Learning how to learn, a good philosopher to lay the foundations of learning

[charlie cho]

In the first sentence of the analects, Confucius said that there are plentiful trustworthy people in the village. They are honorable, devoted to the country, and kind, and he says that he himself is the same. So what makes Confucius so special? Although there are many devoted individuals, there are not many learned ones, and there are none other than himself, in his view, who loves learning. He calls it Hao Xue (好学）which means love of learning. 

Well, I asked a researcher of Confucian principles what this exactly meant, and how this differs to Chuang Tzu's and Lao Tzu's criticisms against scholars who are obsessed with "learning". The researcher said that Confucius was a realistic practical man. Although Taoists are great, he said Confucius was a peasant, practical, lowly, down to earth person. 

That said everything I needed to know about Confucius. 

He added Hao Xue (love of learning) simply means enjoying the act of learning in itself. It's hard to ride a bike at first. But you learn it and enjoy the learning of the bike. Skiing. Same with reading philosophy, history, and math. There is nothing special about Hao Xue. Just loving to learn. Practical, no complexity. Nothing mystical. Confucius never talked about God, mysticism, or the other world. He was against those kinds of topics. (really) This aspect of Confucius put me off, but since I've begun to really think hard about learning, and also watching Eben Pagan's learning program, reading how Nikola Tesla learned, how Feynman learned, how Einstein learned, how Leonardo Da Vinci learned... etc. I've craved to find who can give me a good foundation in the philosophy of learning. Maybe a foundational epistemological understanding of learning knowledge.

I've found that Hao Xue must be the most basic fundamental building block in learning how to learn. Loving learning must be the basis of all learning! Is there any other explanation than this? Can you find another one? Through love of learning, there is an awareness and understanding of learning. A certain distance from our mastery process. Thus we are prone not to make many mistakes along our mastery process.  

Reading the Analects from this standpoint, I've understood many things about Confucius. His phrases, books are not to be read once. For example, Tao Te Ching and the Dhammapada is a spiritual text. It can be argued these texts must be read through intuition, so reading them once maybe better than memorizing them and intellectually trying to understand them. 

Confucius' text are far from spiritual. It's about cultivation and learning. He believed even goodness and kindness could be cultivated and learned. To him love and kindness was training and self-help, not natural. All texts in the Analects and the spring and autumn annals are like riddles to mentally try to understand. You can't just read it as face value. You need to study it like you're solving a math problem to understand confucius's sayings, because he himself was all about cultivation and learning rather than natural intuition. 

By the way, Confucius said in his life time that he only saw one person in his life who had loved learning as much as him. It was one of his disciples Ahn Hui. Ahn Hui died early, he was sickly quiet but was a genius (so they say). So you get the grasp of how rare it is for one to really love learning 好学 in the way Confucius had explained it. 

Edited February 17, 2022 by charlie cho

[EternalForest]

I think people need incentive to learn. What is your reason for trying to learn anything other than what it can do for you? Not to say this in a selfish way, but if you really think about it, why would you learn things that are pointless to you? How does it serve you? People without a natural love of learning still learn things naturally all the time, but it's what they want to learn based on what they've been exposed to or what they're naturally interested in. If they love cars, they learn more about them all the time. If they love animals, they want to spend more time with them, watching and observing them. Someone who is into insects probably isn't going to spend every weekend at the car show, however. Not to say it's limited to just this, since they may learn something just because someone they love or respect is into it, but even this is incentive.

 

Edited February 17, 2022 by EternalForest

[charlie cho]

@EternalForest I see what you are saying.

But have you ever thought that man can love learning itself without an objective? 

If we really think about it, life is all about experiencing but at the same time releasing and letting go. Two contradictory statements at face value, but essentially the same. In other words, life's assignment is about balancing out the two spectrum of experience and letting go.

Here, I'm proposing that at least in terms of having rich experiences of life, one must cultivate the love of learning. Learning and experiencing is ultimately the same concept, because without a change of behavior/experience, there is no learning. People like to think learning is just mental. No, learning is the most practical, gross, blatant, physical, down-to earth activity there is. And I cannot begin to understand how a person who does not love learning in itself will ever have rich experiences in life. 

Edited February 17, 2022 by charlie cho

[EternalForest]

@charlie cho Yes, but learning for learning's sake can become redundant. There's nothing wrong with enjoying it, but I also don't agree that being neutral on it is going to lead to any less of a quality life. Imagine being a musician and all of your songs revolve around the topic of loving music? Or only giving speeches about the power of a great speech?

I think back to my high school days and view it as the biggest waste of time in my life. When thinking back, high school held no meaningful moments or epiphanies for me. Everything valuable about my time there came from the friends I made, places I went, and life experiences I had. My reading and writing level is fundamentally the same as it was when I was in 9th grade, same with my math abilities, especially the stuff I've actually had to use in real life. The most important things I know weren't taught in school.

 

[ZenSwift]

To break down your selfishness with regards to learning you need to first understand what pragmatism is. 

 

Through my contemplations I've realized that you can never know what will someday become practical. How pragmatism is a notion that hinges entirely on your survival bias. 

 

Therefore, learning about everything is just feeding more data to the system because everything is interconnected anyways. Even if that just means learning about something is just adding more metaphors to your web of  understanding. The more reference points you have the more you can triangulate/construct an understanding that is benefitial. 

[charlie cho]

@ZenSwift yes, whatever you learn. Just learn it. Better to know than not know, it's a good way of thinking 

[BartekD]

On 2/17/2022 at 1:05 AM, charlie cho said:

because he himself was all about cultivation and learning rather than natural intuition.

I wonder if natural intuition later increases and if it itself can be learned/mastered lol. 

I love this post btw 

[BartekD]

On 2/17/2022 at 2:16 AM, EternalForest said:

I think people need incentive to learn. What is your reason for trying to learn anything other than what it can do for you? 

 

You can learn to love learning actually. I think I heard Naval Ravikant talk about reading, and reading only what you really like until eventually you learn to love reading itself for its own sake. Extrapolate that to learning and it becomes applicable to learning  

 

[EternalForest]

On 2/17/2022 at 2:58 PM, ZenSwift said:

To break down your selfishness with regards to learning you need to first understand what pragmatism is. 

 

Through my contemplations I've realized that you can never know what will someday become practical. How pragmatism is a notion that hinges entirely on your survival bias. 

 

Therefore, learning about everything is just feeding more data to the system because everything is interconnected anyways. Even if that just means learning about something is just adding more metaphors to your web of  understanding. The more reference points you have the more you can triangulate/construct an understanding that is benefitial. 

This is also very true and something I should have acknowledged, thank you

[charlie cho]

@ZenSwift If I might add, I read OSHO wasn't against "cultivating" and gaining knowledge through books. He told his sannyasins to read many books and experience life to the fullest before pursuing enlightenment. In his own words, "make your mind rich, then can you drop it"