I
affectionately remember browsing through my ninth grade textbooks at the
beginning at the year. Even though the year hadn’t started yet, I already had a
sense of accomplishment. I knew I was going to get through the year and, from
what I had seen, it looked as though I would be learning so much. I smiled at
the childish prospect of bowling my friends over with some of the obscure facts
I had memorized from my books.
A year is a
long time. By now, I have become a master of my chemistry and physics books.
However, as I have learned from reading the Q and A section below Khan Academy
videos, I am far from a master even on some of the most basic topics. It is
only after reading beyond the textbook I have come to understand the amount of
simplification that goes into a beginner high school course. I’m not a master.
I’m just a sorry guy looking for gold on the surface when all the smart guys
are mining tons of the stuff down below.
That
realization really drove in the understanding of the monumental task of
learning. Even If I study for years and years, I may never be a master of even
one field, unless I create it myself.
That’s a
pretty sobering fact. It’s motivating a discouraging. I want to see how much I
can learn, but, honestly, I hate studying. I’m much more practically minded. Of
course, the virtue of books is that we can read a few words and learn what it
took others lifetimes to discover.
That also
leads to another question. Any qualified scientist today have a much better
understanding of the universe that Newton did. But does that make them ”smarter”
than him? How does one define smart? If I spent all my waking hours memorizing
facts from textbooks, would I really be smarter.
In the end,
the question we have to answer is, what really defines a master: factual knowledge,
or ability, or both? If Einstein were resurrected, would his impressive
capabilities make up for his lack of modern knowledge?
