When obtaining knowledge Why or What is important?

[Sylreick]

Not another one. Oh gawd. Abandon logic, run for your lives!

"You are wrong" is the what. Now tell me the why.

If I had gone to great lengths to detail the steps out for you, that would be giving you the why, which would lead to that what. But giving you the what alone does nothing.

Do you grasp it now?

[Doctor Amadeus]

Alright. I'll play with this. Why creates the space for whats.

Example:

What? Kepler said that planetary orbits are ellipses, and that a line segment joining a planet and the Sun sweeps out equal areas during equal intervals of time.
Why?

Why? Newton explained that it was a consequence of a broader principle.

Misapplied, and this post has nothing to do with the OT, sorry but it's dumb shit like this that helps contribute a lot of bad science and knowledge. I am not getting into this seriously, you are wrong if you agree that WHY is dependent on WHAT, or as important. 2 + 2= 4 there is no room for debate, and the why is specific to that.

- - - Updated - - -

"You are wrong" is the what. Now tell me the why.

If I had gone to great lengths to detail the steps out for you, that would be giving you the why, which would lead to that what. But giving you the what alone does nothing.

Do you grasp it now?

Shit like this is why the worlds fucked, man lets close all the schools and Universities, man GOOGLE will save US! I'm gonna blame Wikipedia too, LOL!

[belfpala]

Misapplied, and this post has nothing to do with the OT, sorry but it's dumb shit like this that helps contribute a lot of bad science and knowledge. I am not getting into this seriously, you are wrong if you agree that WHY is dependent on WHAT, or as important. 2 + 2= 4 there is no room for debate, and the why is specific to that.

I said nothing of the sort.

I said that Kepler observed something. That's a what.

Then I said Newton later explained it as consistent with the mathematics of gravity. That's a why.

The why is bigger than the what. Always.

[--Code--]

"You are wrong" is the what. Now tell me the why.

If I had gone to great lengths to detail the steps out for you, that would be giving you the why, which would lead to that what. But giving you the what alone does nothing.

Do you grasp it now?

Grasp what? That the order of events is what->why->what->why etc? Yes, I do. When did you get the idea I thought the why was less important than the what? They're equally important. I already said a million times, "what" alone is nothing, and so is "why" alone.

[mickybrighteyes]

Grasp what? That the order of events is what->why->what->why etc? Yes, I do. When did you get the idea I thought the why was less important than the what? They're equally important. I already said a million times, "what" alone is nothing, and so is "why" alone.

equally important is a lame answer and doesn't say anything.... it's like the neutral dude in the DND campaign....

[Adam Jensen]

Why teaches far more than what.

I mean, if you want to know what happened in WWII, that's interesting and all, but understanding why will better help one avoid allowing such a situation to happen again in the first place.

[--Code--]

I think we're arguing over two different questions here, misinterpretation at it's best. I'm saying that what and why are equally important to literal static knowledge. Learning on the other hand should emphasize why as it expands your knowledge and nurtures the mind better than just learning a bunch of whats.

[Kellhound]

It's a gift, the guy is obviously fucking wrong, and if he doesn't know that, it is a good example of what I am talking about, if he understood the WHY, he would know it's not relevant.

Without the What, there can be no Why.

[Revi]

Both?

The "what" is necessary before "why". Without the "what" there's nothing to know the "why" about.

But I also think the why is very important.

[Jester Joe]

"You are wrong" is the what. Now tell me the why.

If I had gone to great lengths to detail the steps out for you, that would be giving you the why, which would lead to that what. But giving you the what alone does nothing.

Do you grasp it now?

Huh, well played.

I think we're arguing over two different questions here, misinterpretation at it's best. I'm saying that what and why are equally important to literal static knowledge. Learning on the other hand should emphasize why as it expands your knowledge and nurtures the mind better than just learning a bunch of whats.

And that's what OP was talking about, learning.

What's more important when learning something to you learning WHAT is the right answer or WHY something is the right answer?

Also in your opinion, in learning or teaching is it more important to show your work or just give the right answer?

[mickybrighteyes]

I think we're arguing over two different questions here, misinterpretation at it's best. I'm saying that what and why are equally important to literal static knowledge. Learning on the other hand should emphasize why as it expands your knowledge and nurtures the mind better than just learning a bunch of whats.

the thread title included "obtaining knowledge" >.> one would think that would refer to one going out and learning

[--Code--]

the thread title included "obtaining knowledge" >.> one would think that would refer to one going out and learning

Yes, thread got offtopic, mindblowing. I'm honestly just saying this so I can /thread in peace.

[Dispraise]

The why gives you the what.

This sounds like a euphemism.

[Dezerte]

The "why" allows you to understand something, it engages more thought processes in your brain. And this sort of knowledge will allow you to apply the same thought processes to other issues.

[Templar 331]

Both. What happens and why it happens is equally important. You don't fully understand one without the other.

[NPEC]

Today one of my students decided that my phone on my desk would be better suited in their pocket. While I am quite curious as to which student actually took it (the "what") I am MUCH more interested in the "why": Was it personal, are they desperate for cash to buy a prom ticket, is it to support a drug habit, does their family need money to make rent, etc etc etc. Once I find out the "why" I can address the underlying symptoms that led to the "what".

The ting is, if they he hadn´t took you phone " the what" you would never wander why did he took it the "why".

[wow2011]

The why is important for learning purposes.

The what is the only thing that matters if you get into good college or not.

[apepi]

You know, I was thinking about this for a while. And I decided that it is neither.

When in science, you don't look for why or even what. You look for how many. Is X consistent so many times? How many times is it not consistent? We don't look for why. Putting reason to something that knowledge has no reason. We make 'knowledge' through our finding of consistency, not why or what. Knowledge can not reason with us, we reason with knowledge.