Feb 5, 2024

have people stopped to learn for the sake of learning?

my base-rate neglect

Long gone are the times when you see people learn for the sake of learning, and long gone are the times when you see people curious, and use that curiosity to solve the unsolvable.

This statement was based on my own observations. I hadn't consulted any statistics. Perhaps it was a base-rate neglect from my end, plus it was very small-scale. After a discussion with vhaangogh and untrivial, I realised that this "claim" might not be much true.

untrivial contradicted my statement by saying that the era might not be gone, that learning for the sake of learning has become in fact more common, justifying it by:

"More resources & education & social benefits per person increases base rate of curiosity/solving and that these effects dominate any negative externalities caused by development."

I countered the argument by saying that people usually take things for granted; resources are endowed upon us much easier then before, which reduces their value. And that consumer culture (tiktok, instagram, etc.) kills our curiosity.

There was no way to be sure if the no. of people learning for the sake of learning had a change or not.

The answer to generalists vs specialists was also highly personal, because of different learning styles of people. Is there any way to tell which of them is better? Perhaps not from the "opportunity" standpoint (i.e, jobs), but for the amount of value it brings to the learnings?

Uncertainty loomed clear.