A hobby that can be taught by oneself.

A hobby that can be taught by oneself.

Hobbies that can be taught by themselves. Sometimes we have a wide range of hobbies. Some people have three or more hobbies. Besides work, we can learn a brand-new hobby, broaden our knowledge and teach ourselves.

Hobbies that can be taught by themselves 1 the first kind: photography.

Photography is an art. It is very good to record your college life with a lens and meaningful life scenes in the form of photos.

After remembering, it must be full of happiness. Now both mobile phones and cameras can take pictures, and many photos taken by mobile phones are also very nice. Students may wish to study this aspect, and maybe they can see the big picture.

The second type: programming

This is a technical job, and boys may be more interested, but both boys and girls have a lot of fun learning programming well.

Digital media is changing the world. If you learn programming, you can write programs according to your own ideas and realize functions that are more in line with your wishes.

At present, programming is also a creative art, which can exercise our logical thinking ability and is also a hobby of relaxation and entertainment.

The third kind: reading

Nowadays, many people like reading with electronic devices, but this is fragmented reading. Traditional reading methods are actually more conducive to training your understanding ability. Holding a book in the library for an hour or two and thinking deeply through reading are conducive to forming your own ideological system.

The fourth kind: music

Music is very interesting. Sometimes when you are in a bad mood, maybe a song can cure you. During college, learning a musical instrument that interests you and sticking to it will add color to your life.

The fifth kind: painting

Painting can improve people's aesthetic ability. The process of learning painting is actually very interesting. It is interesting to think that a picture in your hand is from point to line, then to surface, and finally forms a complete picture.

The sixth kind: sports

Exercise is a very good hobby. As the saying goes, life lies in exercise, which can enhance physical fitness and promote metabolism. Most importantly, people will have a sense of pleasure after exercise, which is very conducive to adjusting their mood.

College life is rich and colorful, and everyone should cultivate some hobbies as much as possible. Once cultivated, it is likely to affect your life.

Hobbies that can be taught by themselves II. structure

Many readers and friends have asked me, "How can I learn when I just start a field and don't know anything?" My answer is always the same: we must start with the framework.

What do you mean by framework? In short, it is to prepare your brain and tell it that we will absorb a lot of this knowledge in the future, so please be prepared to understand and store it.

For example, when you write a planning plan and report, do you have a general idea and an outline: what to write first, then what to write, and finally what to write-and then do it?

The same is true of study. Without a framework, all the knowledge you get is just fragments of information. They will float in the memory alone, and it is difficult to exist stably, and it is difficult for you to call, organize and integrate them.

So, how to build a framework to make our learning more systematic?

My suggested method is to search the classic textbooks related to this field, about 3-5 books. Then read it again-it doesn't need to be read word for word, it takes too much time. Just turn it over and read it through.

In this process, you need to think and answer these three questions:

What: What is the research object in this field? What are the main schools and branches? What are the commonly used terms?

Why: What is the significance of this field? Solve what problem? How is it going now?

How: What are the main methods in this respect? What are the basic achievements that are widely recognized and applied?

For example. Many readers ask how to enter psychology, and I always recommend several books, such as Psychology and Life, Social Psychology and Cognitive Psychology. Many people will start to shrink back when they see it:

"Hundreds of pages, when can I finish reading them, at least one year ..."

Do you really need to read page by page? Of course not, and it is not necessary.

Look at the first two chapters to have a preliminary understanding of their origins, and then look at other chapters to understand what the branches of psychology are, what they study respectively, and what major achievements have been made so far.

Then focus on the bold terms inside, or on the terms that come out at the end of the chapter, and roughly understand their meaning.

For another example, to learn philosophy, you don't have to turn over the Great Problems and Introduction of Western Philosophy page by page. What you have to do is:

Reading through the whole, we can understand that the origin of philosophy is man's suspicion of nature, and the main concerns are ontology, epistemology and ethics, which can be roughly divided into ancient Greek philosophy, scholasticism, modern philosophy and modern philosophy, and what are the characteristics of each stage.

For example, influenced by the Renaissance and the Enlightenment, modern philosophy shifted from religion to humanism, introduced mature logic and science, and became diversified.

What are you going to do at this stage? It is to learn and build a picture in your heart. Don't confine yourself to "the author's context", but focus on the picture in your heart to make up for what is missing.

