Re: What is understanding?

[William Beaty <billb@ESKIMO.COM>]

On Sun, 11 Jul 1999, Ludwik Kowalski wrote:

> I would very much like to hear what people have to say
> about this important philosophical topic. We will never
> all agree on what understanding is but hearing each
> other may be stimulating. There is no need to read old
> messages to restart the discussion.


One thing missing from that discussion is a particular quote by Einstein.
Please don't trust my memory entirely, but I think that it goes like this:
"If you don't know several independant ways to explain a concept, then you
do not understand it."

Over the years I've increasingly seen the wisdom in this definition of
"understand."  Real understanding requires that we've passed through
the stage of learning "the right answer", and have come to see that there
are usually several "right answers" which, on the surface, often seem to
contradict each other.

For example: our old battle between the "Bernoulli-ists" and "Newtonists"
over how an airplane really works.  When a person finally sees that the
two sides of the debate are both correct, *that* is the time when real
understanding of airplanes has been achieved.



((((((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (O)    )   )  ) ) )))))))))))))))))))))
William J. Beaty                                  SCIENCE HOBBYIST website
billb@eskimo.com                                  http://www.amasci.com
EE/programmer/sci-exhibits          science projects, tesla, weird science
Seattle, WA   206-781-3320          freenrg-L taoshum-L vortex-L webhead-L