# Thread: Mastering difficult material

1. Originally Posted by BlackOp
No..the illusion is not knowing your limitations. I fully understand the construct "shoot for the stars".....I also know the pain of hitting the ground. Gravity doesnt care.
So, for you, this is an emotional issue at the core (unable to process feeling of failure), covered by logic. You cannot possibly know your limits until you try your very best. Even then it is doubtful you reached your true limit.

Again: Control and "Realism" are both illusions.

OP: Part of mastery is to be able to deal with exceptions and extremities.

2. Originally Posted by FDG
Advanced mathematical and statistical methods, basically. But a general approach is welcomed, too.
Math is one of those things that is very conceptual and abstract, but at the same time very structured, and precise.

Ironically, due to its rigor, it will submit to whatever strange approach you want to bring to it, so long as it capture the rules.

If you want to think about numbers as lili-pads where hopping frogs hop along to represent various numerical operations, you can do that.

If you want to think of symbols being processed through a particular mechanical machine, you can do that.

If you want to map the concepts using diagrams, you can do that too (this my preferred method).

Math involves three elements, in my mind:
1) Conception
2) Proof
3) Application for problem solving

For the conception part, it is about producing ones own representation that captures the rules of the concepts being discussed. All such representations will be "isomorphic," but some conceptions can lead to "error-prone."

Proof, is the "building-up" of some concepts from others. Good proofs leave no conceptual gaps. You can use your old subjective pictures to form a subjective picture of the new concepts (theorems) developed.

Of course, problem solving uses you general problem solving skills with your mathematical conceptions as part of your "tool-kit."

Like with everything else. Practice, and simply time spent, works.

3. Thanks everybody again for the plentiful replies I am mostly trying to follow nonsequitur and provoker's approaches right now

4. Originally Posted by Alpha Prime
So, for you, this is an emotional issue at the core (unable to process feeling of failure), covered by logic. You cannot possibly know your limits until you try your very best. Even then it is doubtful you reached your true limit.

Again: Control and "Realism" are both illusions.

OP: Part of mastery is to be able to deal with exceptions and extremities.
I am only qualified to speak from my vantage....there is no definitive way to go about one's business and dont pretend to speak for anyone. The term used was "master" and he was having issues with the subject.

"OP: Part of mastery is to be able to deal with exceptions and extremities."

to master=to control...and is a deliberate reduction/conclusion from application. It is the essence of pragmatism in its purest form. Is it absolute.....probably not but what is? So if mastering (control) is an illusion then he shouldnt have asked the question. I should have just responded "I refuse to lie".

5. Originally Posted by substitute
Good grief, I can't think of anything that'd demotivate me faster!!
I think the point is, that for me, I need to be on my own, away from noise and interuptions. I take regular breaks (exercise or surfing the Internet) and I'm aware of when I'm becoming stressed out.

6. Originally Posted by IlyaK1986
Three words:

Learn By Doing.
I totally agree with this.

When I was learning programming, although I did read a lot of books on the topic, it was only through applying learning that I came to understand it properly. I would think of my own problems that I'd like to solve (not just ones set for me as tutorials).

The very best way to learn is to teach a subject. For example, giving help to a struggling student really highlights your level of understanding of a subject and forces you explain stuff in ways that other people would understand, not just the way that you understand it.

7. Originally Posted by IlyaK1986
Three words:

Learn By Doing.
I agree with tyhis also. you should also have a strong foundation before leaping on difficult material, For instance trying to understand quantum mechanics and relativity without some basics understanding in calculus and mechanics is just stupid.

The same approach is in chemistry,. For instance, you should know that matter only has three forms , liquid , solid and gas, and energy is needed to transformed it from one state to another before moving to more advance material.

Self-learning is much more diffuicult than learning from a tteacher, because it involves discovery. But its also more rewarding.

8. Originally Posted by Provoker
You can work consciously to program your subconcious so that intuition becomes ally to the intellect rather a force against it. Again, the procedures are critical. If you've mastered procedures and learned to intuitively recognize procedural patterns than although the substance of various phenomena changes you should be able to apply your procedural intelligence to master various problems.
Please be more specific. This sounds valuable.

9. ^ I think I've read a couple articles that hold similar sentiments. When I have more time I'll get busy and search for them. I think though that the crux of the argument is skill and pattern recognition. If I'm not mistaken the basal ganglia is responsible for that, all you pseudo-neuro-scientists can correct me on that, but the theory is once you've seen something in action numerous times that part of your brain basically holds a sequence of patterns and all it takes is one instance of the procedure for you to rapidly both recreate and apply the skill without much concerted effort.

I think INTJ mom had an article in her multi-tasking thread that sort of touched on it, but instead her focus was on the negative effects of listening to music, watching tv etc... had on learning( it was more akin to skill acquisition in the aforementioned ganglia). I think on a pseudo level(pending article) that it does make some sense, If you imagine it in a sports scenario how do professional athletes have amazing foresight to react almost instantaneously to the slightest actions and movements.

Anyways Provoke, I've gotta be off hope that was similar or at least in the ballpark of what you were trying to say.

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
•