本课程将介绍各领域专家所使用的学习方法，他们包括艺术家、文学家、数学家、科学家、运动员和很多其他领域专家。我们将学习如何使用两种不同的大脑模式，以及大脑如何封装（“chunks”）信息。我们还将介绍能力错觉（illusions of learning），记忆技巧，对付拖延症的方法，以及研究表明能帮助我们掌握困难科目的方法。 无论您在所学领域是专家还是菜鸟，您都可以使用这些方法，改变自己的思维模式，重塑自己的人生。如果您是所学领域的专家，通过学习大脑认知的底层知识，您可以进一步提高自己的学习能力，您将了解反直觉的考试技巧和见解，从而能够更高效地完成作业和习题。如果您在学习中遇到困难，系统有效的学习技巧将帮助您将走上正轨。无论您希望学习什么内容，这门课程都可以作为您的指南。
可选的与Robert Bilder博士就创造力与问题解决能力进行的访谈
Loading...
Del curso dictado por McMaster University
学会如何学习：帮助你掌握复杂学科的强大智力工具（Learning How to Learn）
784 calificaciones
De la lección
什么是学习？
尽管活体大脑相当复杂，但此单元将利用隐喻与类比帮助简化内容。你将发现几个完全不同的思维模式，并了解能怎样利用这些模式改进自己的学习。你还将接触到一项治疗拖延症的工具，获得一些有关记忆的实用信息，并意外地挖掘到一些有关学习与睡眠的实用见解。
如果你希望作好更充分的准备，那么可以选读 《数字思维》（非必修内容，但却是此MOOC的基础教材）。该书也已有华语简体版《学习之道》和华语繁体版 《用對腦，從此不再怕數字：學會如何學習，以如何創意思考，解決(幾乎)所有的問題》，还将推出更多外语版本，敬请期待。这本书让你有机会巩固在本课程中学到的学习方法，你可以在空白处作笔记或以电子笔记的形式帮助进一步推动思维的“组块化”。
Conoce a los instructores
Dr. Barbara OakleyRamón y Cajal Distinguished Scholar of Global Digital Learning, McMaster University
Professor of Engineering, Industrial & Systems Engineering, Oakland University
Dr. Terrence SejnowskiFrancis Crick Professor at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies
Computational Neurobiology Laboratory
Hong Chee Joo
Dr. Robert Bilder directs the consortium for
Neuropsychiatric Phenomics, which is a team of
more than 50 investigators most centered at
the University of California in Los Angeles.
This consortium aims to understand neuropsychological
phenotypes on a genome wide scale.
Through a combination of human research, basic research, and informatic strategies.
Basically, Dr. Bilder is digging to create a fundamentally new understanding of how
to look at personality disorders and
diseases that have an effect on personality.
In this regard, Dr. Bilder also directs
and co-directs a slew of other important centers.
But of the most interest to us, Dr. Bilder
is the Director of the Tennenbaum Center for the Biology of Creativity
one of the most important programs
in the country involved in the study of creativity.
So with that, it's a pleasure to speak here with Dr Robert Bilder.
Thank you so much for joining us here today Dr Bilder.
You're one of the world's foremost experts on creativity.
So I have a question for you, sometimes my students will tell me.
Now, wait a minute.
Other people have solved this problem before.
So, if I think about it and figure out how to solve this problem, I'm actually
not being creative while I'm solving this problem,
because other people have already solved this problem.
What are your thoughts on that situation?
>> Well, I think until you've solved
the problem yourself you haven't exercised your brain
and made the unique connections in your
brain, that are needed to solve that problem.
So, we could distinguish between those things
that are created for the world, which
that may not be creative with respect to everything else that's been done before.
But if we think about what's been done that's unique for you, something new
for you and that has value to you, then that satisfies a criteria for creativity.
And it's important for your, your brain to
do that in order to pursue other creative problems.
>> Well, I couldn't agree more.
So I, I'm glad you made that point.
When you're trying to learn something new, and you
speak publicly, sometimes you, like everyone, is criticized for it.
What advice do you have for handling this kind of criticism?
>> You know, someone told me something that
I'm surprised I only heard a few weeks ago.
And they said leadership is the ability to disguise panic.
And I think that if I had to think of all of the occasions i've had when i've
had great concerns about what was going on, or about handling criticisms, and
I think that it may only be through repeated
experience that one learns how to cope with that a little bit better.
Always difficult but I think the only
advice I can give to others is to always adopt the
same kind of curiosity about your own shortcomings and
your own difficulty getting the big picture
and understanding the entire scope of the
problem that you would apply to others and to, to any problem in general.
