Few snippets from those 10 lessons:
--- Students join forces on the problem sets, and some students benefit more than others from these weekly collective efforts. The most brilliant students will invariably work out all the problems and let other students copy, and I pretend to be annoyed when I learn that this has happened. But I know that by making the effort to understand the solution of a truly difficult problem discovered by one of their peers, students learn more than they would by working out some less demanding exercise.
--- Half a century ago, the philosopher Gilbert Ryle discussed the difference between "knowing how" courses are those in mathematics, the exact sciences, engineering, playing a musical instrument, even sports. "Knowing what" courses are those in the social sciences, the creative arts, the humanities, and those aspects of a discipline that are described as having social value.
--- It is my theory that "knowing how" is revered because it can be tested.
(
This knowing-how-and-knowing-what reminds me of Snow's Two Cultures!! Imprinting such "divisive" ideas on human psyche may not be good for education.)--- The idea of genius elaborated during the Romantic Age (late 18th and 19th centuries) has done harm to education. It is demoralizing to give a young person role models of Beethoven, Einstein, and Feynman, presented as saintly figures who moved from insight to insight without a misstep. Scientific biographies often fail to give a realistic description of personality, and thereby create a false idea of scientific work.
--- Young people will correct any fantasies they have about genius. As they start doing research with their professors they learn another healthy lesson, namely, a professor may well behave like a fumbling idiot.
______________________