On Learning

[Endolori]

This may or may not be related to type but I think it is.

Anyway the problem is I'm helping out my SP cousin with her studies and I encounter A LOT of problems with communicating concepts to her properly. For example, the other day I was trying to explain some Physics concept to her and she just gave me a blank stare. Then I proceeded to give a concrete example of what I was talking about and she said, "wasn't this exactly what I was telling you just now?"

So yeah, I'm in a bit of a quandary. So just asking you sensors out there, how do you usually learn? Would talking about concepts help, or do I need to be extremely precise in my wording when explaining things? In what way would information be more clearly brought across to a sensor?

Anyway the irritating thing is that she'd treat me as if I were crazy if I tried explaining concepts in an impressionistic way. I just get this feeling that we just don't get one another and it's quite detrimental. And no, I don't have the same problem with my sister (an ENFP).

Thoughts anyone?

[Jeffster]

Originally Posted by Endolori

do I need to be extremely precise in my wording when explaining things?

Yes. The more concrete and less abstract you can make it the better.

I usually learn by doing. Often no amount of explanation gets through to me until I can actually do the thing, whatever it is. I know zilch about physics but I assume there's some sort of formulas involved? I'd have to write them myself, probably over and over again until I got it right.

Sorry I'm not more help, but your questions are too abstract.

[Victor]

Originally Posted by Jeffster

Yes. The more concrete and less abstract you can make it the better.

I usually learn by doing. Often no amount of explanation gets through to me until I can actually do the thing, whatever it is. I know zilch about physics but I assume there's some sort of formulas involved? I'd have to write them myself, probably over and over again until I got it right.

Sorry I'm not more help, but your questions are too abstract.

Learning takes place on two levels - the concrete and the abstract.

If you are limited to the concrete, you are very limited. For instance, if you try to leave a neurosis, like insomnia, using the concrete only, that is, by external means, you will fail.

Indeed it is the interplay between the concrete and the abstract that is learning.

Those who are limited to the concrete have a learning disability.

[Thursday]

those who are limited have a learning disability.
vague, but a bit more true than " Those who are limited to the concrete have a learning disability. "
fixed.

[Endolori]

Originally Posted by Jeffster

I'd have to write them myself, probably over and over again until I got it right.

You're right actually. I find that's mostly how I remember stuff as well, although I don't really see how this applies to helping someone else understand a concept. that said, it's a good idea regardless.

Originally Posted by AvereX

those who are limited have a learning disability.
vague, but a bit more true than " Those who are limited to the concrete have a learning disability. "
fixed.

Don't we all have limitations somewhere? Like, I tend to skim over precise definitions of stuff and end up totally messing up concepts because it wasn't clear enough in my head.

I wouldn't say a sensor is limited from learning abstract stuff also. I have a sensor friend who handles advanced chemistry like it's super simple. I think ideas or concepts just takes a different form when perceived by sensors. That said, I don't really have any idea how they learn things, that's why my question.

Perhaps if I worked backwards, from giving practical applications and then explaining the underlying concept from there? But wouldn't that be too limiting and constricting, and she'd be less able to branch out the concept/theory and apply it to other situations?

[Jeffster]

Originally Posted by Endolori

You're right actually. I find that's mostly how I remember stuff as well, although I don't really see how this applies to helping someone else understand a concept. that said, it's a good idea regardless.

What is the purpose of understanding the concept? Is it not to then apply that concept in some way? By doing something with it?

Perhaps if I worked backwards, from giving practical applications and then explaining the underlying concept from there? But wouldn't that be too limiting and constricting, and she'd be less able to branch out the concept/theory and apply it to other situations?

I don't know, when you talk in vague terms, there's little that I know to tell you. But, to use an example of a theory/concept that I have come to understand, take MBTI, the reason I'm here. I did not learn MBTI as a concept/theory, I learned about it by reading the type descriptions that talked about people's actual behavior in life and then the stuff about recognizing the patterns of behavior to identify types. If I had started reading all that cognitive function formula stuff first, I would have never got into it, because on the surface, that's just a bunch of gibberish to me. I still zone out on discussions on this forum that get too heavily into endless theoretical hypothesis, instead of talking about how these things actually play out in the real world. So, it sounds like an example of what you call "working backwards" even though it seems completely forwards to me.

[Endolori]

Hehe I'd love to get deeper into the cognitive processes thing actually. It's somewhat easier to remember 8 function-attitudes than 16 different behaviour patterns.

Anyway that's one perspective I'd take into account next time. Come to think of it, I don't think I've really met other people who study the way I do.

[alicia91]

I'm not sure it's a sensor-intuitive issue. Personally I didn't have any trouble understanding more abstract subject in highschool or college (I'm just not really interested in them). I'd look at what learning style she has - visual, auditory or hands-on. Most people are visual learners (perhaps those are the Sensors?) and appreciate diagrams, pictures, flow-charts etc.

Personally I'm a combination of visual and hands-on and just explaining complicated information with words is very confusing unless I can easily understand what you are saying. If you are telling me something that I'm struggling to understand then by the time you tell me the next bit of info I've already lost the previous thing you told me. So I really benefit from taking notes or making a diagram etc and going STEP-BY-STEP.

Another thing with me, I like to see where we are headed UP FRONT (the big picture) then have it broken down into teachable steps. This could be something specific to ISTPs (Chart-the-Course) but I'm not sure. So, what helps me is to say "I'm going to be teaching you about the 16 personality types, each of which has their own pattern of cognitive processes, temperments, and interaction styles. Let's start by..........." Might not be a good example but KWIM? If you don't do this then I have trouble holding all the info together and it's feels random.

[Jeffster]

Visual has always been my weakest learning method.

I definitely go:

1. Hands-on
2. Auditory
3. Pure Luck/Miracle
4. Visual

[Edahn]

Maybe she's having problems listening because she's not comfortable. That's what I've found in tutoring.