>> I like that too, sort of be,
be willing to accept discomfort sometimes because that's necessary.
You know, some people would say that it's only when you
experience some discomfort that you're
actually accomplishing some kind of change.
So, to the extent that one wants to make
progress, it's necessarily going to involve some degree of discomfort.
That's the nature of change.
Physical change in the brain has to involve some
work and that work has to involve some, some discomfort.
But I couldn't agree more.
>> I'm reminded, my old swimming coach used to say no pain, no gain.
>> [LAUGH] Yes, indeed.
>> And that may also be true of the brain.
>> Sometimes those old proverbs are really so true.
You know, that's why they're proverbs.
You have some very interesting
insights regarding creativity and being disagreeable.
Could you give our viewers just a little bit of insight about that.
>> Sure, sure so it's interesting that when
we have studied personality it turns out that their.
Our various models of personality, or temperament or character.
But they pretty much all boil down to five
factors, and these have been very reliably seen over time.
And the way that I find easiest to remember those five factors is
to use the acronym OCEAN, which stands for openness,
conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and neuroticisim.
And now that we've looked at that personality characteristics of people and
then tried to relate their personality
characteristics to their degree of creative achievement.
We find that there are two correlations here one of them's not surprising at all.
Openness to a new experience is associated with great achievement.
But then we find something that's perhaps not quite as intuitive,
there is a correlation also with
agreeableness but that correlation is negative.
So it means that people who are less agreeable
or more disagreeable tend to show higher creative achievement.
And I think that we might consider this to be a facet of nonconformism.
Those who tend to challenge the status quo, challenge models,
and don't believe things just because other people have said them.
I think that these are our folks who are more likely to be creative achievers.
I think so, too.
That's, that's a very interesting and it's a counter-intuitive finding.
>> Yes.
Usually people think agreeableness is, you know, a nice, positive trait.
And, indeed, agreeableness is a nice, positive trait.
yet, there are occasions when disagreeableness.
Can push the envelope, help us to challenge prior conventions and make
the kinds of pushes forward you know, that are outside the box.
>> I think sometimes it's just, it's hard to
walk that fine line between being being a, being agreeable.
Because things make sense.
And then sometimes stepping back and being
willing to be disagreeable because it doesn't
make sense to you, and then sometimes you find out, actually, it does make sense.
But sometimes, you're right to be disagreeable.
So finding that fine line of where to agree and where to disagree, and being
willing to disagree if you think that something is not quite right,.
I think that's an important important line to find.
>> Yeah, it's, it's difficult to know how to balance the correct approach.
And indeed, I think that's one of the cornerstones of
creativity, just by following from the root definitions of, of creativity.
Which typically emphasize on the one hand whatever the
product is, to be considered creative has to be new.
But then it also has to be useful or valued by someone.
So, this involves a kind of attention between doing
something that may be totally driven by your own
vision of things, and those things that are going
to end up being adopted or used by others.
So it means that you can create things that may be novel, wonderful, and strange.
But if they're too novel, too strange, then
they're not going to be considered wonderful by others.
So finding this sweet spot in the range between what
you find to be the newest and most valuable and exciting.
And what others believe is I think that's
a life long process of, of deliberation and balance.
>> That's so true.
I, I think writers in particular, writers and inventors are both,
they have to face what other people's opinions of their work are.
And sometimes it's just surprising what they'll come back
with, something that you thought was perfect, a real gem.
People will come back and, and give you insights that
allow you to understand that maybe your perceptions weren't quite right.
>> That's right, yeah.
I've gotten that feedback you know quite routinely,
and [LAUGH] may be a little defensive at first.
And then, you know try to warm up to it, and
try to understand well, what, what do they have in mind.
>> Any particular tips on how you learn most effectively?
>> Well, I think people vary a lot in terms of
the degree to which they are dominated by words or images.
You know some verbal versus visual learning styles.
And so I find that I do best if I can go between the two.
Because I love words and language.
I was actually once accused by my students of
being a sesquipedalian and got a little plaque from them.
I didn't know what sesquipedalian meant until I got the plaque.
And then anybody who watches this can then look it up.
Anyhow I love words, and so there's a nuance there that I really like.
But at the same time I feel like I don't
have a complete understanding unless i've somehow mapped it, graphed it.
Or visualized it.
And so I like to go back and forth between those two kinds of approaches.
The other thing that I really like to do,
and sometimes we've recommended this in exercises to enhance creativity.
Is to do a powers of ten exercise.
And for those who haven't seen it, there's a great video.
You can easily get it online.
Well you just look up powers of ten video I think that will do the job.