This is called schema in psychology. It is the basis of our cognition and understanding of things.

For example, after reading a book, you know that one of the problems in philosophical research is epistemology. But you don't know what epistemology is.

Then turn to the relevant chapters and read them several times, or master all the epistemological contents in the book. There is no need to delve into what each concept means and how each conclusion is derived, as long as you know what it means.

The first task at this stage is to complete this picture. Once the picture is successfully established, it will play an important role in your future study.

Second, the concept

After building the framework, all you have to do is refine and supplement it.

In the process of framing, you will inevitably encounter many terms and concepts, stay at the level of incomprehension, and there may be deviations. It is time to get rid of them.

At this stage, the method you want to take is not limited to classic textbooks, but extensive search.

For example, when studying philosophy, you see a term called "matter", which comes from Aristotle, but it is not introduced in detail because of space. Then, you have to search for this term yourself and try to make it clear and thorough.

For example, you can read the introduction and explanation of Aristotle's philosophy, turn to the relevant parts and try to understand its accurate connotation. You can find books, search online, and watch open classes ... without sticking to all forms.

What you need to do is to quickly locate the concept you have doubts about and use as much information as possible to overcome it.

In this process, you are likely to encounter new concepts, so you might as well continue to follow the clues, follow the materials, include all relevant concepts and understand them clearly together.

The common confusion of many friends is: how to control this degree? How to prevent yourself from constantly extending and jumping into the ocean of new concepts?

My suggestion is: always ask yourself in your heart, can I explain this concept clearly in my own words? If you can, and it doesn't involve new concepts, it's time to stop.

For example, following the material, you may see the material form and jump to the "four reasons theory" ... that's all. If you go further, it has nothing to do with the material.

Always remember what your goal is. With the purpose as the guide, draw boundaries for yourself.

Once you think you understand a concept well enough, put it back in the frame and try to explain it in your own words to see if it is smooth and reasonable. If so, that's good, keep looking for the next concept, and so on.

Slowly, when these concepts are fully understood, your whole framework will be more accurate.

Third, the network.

At this point, you officially started.

After the framework construction and concept clarification, you will find that what you didn't understand before seems to be roughly understood now; What I took for granted before turned out to be that my understanding was not accurate enough; There seems to be some ideas about the vague question before.

Then, at this stage, you can read, attend classes and study with the following questions.

What's the problem? Always with the idea of "contact", I have been thinking: what knowledge have I learned? What other knowledge points can you contact? How to establish this connection?

This is the core of learning:

The essence of knowledge is never the information itself, but the connection between information.

It is this connection that leads to a systematicness beyond the sum of individual information points.

How to treat "connection"? My usual practice is to regard each knowledge point as a knowledge unit, which has three synapses, namely, what, why and how:

What: theme, structure, category

Why: principle, cause and origin

How to: Apply, Explain and Result

For example. When you read Descartes' I think, therefore I am, you find that he is explaining "self"-then you can associate it with "self".

After a while, you may read Daniel Dannet's multiple draft model, and you will find that he put forward a brand-new concept of "self" from the perspective of brain science. Then, also associate it with "self".

At this time, you will find some connection between "self", "I think therefore I am" and "multiple draft mode". What is this connection?

Obviously, the latter is refuting the former and putting forward an immaterial and distributed "self". Then, you can establish a new connection between them.

Further, you can think: Why are their views so different?

If Descartes is put back into the previously established framework, it is not difficult to find his ideological basis from religion and ontology: his dualism of body and mind is essentially the harmony between religion and science-then you can start from why and extend it.

Similarly, Daniel Dannet's theory can be extended to brain science and cognitive science. ...

In this way, numerous conceptual nodes can be combined to form a network. A huge network covering various disciplines and fields, from the bottom to the surface, is very detailed.

This is your knowledge system.

Fourth, the theme

In the above example, what if we focus on the concept of "self"?

You may think of "I think therefore I am", "multiple drafts" and Hume's "ego is just a collection of a series of impressions" ... these nodes embedded in the knowledge network will all appear and enter your field of vision.

So, you might as well think about it:

Around this theme, how do these different people and different views merge?

What is their development background?

What is the relationship between them?

Why are there these similarities and differences?

This is the theme-pay attention to a detail in our huge knowledge network and pull out a local network.

