to a simple approach to learning in a new environment.
1) Find a piece of information from that domain, such as:
- “content management systems are a great way to let a platform provide the common infrastructure of web applications and let developers spend their time creating the functionality that is unique to the product”
- “it can be argued that countertransference can be grouped into roughly three categories: irrational kindness, irrational hostility, and anxiety reactions”
- “Examined are first-year medical students’ explanations of complex concepts in cardiopulmonary physiology following a lecture series. The results revealed systematic misconceptions by the students in developing a pathophysiological model of the problem.”
2) From that piece of information, ask yourself if you understand it. If you don’t understand it, identify the words you don’t understand. Go and find out what they mean. You may have to do this recursively (a computer science term), which in this context means that some of the words and terms used may be defined using other terms and words you don’t understand: keep looking up the unknown elements until you’ve defined them in terms you already understand.
3) Return to the original statement and see if it now makes sense. If it does, you’ve extended your understanding of this domain of knowledge. If it doesn’t, find someone who is knowledgeable in the area, explain your understand of the terms. Explain how given that understanding the piece of information doesn’t make sense, and ask them to explain what your misunderstanding is (even people with no teaching skills whatsoever should be able to see what you’ve misunderstood and point you in the right direction – the trick sometimes is to get them to shut up and listen to what you’re saying rather then letting them babble).
4) Find another piece of information, and repeat this process. You increasingly become an expert as its more difficult to find information you don’t understand.
I understand that words and terms can have nuanced meanings that are contextually determined and that people who are “experts” in an area will have a deeper understanding of these. Nevertheless, I believe that understanding is just a richer vocabulary (defined by how extensive your understanding of each term is, as well the number of terms known).
September 20, 2007 at 1:32 pm
Hey Cheap, let me be the first to say that I completely agree with you. However I’d also like to add, from a Javascript perspective that
Vocabulary == Knowledge is true but
Vocabulary === Knowledge is false
The two are intrinsically connected, but not exactly the same.
However, it is safe to say that vocabulary is the first barrier to Knowledge, but I won’t say that it’s the only barrier. And this is probably the source of the “hums and haws”. The second barrier here is Mass or Experience which you allude to in your last paragraph.
Simple example, a 3rd-grader can’t do division. It’s probably b/c they don’t understand “what division is”. They’ll copy whatever the teacher does, but they can’t solve new problems, b/c they don’t get it. Division is fundamentally meaningless to them and until they get over that hump, division simply won’t make sense.
But that’s only the start. My understanding (and probably yours) of division is actually some giant leap forward from this 3rd-grader. It’s still the same word, but it’s tainted with so much more Mass or Experience. We understand division as an inverse of multiplication or as a ratio. If you do second-year university math, you start to understand division as a function on a pair of numbers with different and unique behaviors based on the space into which that function is applied (real numbers, integers, vectors space, etc.)
This is all well beyond the 3rd-grader’s comprehension. It doesn’t mean they don’t “know how” to divide, but there are limits on their experience.
As a teacher and a student I have seen entire classes illuminate the moment they understood (or “cleared”) some word that was holding them back. However, I don’t think that looking up word definitions is really a great way to learn. Rather, it’s important to use a good manual and look up any words that you’re not “getting”.
Unfortunately, it’s not really unique, remember my whole Scientologist story a while back? Well, understanding words is one of their fundamental tenets. These are the guys with different dictionaries on hand so that they don’t have to recurse too deep when they go word hunting. And despite my issues with the whole religion, they’re correct on this concept.
Of course, they’d go a step further and say “make it in clay”, b/c if you can make a crude design of whatever you’re trying to say in clay (or on a sketchpad/whiteboard/etc.), then you will have a much higher level of knowledge.
Ever seen a chemistry student draw the entire periodic table on a blank piece of paper? Ever seen how people simply “understand” when they start drawing out a sequence diagram for their new piece of software? This is understanding beyond just definitions.
September 20, 2007 at 2:45 pm
Gates: I agree that there are richer understandings of vocabulary (such as comparing your understanding of division with the grade 3 student), and if you’ll look at my post again, you’ll see the last line was “defined by how extensive your understanding of each term is, as well the number of terms known”. That’s exactly what I meant by this.
I think you’re missing this point when you say “looking up word definitions”. By “Go and find out what they mean”, I’m talking about far more than that (although that could be an excellent approach to try). Obviously we don’t learn a language by looking up dictionary definitions. For well used words, any native speaker would have a far, far more nuanced understand of the term than any dictionary could provide. This nuanced understanding is the richness, but its still vocabulary.
What I’m saying is, if you had a dictionary that provided a complete set of definitions, each with as much of this richness as an expert (yes, this is a magic dictionary), then that dictionary would embody an expert knowledge of that domain, and nothing else would be needed. Someone with access to this dictionary and enough time to look things up would be as proficient as any other expert.
I suspect assembling such a dictionary in your head is how we learn, and expanding the number of terms in it and adding to the richness of each would be an excellent way to learn (and the only approach needed).
The flaw with the Scientologist approach is that they’re RESTRICTING the richness of the terms they’re using, by slavishly clinging to the vocabulary and meanings that L.R.H. used (at least that was my understand of what you previously wrote, I haven’t independently looked into this).
September 20, 2007 at 5:29 pm
An interesting idea that has some truth to it. I did four years of school to learn to speak engineer. I didn’t know how to actually engineer anything until I got out of school and learned it, but the vocabulary let me learn it faster than trying to teach someone from nothing.
Tim
September 20, 2007 at 8:06 pm
Tim: Yes, exactly! What you learned after graduation is more of the skill (although its a very “knowledgy” skill).
September 21, 2007 at 4:28 pm
Good post.
Vocabulary is the first barrier to gaining knowledge. However knowledge is not just vocabulary, but facts and data as well. In the case of the surgeons, they need to know what a heart is (vocab) and where it is located (data).
In our financial quests the knowledge comes from learning the vocabulary (what is RRSP) but also the the facts surrounding it (rules for using it).
But I think you are correct that the real power is in /how/ we use the knowledge. Understanding things beyond just the vocabulary and the facts and then actually implementing them.
September 24, 2007 at 11:47 am
The first day I resumed at work, I was thrown off balance with words that I thought were ambiguos ranging from SMGAs, RKSF, DHF, SF, AME e.t.c. I took me some time before I was able to understand what my colleagues were talking about. So to ease my understanding, my line manager gave me a big summary of the all the words being thrown at me. I tell you it wasn’t a smooth ride.
September 24, 2007 at 2:04 pm
January: Yes, I think a lot of people suffer through the same thing when they start a new job.