7 ms·
I think knowing the names of things is useful and gets unfairly maligned. It gives your mind a set of symbols with which it can make connections, which is how u
by dorkwood 2y ago
I think knowing the names of things is useful and gets unfairly maligned. It gives your mind a set of symbols with which it can make connections, which is how understanding forms. Rote memorisation of names is a precursor to understanding.
- bubblyworld 2y agoI agree - names have power. I think consistently giving something a name teaches your brain that it is worth paying attention to, and over time that can radically alter your conscious experience of it.
- dTal 2y agoI think what is being pushed back against is that the idea that knowing the name of something is important knowledge by itself. As you say, it is a handle to knowledge - a node that you can connect to other nodes, a precursor to understanding. This is not a straw man - people spend hours of study learning the Latin names for funny little blobs in the human body, and call it "learning anatomy", and feel a sense of achievement. And the sense of achievement is important! It's motivation for an important task. But they have learned nothing, until they go back and learn what each blob does. It is vital to keep reminding the student of this, to not let their sense of achievement fool them into thinking they have finished learning anatomy. They have only started.