"for anw and others who seem to believe in magical inate abilty"
3) These differences can be measured after a fashion, with
reasonable consistency, under certain conditions, by various
assemblies of trick ‘questions’ vaguely referred to as IQ tests.
my conclusion is that it takes about 5 years solid work to get
to a state where a person is good enough to work supervised
on a reasonably complex task related to the 5 year study period...
and it takes about 10 years for them to reach a state where
they can go reasonably independent...ie, supervise others
grind research is coming to similar conclusions...
a summary can be found in ch. 2 of gladwell's 'outliers'...
that ch. is headed 'the 10,000 hour rule...
On 26/05/16 14:48, abelard wrote:
"for anw and others who seem to believe in magical inate abilty"
Magic is for magicians. I believe that such people have
entertaining skills. I don't believe anyone has supernatural
powers. So I have no idea what I have written to lead you to
your description of me above.
[...]
3) These differences can be measured after a fashion, with
reasonable consistency, under certain conditions, by various
assemblies of trick ‘questions’ vaguely referred to as IQ tests.
FWIW, I'm not a great fan of IQ tests, except as [rather
weak] entertainment. They certainly measure something [which is
moderately reproducible], but it bears only a passing resemblance
to what people normally call intelligence.
[...]
my conclusion is that it takes about 5 years solid work to get
to a state where a person is good enough to work supervised
on a reasonably complex task related to the 5 year study period...
and it takes about 10 years for them to reach a state where
they can go reasonably independent...ie, supervise others
Indeed.
The fallacy is the belief, apparent among some posters,
that 5 or 10 years hard work is *all* it takes to become expert
[or (eg) World Champion] in a field.
grind research is coming to similar conclusions...
a summary can be found in ch. 2 of gladwell's 'outliers'...
that ch. is headed 'the 10,000 hour rule...
Gladwell is a very uneven writer,
but "Outliers" contains
much of interest. I'm not qualified to comment on its accuracy,
but at least it doesn't jar in the way "Blink" does, and which in
turn is less annoying than Taleb's "The Black Swan".
So I have no idea what I have written to lead you toas a means of detaching you from your pedantry
your description of me above.
many people define intelligence as 'he agrees with me'....
others don't
The fallacy is the belief, apparent among some posters,what magic ingredient/s do you wish to posit?
that 5 or 10 years hard work is *all* it takes to become expert
[or (eg) World Champion] in a field.
i've read black swan...i don't remember reading blink so it's
likely that i haven't
Gladwell is a very uneven writer, but "Outliers" contains
much of interest. I'm not qualified to comment on its accuracy,
but at least it doesn't jar in the way "Blink" does, and which in
turn is less annoying than Taleb's "The Black Swan".
On 26/05/16 19:47, abelard wrote:
So I have no idea what I have written to lead you toas a means of detaching you from your pedantry
your description of me above.
Well, that's a bit mean. I spent a large part of my career
trying to explain maths in a non-pedantic way.
[...]
many people define intelligence as 'he agrees with me'....
others don't
In that case, I'm an "other".
The fallacy is the belief, apparent among some posters,what magic ingredient/s do you wish to posit?
that 5 or 10 years hard work is *all* it takes to become expert
[or (eg) World Champion] in a field.
If I knew that, I'd know what profession/activity I might
care to become World Champion in. But I do know that many people
work amazingly hard at things I more-or-less understand, and many
of them never even become adequately competent, and almost all of
the others never become remotely close to the highest levels, to
the extent that *I* know they're not particularly good.
If you
choose to call it "inate abilty" [sic], I shall complain only
about the speeling.
i've read black swan...i don't remember reading blink so it's
likely that i haven't
You probably blinked and missed it.
"Black Swan" is a three-page essay rewritten many times
to compose a book. Annoyingly, that sells, as anyone glancing
at it at random finds a three-page essay that looks interesting.
On 26/05/2016 19:40, Andy Walker wrote:
Gladwell is a very uneven writer, but "Outliers" contains
much of interest. I'm not qualified to comment on its accuracy,
but at least it doesn't jar in the way "Blink" does, and which in
turn is less annoying than Taleb's "The Black Swan".
Ericsson and Pool recently tried to clear up Gladwell's mistakes.