Just like my book "The Hole in the Brain: How Did You Become Narrow and Stubborn?" The process of "facts → conclusions → ideas → beliefs" written in the book is a local network formed around the theme of "prejudice" in my knowledge network.

Are there any books that directly mention this process? Has any book ever put forward the words "oversimplification" and "isolated memory"? Actually, no.

They are not inherent knowledge in psychology. It is the result that I refine, summarize and induce all the processes that will lead to prejudice around the core of "prejudice" and then give it a name.

Similarly, are "confirmation bias" and "information cocoon room" the same knowledge field? Actually, it is not. The former belongs to psychology, while the latter belongs to communication. But it doesn't matter under the theme of "prejudice", the two complement each other.

This is the power of the theme.

Around a theme, you can extract a complex and abstract process and turn it into a new node; You can also put knowledge points in different fields together and draw a new and higher-level conclusion according to their inherent similarity and * * *.

For example. If the knowledge network is like a house, then the theme is all kinds of activities you can do in this house: gathering, working, eating, watching movies and so on.

These themes constitute our understanding of the world.

Verb (abbreviation for verb) immigration

Finally, I talked about migration.

If the first four points belong to the accumulation of knowledge, then here, it has officially entered the application of knowledge.

What is migration? It actually means transferring old and known laws and patterns to new problems and situations. What is the most important thing at this stage? It is the ability to understand and disassemble the external situation.

For example, this question: the museum is on fire. Should we save the famous painting or the cat? Seeing this problem, we should think about its essence through appearances:

What is the essence of this problem? It is a dilemma.

Where is the dilemma? One end is value (famous painting) and the other end is morality (life).

Then, you may find: what is its essence? In fact, it is just a variant of the "tram problem".

Furthermore, when we are faced with the dilemma of morality and value, how should we think? We might as well turn to ethics.

There are two viewpoints in ethics, namely teleology and deontology. The former focuses on the utility and value of things, while the latter focuses on the motivation of behavior and behavior itself. As long as the starting point is good, behavior is good.

Obviously, if we transfer the knowledge of ethics, we will know that there is no answer to this dilemma. But through such questions, what we can do is to reflect on our own positions and concepts.

For example, if you are a utilitarian, think about it: Can you really accept a life disappearing in front of you? You are an deontologist, so think about it, is your behavior really from the heart? Will it be influenced and interfered by the outside world?

Of course, if you use other knowledge to migrate, you may come to other conclusions.

This is a kind of migration. Specifically, it is three steps:

When accumulating knowledge in the first four steps, reserve the interface of knowledge (refer to the fourth point on how to synapse).

When encountering new situations and problems, find out the core behind them by disassembling the problems.

Compare the core of the problem with the "interface" and apply the existing knowledge to the new problem.

Similarly, if you study programming, what is the most important step?

It is to disassemble the effect you want to achieve, describe it with the process and mode that the computer can understand, and then use the existing knowledge to solve the problem according to your accumulated programming knowledge.

For example. If I want to do a small activity of "one-on-one pairing" among a group of people, how can I disassemble this problem?

Think about it, what is its ultimate purpose? Is to match similar people as much as possible. So how to make the computer understand the similarity?

As we know, computers don't understand languages; They can only understand numbers. So similarity can only be achieved by numbers.

So, a simple idea is:

We define several categories in advance, and then ask participants to make a questionnaire. According to the results of the questionnaire, we divide them into different categories (label everyone with 1, 2,3 ...), and then randomly select them in the same category.

Further, you will find that this is actually similar to the algorithm of the recommendation system. It's just that the input of the recommendation algorithm is changed to various user behavior data, and the algorithm is much more complicated.

In short, combining these examples, what methods can we "migrate"?

Analogy. We can think about what old problems this problem is similar to what we know, and we can imitate the analogy.

Black box. Think of this problem as a black box and think about it: what is its input and what is its output.

Abstraction. We might as well try to generalize and abstract it, extract its structure and skeleton, and think about what kind of problem it is in essence.

Six, the model

When you enter the "migration" stage, the next step is to keep practicing. Constantly discover and discover new situations and practice disassembly and migration.

In the process, you may gradually discover:

Between many new problems, there are actually some * * *. Although they are different, they can all be migrated and solved with the same set of knowledge patterns. At this point, you have created a Model.

