Personality Cafe banner

1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
472 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I personally detest the latter. It's time-consuming, stressful, often messy, and usually involves something I don't care about at all.
I'm more likely to put effort into trying to understand a textbook, for example, than I would put into some silly experiment.

I'm curious to see whether this is odd for an INTP or not. :B
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,095 Posts
This is an interesting topic. My friend's father has been a teacher for over 20 years, and he wants to write a book on the difference between learning with boys and girls. He believes that boys learn better hands on and girls learn better through reading and verbal communication. He believes the current school system is set up to benefit girls in learning more than boys.

I think that I learn better hands on, but I like doing so at my own pace. I like to slowly digest my reading and all of my learning. For me reading non-fiction it's kinda like - read a paragraph, understand the true meaning and intentions of the author, read the next.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
255 Posts
I think this is too vague of a question to give a single answer on. What am I "learning", and for what purpose? Is it something I wish to apply in a direct way in my life, or something to broaden my perspective or understanding of life? Not that those two types of goals are mutually exclusive, either.

When I was younger, I would have answered that I preferred to accumulate learning by reading, but many experiences throughout life have shown me that what often works on paper doesn't necessarily translate to what works in reality. As a result, I have increasingly placed a stronger emphasis on hands-on learning.

Learning how to sew a patch onto a hole in clothing is fundamentally a different kind of learning than (for instance) learning about highly abstract topics such as sociology and philosophy whose applications aren't necessarily obvious. Sewing is a skill that might seem to benefit mostly from hands-on learning (it requires good fine motor skills), but I would be benefitted from reading a set of instructions that explains the fundamentals so that I have something to reference. Likewise, it's easy to learn about abstract philosophical topics through reading, but everyday life situations (the hands-on) also provides many opportunities to learn and test abstract philsophical ideas.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
749 Posts
I think I learn better hands on. Like if I need to understand a process like say fisheries management, I prefer to sit down with the book and derive all the equations myself, and voila! I know why we fish the living piss out of our fisheries!

But for me hands on learning can be messy (especially with women, lol). But I mean if I want to learn about a car I like to tear it apart and then forget how it went back together and then put it back together with an assortment of bolts lying about that I hope weren't important. I refuse to ever buy one of those shitty, poorly written Hanes manuals. They're only good for torque specifications which are largely available on internets :laughing:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
101 Posts
I prefer the reading. However, hands-on learning can serve to better explain things. If ever I don't quite understand how a process works by study, I may attempt to demonstrate it via experiment. Experimentation as a primary source of knowledge is time-consuming, and sometimes very tedious and pointless. I would rather use it as a last resort only.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,308 Posts
In essence both. When I was young I was much better at retaining information from reading. Still, even then I preferred the hands-on method.

When I learn hands-on I feel like I am obtaining meta-knowledge about what it is I am doing. It allows me to extrapolate and apply the knowledge in a wider perspective.

Nowhere is this difference more apparent than in using software. Book learners will study recipes which have limited value outside the exact situation described by the recipe. Ever notice how fat computer books are and how much redundancy there is in them?
I learn to deal with the problem hands-on instead. I may take four times longer to figure it out, but once I do the experience I have gaing allows me to tackle ten other problems similar to the first one, whereas the book learners have to dive back into their literature.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
80 Posts
Hands-on is definitely better. When reading a book you are essentially looking at the perception of the author concerning that particular subject. Hands-on allows personal perception.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,207 Posts
Do you prefer reading or hands-on learning?
I personally detest the latter. It's time-consuming, stressful, often messy, and usually involves something I don't care about at all.
I'm more likely to put effort into trying to understand a textbook, for example, than I would put into some silly experiment.

I'm curious to see whether this is odd for an INTP or not. :B
I don't like reading textbooks. If it is a skill that can be "done," then I prefer to learn it by doing it. I like to read about personality theory, but I am also observing people. The problem with classroom "experiments" and "hands-on projects" is that they are usually pre-determined and boring. There is no discovery involved, you're just doing what the lab manual says to do. A well-designed "hands-on project" gives you more room to think and figure things out for yourself.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
487 Posts
I prefer reading about the topic and then seeing an example or demonstration. It also helps me to know why it happens rather than just accepting that it does.
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top