Boxing Clever

Jun 21, 2010 13:07

Just a little thinking out loud about thinking ( Read more... )

internets, cognition, history

Leave a comment

Comments 16

accy June 21 2010, 06:47:44 UTC
Multiplying two large in seconds was once considered astonishing, and highly valuable, now it is a curiousity as a human ability (but the foundation of much modern infrastructure as automation) - human being mimics $2 calculator.

And yet, people should retain the skill of being able to do basic arithmetic without needing a device to do it. It's not about being remarkable it's about competency.

Reply

ataxi June 21 2010, 07:19:16 UTC
Damn right.

Intuition about how numbers interact is still totally critical to being able to estimate costs, improvise construction, and tune complex systems.

It's not enough merely to know that two adjustable parameters have a multiplicative effect on price, size or output: it's also necessary to be able to think out the approximate result of specific choices for each.

Relatedly, I don't believe there are many who have poor grammar but can still put together a solid, logically ordered argument.

Reply

(The comment has been removed)

accy June 21 2010, 08:31:35 UTC
If I could think 5 * 3 at some sort of assistant computer and get back 15, wouldn't that be wonderful and liberating?

Or it enslaves you do our new silicon overlords ;-) The premise of Dave's original argument seems to be that technology frees us from memorizing stuff to be able to think about higher level problems. I don't agree with that analysis. I think we're being freed from life skills so we can worry about whether Britney is wearing underpants.

Reply


(The comment has been removed)

ataxi June 21 2010, 09:10:07 UTC
Of course, people who actually know stuff have the best filters. To go to extremes, imagine someone with no vocabulary trying to come up with effective search phrases.

Reply

(The comment has been removed)

ataxi June 21 2010, 09:27:40 UTC
*nod* I'd agree with that.

A classic example, for me, was being faced with a sensitive buffer level control problem, finding that a bang-bang wasn't adequate, and remembering, ever so vaguely, that PID feedback controllers existed.

That recollection was the first step of "applying half-remembered knowledge to solve a problem", and got me as far as adapting a cut and paste of a basic implementation to my circumstances.

The second step was vaguely recalling something about the significance of the integral "windup" term to minimising the settling time. But in order to fumble that far I'd had to draw on a fair bit of actual, albeit latent, knowledge, all of which I'd obtained in a formal educational context.

Reply



owlrigh June 22 2010, 03:29:49 UTC
Hmm. People say I'm intelligent a lot, but this is only because I have some sort of weird mnemonic happening where I remember stuff. Just random stuff. I think it's still considered a feat of cleverness.

Being able to use the outsourced information and digest it and then come forth with your own theories and use information to develop new stuff--that's a mark of intelligence, or at the very least a sign of creative and/or logistical thinking. Now logic: that wrangles my brain, wrings me out, and leaves me weeping--and with only one question of logic!

Reply


Leave a comment

Up