[gilleain]

Agreed, it interests me how much some people emphasise knowing facts - like dates in history or dictionary definitions of words.

Facts alone are like pebbles on a beach, far better (IMO) to have a few stones mortared with understanding to make a building of knowledge. A fanciful metaphor but you know ...

[helle253]

Knowing facts matters quite a lot imo, even if it doesnt 'seem' like it.

To use another metaphor, you can't REALLY see the forest amongst the trees, if you don't consider the trees themselves.

One of the reasons I like history so much is because, with enough facts accumulated, you can see how one piece of information flows into another - e.g. dates matter, because knowing the precise order in which important events occur helps you determine how those events may or may not have affected each other in the course of their unfolding.

Sure memorizing dates is boring on its own, but putting them in contexts is exciting - you still need to comb the beaches to find the right stones!

[gilleain]

I accept the ordering of dates is important, yes. History can be in the details, but as you say you need to comb the beach for the right stones.

I guess an interesting counterpoint to what I said is something like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantom_time_conspiracy_theory (and similar) where a grandiose framework tries to fit inconvenient facts into a shape that is entirely invented.

[animuchan]

This is an entirely false dichotomy though, is it not? One can both know facts and understand logic behind them, it's not like you're creating an RPG character and need to make a choice with limited character points.

(Can't say time is the limiting factor either -- we're both in HN comments, valuing our own time at zero.)

[fendy3002]

I'm not an expert, however what I believe is brain has limited capacity, and old memories keep being deleted when unused after long time. It is impossible to remember everything unless you have photographic memory. It makes remembering facts like syntaxes challenging and most of the time useless, and keeping logic is better in the long run.

Let's for example about html boilerplate, where you don't remember the syntax. What you remember is the components & why they are needed, then add them one by one as you recall your memory. Doctype, html tag, head, body, etc. It works because html is simple and common.

Then for express it is harder, because you need to recall javascript syntaxes and express syntaxes, and most of the time you don't get involved with express outside req and res. You recall that express need body parser, register routers, and finally listen, whether you use http server first or directly from express. Now you compose one by one, looking at docs or web for the forgotten pieces, but you don't lose the understanding / logic of express, you just forget the syntaxes.

As for stream where I keep forgetting it, I just need to remember that stream need source, event handler such as on data, error, finish / end. Pipe if needed. However I never remember whether to use writable, readable, streamable, etc because I seldom get involved with them, and can look up for references anytime.

[randcraw]

And it ignores the fact that, if you refuse to remember any facts because they can be looked up, you'll be unable to form any new ideas because you'll know nothing, and you won't know what is out there to be looked up.

And of course, what if your phone dies?

[gilleain]

Yes I was not clear, it seems. Facts are necessary but not sufficient.

There is limited time, of course - no one can learn everything, but you can pay attention to the important facts, and the connections between them.

In some ideal world you would learn every fact there is, and the connections would fall out on their own, but in the real world we have to construct theories and frameworks to organise facts.