I appreciate the insight you folks have offered. I have spent some time just thinking about this for a while.
I
think what I may be trying to get at is the
feel of how a brain/person actually works (thinks) in learning. I am wondering if the brain kind of, "automatically" kicks into a "higher gear" in terms of "quality" of acquiring data (learning) while working or authoring?
I am acquainted with the long-known "facts" of learning, but I'm coming at this from a more visceral as opposed to empirical vista. If I can use the term, it seems that knowledge that is learned is more "meaty." When I take the "easy" or "quick" pathway I do gain the knowledge, but if I have to work for it... it's
mine! It's almost like a 2d compared to a 3D experience.
In regard to "code reuse," I'm very much in agreement, but only if it is "my" code snippets. I know production deadlines sometimes force us to the push-button solution, so one may not always have the luxury, but I do know the author of a book knows the story in intimate detail which a reader can never know. This intimacy allows the author to add or omit characters and story lines at will and maintain the whole intact. I think coding is like authoring a book in this regard, so the ability to author all of the code allows a programmer to "know" the code in a way only he /she can. I'm using "coding" as the example, but this would apply to all areas of learning and knowing. I realize this is the ideal, but it would substantiate the concept of the mind gaining a qualitative advantage while learning.
Please feel free to take a blind stab to help me get my head around what I think I'm trying to say. Someone once said, "No man is an island." Maybe the progenitor of that wisdom had "thought" in mind?