This is also the ability that many people lack. They may know how to migrate, and they are not short of practice, but what they lack is the ability to summarize and abstract the "model" from the experience of solving problems at a high level.

Many of our so-called "experts" and "smart people" are actually better than us, which is the crux of the problem: their advantages are not the knowledge reserves-those are static. Their advantage is that they have a large number of "models" accumulated.

You will find that in the face of a new problem, they can always disassemble it quickly and call relevant knowledge to solve it-this is the role of the model.

For example, the example given in point 5, "Save the painting or save the cat", uses the wording "this kind of problem"-this is actually a "model".

For another example, I mentioned the "power-resistance" model many times in previous articles. Have any books mentioned this model? Actually, no. This is completely my original.

However, through this model, I can concentrate a lot of relevant knowledge and deal with a series of problems related to decision-making, behavior, habits and policies. And think about them and solve them better.

I always say that we should try our best to create our own methodology. This model has its own methodology.

All your knowledge is known in the world, and only these condensed models obtained through your experience and practice are your own wealth.

You will find that the model is very similar to the theme. What's the difference between them? The theme is internal, which is a series of explanations that you unfold around a node in the knowledge network. The model is external, which is the result of transferring the theme to a series of situations.

In short, the essence of the model is theme+situation; The theme focuses on "why" and the model focuses on "how".

When you can get through the first five layers, look at new problems from the perspective of models and solve new problems, you will enter the field of "specialty".

Seven. update

The last layer is update.

There is no end to learning. When a framework is established and a knowledge network is established, it will be a thing of the past forever. But human knowledge is constantly developing.

You must update it frequently, update the old nodes and update the links between nodes to keep the vitality of your knowledge network.

How to update? Here, it is the role of debris information.

In my life, I will go to various websites, blogs and magazines, read some short articles focusing on a certain point, and cover and correct my old views with the latest conclusions and opinions.

Similarly, in life, if my old views are challenged and questioned, I will try my best to find out the shortcomings and imperfections of my own views (positive) and integrate the other's views (negative) for by going up one flight of stairs.

This is a process of constantly updating the knowledge base and upgrading the brain operating system.

But many people at this level are particularly prone to a problem: closed mentality.

Many people will take different views as attacks on themselves, thus subconsciously starting the defense mechanism to maintain their correctness and stability.

Remember: only an open mind can keep us alive. When your heart becomes closed, when you close the door of acceptance and knowledge, you are really old.

VIII. Answers to Several Frequently Asked Questions

First, some people may feel "I don't seem to have a framework". In fact, the framework must exist. I feel that there is no framework, just because it has not been realized by you.

But in this way, it is easy to cause what results? The framework is incomplete, inaccurate and fragmented. In this way, your reception and storage of new knowledge will be cut off.

Therefore, "clarifying your own framework" is also a very important ability.

Second, this theory is applicable to the vast majority of learning. However, for different learning fields, the proportion of each level will be different.

For example, in the field of theoretical knowledge (such as philosophy, history and art), the proportion of frame-concept-network-theme may be heavier; However, in the field of practical and skilled knowledge (such as programming), the proportion of framework-concept and migration-model will be greater.

Third, what are the problems of most people? Passive learning.

What do you mean? Open a book, read it from beginning to end, busy thinking about "what did the author say" and "what is the structure of the book", and accept it as a whole; After listening to a class, I was busy sorting out the structure and context of the course, and then rote it. ...

Does this work? Maybe, but not much. You are just copying other people's ideas. No matter how much you learn, it's just repetition, so it's hard to really use it.

Don't think that following others is a shortcut. There is no shortcut to learning.

Fourth, many people will be confused in the first few layers: but how do I know if the framework I built and the concept of understanding are correct? What if it's wrong?

Actually, there is no need to worry too much. On the one hand, the construction of the framework and the understanding of the concept are not based on speculation-you have to consult the information to overcome it. This can ensure that there will be no direction deviation.

On the other hand, it is a robust system. Framework and concept * * * are combined and interact. If the deviation is too large, then the framework must be inherently contradictory and easy for us to find.

Finally, there is no need to pursue the correctness of 100%, which is neither necessary nor possible. The key is to keep an open mind and always check and update your knowledge in the later study, that's all.

What we want to pursue is never "absolutely right", but "better than ourselves in the past".