"Malcolm Gladwell got us wrong: Our research was key to the 10,000-hour
rule, but here’s what got oversimplified"
http://www.salon.com/2016/04/10/malcolm_gladwell_got_us_wrong_our_research_was_key_to_the_10000_hour_rule_but_heres_what_got_oversimplified/
there are increasing claims that maybe alzheimers
can be warded off by various forms of 'brain games'(study?)
On 27/05/2016 10:46, abelard wrote:
there are increasing claims that maybe alzheimers
can be warded off by various forms of 'brain games'(study?)
One such claim was made by Lumosity, who were taken to court and made to >cough up 13m dollars for misleading the punters if I recollect.
[...] I spent a large part of my careeris that because you have a good understanding of maths...
trying to explain maths in a non-pedantic way.
much better than most
i know what interests me...i have been driven like a clockwork orange
since i was about 12...i've taken up many things to relieve boredom
...even chess...but each time boredom grabbed me by the throat
the moment i'd got a reasonable understanding of it....
what i do study does interest me, without deteriorating in to ennui
after a few unusually short years...
with this, i'm like a dog with a bone...i just can't let go...or
perhaps it can't let go of me...
i'd suggest much of high achievement is related to that sort of
neurosis...i'm not interested in anything else....
neither was fisher interested in anything but 64 squares...i doubt if
carlsson is much different...
in a competitive world...those who put in most work are likely to
become concert pianists or composers rather than piano
teachers...
i see no magic ingredient anywhere i look...and by polyphemus i've
looked under every stone...and i'm still beavering away...
i was hoping you might help me out...
no it isn't...it's a sign that i knew when to move on to[...] i've taken up many things to relieve boredomThat is a sign of dilettanteism.
...even chess...but each time boredom grabbed me by the throat
the moment i'd got a reasonable understanding of it....
things more relevant to my central objectives
Yes, there are things [...] where you cani've never had the ambition to get people to pay me for wasting
remain an amateur indefinitely. But you are v lucky if you find
that people will pay you to do them.
my time...however much that may have pleased them
why? if people want to be piano teachers or even teach mathsin a competitive world...those who put in most work are likely toThat seems to be a slur on piano teachers.
become concert pianists or composers rather than piano
teachers...
to artists and engineers...that is freedom....
i'm all for freedom
but you do return to your magic...so i repeat the core question...
please define this thing called 'ability'
On 27/05/16 00:22, abelard wrote:
[...] I spent a large part of my careeris that because you have a good understanding of maths...
trying to explain maths in a non-pedantic way.
much better than most
No, it's because I somehow got landed every year with
teaching maths for physicists/engineers/arts students.
i know what interests me...i have been driven like a clockwork orange
since i was about 12...i've taken up many things to relieve boredom
...even chess...but each time boredom grabbed me by the throat
the moment i'd got a reasonable understanding of it....
That is a sign of dilettanteism.
Many interesting things
reach a stage where further progress requires serious study. You
can either say "OK, done that, time to move on ..." or grit your
teeth and work through the boring stuff in the hope that there are >interesting things the other side of the blockage.
what i do study does interest me, without deteriorating in to ennui
after a few unusually short years...
Yes, there are things like that too. Things where you can
remain an amateur indefinitely. But you are v lucky if you find
that people will pay you to do them.
with this, i'm like a dog with a bone...i just can't let go...or
perhaps it can't let go of me...
i'd suggest much of high achievement is related to that sort of
neurosis...i'm not interested in anything else....
neither was fisher interested in anything but 64 squares...i doubt if
carlsson is much different...
It is certainly true that you can't reach the top in chess
[or golf or playing the violin] without serious and even obsessive
study. But eight hours study and eight hours sleep still leaves
eight hours per day to do other things. Many of the world's top
virtuosi have been polymaths.
in a competitive world...those who put in most work are likely to
become concert pianists or composers rather than piano
teachers...
That seems to be a slur on piano teachers.
I know of no
evidence that teachers [of any sort] are innately lazy, or in any
way less than professional.
Among those who attempt to become
concert pianists or composers, those who work hardest are likely,
other things being more-or-less equal, likely to rise nearer the
top; but that's a different matter. My only real claim in this
matter is that hard work is not a substitute for ability.
i see no magic ingredient anywhere i look...and by polyphemus i've
looked under every stone...and i'm still beavering away...
i was hoping you might help me out...
OK. There is *no* substitute for ability.
On 27/05/16 23:07, abelard wrote:
no it isn't...it's a sign that i knew when to move on to[...] i've taken up many things to relieve boredomThat is a sign of dilettanteism.
