Here's my attempt at a clickbait title: "What chicken sexing teaches us about expertise."
(Quite a bit, apparently!)
commoncog.com/blog/chicken-s
Conversation
Replying to
Actually after many years I have come to accept that there *are* things that cannot be taught. But doesn’t mean they cannot be learned.
I think it’s better to be intel. honest with ourselves and recognise reality for what it is. /1
1
Have recently been fascinated with the term ineffable
So when I see “cannot be taught” I see it as a cousin of ineffable.
Cannot b taught = A skill that cannot be transferred via words and instructions alone
/2
1
Litmus Test is can X be adequately learned from a PowerPoint slide alone?
If yes then teachable.
Nobody learns to ride a bicycle from PowerPoint
Therefore riding a bicycle is not teachable. /3
1
The more nerdy way of saying this is teachable is when words is sufficient for X to be learned.
It may be necessary or not necessary but words/instructions alone must be sufficient. /4
1
Replying to
I think you’ll be surprised by the number of people who think that all knowledge can be made explicit. Or even the number of people who think that the explanation is the goal.
This is something I’ll need to put more effort into defusing.
1
1
Replying to
In relation to one of your earlier pieces, if the goal is to obtain useful knowledge, therefore, whether X is learnable should matter more than whether X is teachable.
My suspicions are that educated people having learned mostly from explicit instructions conflate the two.
2
Replying to
Hmm, but what is learnable is what you are ready to learn. It's a bit difficult to reason about, imo.
In practice, this background discussion shouldn't matter that much. More productive would be: how to use deliberate practice and perceptual learning effectively.
Replying to
Ah I see. I don’t consider the capability of learner angle in my definition of what’s learnable and teachable.
Yes focusing on what’s more productive matters more.
Winning is winning :)