Is Starting from the Basics Every Time Normal?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Avichal
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the approach to learning new subjects, particularly in the context of physics and mathematics. Participants share their preferences for starting from foundational concepts versus focusing on modern understandings and applications. The conversation touches on the implications of these learning styles on time management and comprehension.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses a preference for starting from the very beginning of a subject, citing that it enhances their understanding, even if it leads to lagging behind in classes.
  • Another participant acknowledges the importance of basic concepts but argues that going back to the historical origins of physics is unnecessary for understanding basic electronics.
  • A different participant agrees with the need to start from the basics but emphasizes that they still prefer to begin with modern concepts rather than historical perspectives.
  • One participant suggests that if a learner feels the need to start from the dawn of physics, it is simply their personal learning style.
  • Another participant humorously references a lengthy historical text on mathematics to illustrate the potential drawbacks of starting from the very basics in every subject.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally express differing views on the necessity and utility of starting from historical foundations when learning new subjects. There is no consensus on whether this approach is beneficial or a waste of time.

Contextual Notes

Some participants mention having the necessary prerequisites for their courses, yet still feel the urge to revisit foundational concepts. This highlights the subjective nature of learning preferences and the varying importance placed on historical context.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to educators, students, and anyone exploring different learning methodologies in STEM fields.

Avichal
Messages
294
Reaction score
0
Whenever I start a new thing, I begin with the absolute beginning. For eg:- If I start studying electronics I will go back to discovery of electricity, discovery of electrons, cathode ray experiment etc. Similarly with other subjects. I just understand things much better this way.

So does this happen with anybody? There are times when studying advanced maths that I start wondering about how additions, subtraction are defined. I just like starting from beginning everytime I start something new. However this eats a lot of my time. While classes move on I see myself lagging behind.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Not I. I need to understand the basic concepts first, but I don't need to go back to the dawn of physics to understand basic electronics. However if you literally didn't know what an electron really was before you took the course then I can understand that.
 
No I had all the prerequisites for the electronics course but still I felt the need to go back to the dawn of physics before starting the course.
Actually it happens with every course. I like to start from the very beginning before really getting into the course
 
Avichal said:
No I had all the prerequisites for the electronics course but still I felt the need to go back to the dawn of physics before starting the course.
Actually it happens with every course. I like to start from the very beginning before really getting into the course

Not sure what to tell ya. If that's the way you learn then I guess that's just the way you learn.
 
I'm with Drakkith. Basic concepts first, mix in a bit of history if it's interesting or relevant but it's not essential. For me it would be a massive waste of time and effort if for every subject I had to start from the historical perspective rather than starting with the basic concepts understood in modern times.
 
I guess you would enjoy learning the basics of math from a book like Russell and Whitehead's "Principia Mathematica".

If takes them about 370 pages to get to the point where they can start proving the proposition "1+1=2", and they finally complete the proof nearly 100 pages into Volume II, with the footnote "The above proposition is occasionally useful".
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K