...even chess...but each time boredom grabbed me by the throat
the moment i'd got a reasonable understanding of it....
things more relevant to my central objectives
Yes it is. If you aren't a dilettante, you would move
directly to your "central objectives" and stay there, not keep
moving on to "things more relevant". If you want to paint in
oils, you don't try crayons, then water colours, then pastels,
then sculpture, then origami, then ..., in the hope that one of
them is quite like oil paint.
[...]
Yes, there are things [...] where you cani've never had the ambition to get people to pay me for wasting
remain an amateur indefinitely. But you are v lucky if you find
that people will pay you to do them.
my time...however much that may have pleased them
If you have the resources to waste your time indefinitely,
that's fine. Many a gentleman lived that way in the past, and
much good science, engineering, ..., emerged. Today, most of us
have to earn a living.
[...]
why? if people want to be piano teachers or even teach mathsin a competitive world...those who put in most work are likely toThat seems to be a slur on piano teachers.
become concert pianists or composers rather than piano
teachers...
to artists and engineers...that is freedom....
i'm all for freedom
But the implication was that those who work less become
teachers rather than composers.
Teaching is hard work. Good
teaching is very hard work.
FWIW, I didn't particularly want
to teach, even less to teach maths to artists; but the task
was assigned to me, it paid well, and in return I got to spend
my more productive hours being paid well to contemplate surreal
numbers, chess programs and other such-like fun things.
but you do return to your magic...so i repeat the core question...
please define this thing called 'ability'
Why do you think it is "magic"? An ability is just
something someone can do. Some people simply are better than
others. It certainly isn't merely because they work harder
at it. If you want to know more, you'd do better asking a
geneticist than a mathematician.
On 28/05/2016 11:27, abelard wrote:
what is ability i ask you...
In any group of children of a similar age, some will be able to grasp a
new idea/process more quickly than others, then provide correct answers
to certain questions.
One might explain that by motivation. Or their parents feed them
vegetables. Or they learned something similar before. Or they have magic >called ability.
When you ask "what is ability", what do you mean by "is"?
what is ability i ask you...
you become amusing...
a serious artist isn't interested in oil paints
or crayons...that just method or craft skill/s
money is easy in the modern world...what you don't spend, you don'ti've never had the ambition to get people to pay me for wastingIf you have the resources to waste your time indefinitely,
my time...however much that may have pleased them
that's fine. Many a gentleman lived that way in the past, and
much good science, engineering, ..., emerged. Today, most of us
have to earn a living.
need to earn
i'm running an experiment on just how little a person can live on...
i therefore know that a person can live easily on about £200-
£250 a month as long as you have the capital of a place to
live and functioning vehicle...
those who work less at the piano...not those who work lessBut the implication was that those who work less becomewhy? if people want to be piano teachers or even teach mathsin a competitive world...those who put in most work are likely toThat seems to be a slur on piano teachers.
become concert pianists or composers rather than piano
teachers...
to artists and engineers...that is freedom....
i'm all for freedom
teachers rather than composers.
they may work far harder at understanding the problems of
pupils...
they may prefer to go on a cruise
Teaching is hard work. Goodwho is arguing with that?
teaching is very hard work.
though i've met teachers who keep taking days off sick because
the 'stress is too much for them'
i've met teachers who roll into a classroom....'turn to page 20
and do the examples there'
then they put their feet up and read the times...
i've met oceans of teachers who can't teach to any level i would
regard as even reasonable...
and much else for which i wouldn't pay them...
they all still get paid...
teaching is about providing a service...just as it is in macdonalds...
if the person isn't learning what is useful *to them*...the teacher
if not worth paying... [...]
i was asking you...but you do return to your magic...so i repeat the core question...Why do you think it is "magic"? An ability is just
please define this thing called 'ability'
something someone can do. Some people simply are better than
others. It certainly isn't merely because they work harder
at it. If you want to know more, you'd do better asking a
geneticist than a mathematician.
your definition is a tautology...
'people who do well have ability'
what is ability i ask you...
ability is people who do well you tell me....
your definition is magical 'thinking'
as long as you have basic intelligence...as most people do...
it becomes a matter of work and motivation....
for you, money is what 'we' call a conditioned reinforcer....
whereas i don't care much about money...i'm driven by
curiosity...
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 399 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 99:07:56 |
| Calls: | 8,363 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 13,162 |
| Messages: | 5,897,780 |