It basically starts with an imagine of a man sitting or lying in a hammock.
And then the camera zooms ten feet above, then 100 feet
above, then 1,000 feet above, it goes by powers of ten.
Ultimately you're exploring the cosmos in outer space.
And then it zooms back down into the man.
Then it goes powers of ten inside the skin.
Goes into the cell, goes down and reveals
the molecules, and then finally, and what's really
mind blowing, is how far you have to
go when you start getting into subatomic space.
Where you're really surrounded by nothingness.
More vast than the universe itself.
So I think that getting that kind of exercise, getting that perspective.
Trying to figure out what's the higher altitude view, stepping back
from a problem and thinking about well, why am I doing this?
What's the bigger picture?
But then also drilling into individual facets and details,
by zooming in and zooming out from a problem.
I usually find I get a much better idea
of the problem scope and different perspective on that problem.
>> That is very worth while.
I've never really thought of problem solving in that perspective.
I think that's maybe a little bit what you do.
A bit subconsciousness or is it just
naturally when you get away from the problem.
I mean, do you get new perspective when you're just going out for a walk.
Or something like that?
But that's an interesting perspective.
Zooming in and zooming out.
>> I think the brain probably does
some of this spontaneously and particularly during sleep.
Because if you think about what happens during sleep.
You've got a washing away of all of
the conscious, top down, cognitive control over your thoughts.
And it probably permits different neural networks
to assemble themselves in ways that may
make sense spontaneously, but are free from
the guided process of our top down mind.
And so I think that's one of the reason why people will awake
from sleep, dreams, or other relaxed
states, when they're not thinking about problems.
And all the sudden have come up with a solution.
All components were there that required a release at least temporarily of the
constraints, that would be applied to the problem to recognize a new solution.
That may be how August KekulĂŠ recognized the benzene ring,
from seeing that snake biting it's tail.
>> Yeah I think it's sometimes, I like to think of
it as an octopus of attention, and turns off during sleep.
And so the tentacles of the octopus can randomly go about
and that's what helps create some of the innovative new ideas.
>> Well, that's interesting.
You were, I think you were reading my mind because when I
was thinking of August KekulĂŠ, who dreamt about a snake biting his tail,
I was also thinking of well, what if instead of a snake biting
it's tail, he imagined a spider, or it could have been an octopus.
But, then we'd have a completely different structure of organic chemistry before us.
We would never have discovered the benzene ring.
>> Well that's what they say, insights that rise from
the subconscious like that, they are, they can sometimes be invaluable.
But you always gotta check 'em because sometimes
they may seem right, but they're not actually right.
That's right, yeah.
And there, you know, I'm mindful of speaking of spiders,
the fantastic experiments that were done in the early investigation
of LSD, the hallucinogen, where different drugs were given to
spiders and see what impact it had on their webmaking skills.
And while many people felt that they became incredibly creative while under
the influence of LSD, and while many people felt they had great
insights while they're under the influence of LSD, the spiders it turns
out, made really lousy webs when they were under the influence of LSD.
And I think a lot of people who had been putting down
what they were thinking about at the time that they were doing
LSD, found later, when they were no longer under the influence, that
the products that they had created were not exactly what they had hoped.
>> That's, that's, I think that's true, there's
interesting perspectives from history of different people's insights
whilst under drugs and not under drugs, and
sometimes I think it's, it's actually surprisingly good.
But other times, it's surprisingly terrible.
So so there's definitely a mixture there.
>> This is, this is true.
I was just reviewing with a class different kinds
of visual representations of dualities or balances between opposing forces.
So we were talking about the yin yang symbol, the Tibetan eternal knot.
But one of the symbols that's one of my,
one of my favorites probably because I understand it
the least, is the intersecting gyres or intersecting cones
that were described by Yeats and his wife George.
And those, those images were probably created
while they were under the influence of opium.
>> I will definitely have to go look those up now.
[LAUGH].
>> So, Doctor Bilder, I, I, I
so appreciate your, your an abecedarian polymath.
[INAUDIBLE] [LAUGH] So I greatly appreciate your
insights here, and on behalf of all the students of learning how to learn.
I, I thank you.
>> Thank you, Barb.
It's always great talking to you.
[BLANK_AUDIO]
Explora nuestro catálogo
Inscríbete de manera gratuita y obtén recomendaciones personalizadas, actualizaciones y ofertas.
Coursera brinda acceso universal a la mejor educación del mundo, al asociarse con las mejores universidades y organizaciones, para ofrecer cursos en línea.
© 2018 Coursera Inc. Todos los derechos reservados.
