teaching you things like what “understand” means is a large task. are you willing to put in effort by e.g. reading a book chapter, and answering questions to identify what you do and don’t already understand about the matter?
When you say “ability to explain”, I hear “communicate a model that says what will happen (under some set of future conditions/actions)”.
There is no such thing as “why” in the actual sequence of states of matter in the universe. It just is. Any causality is in the models we use to predict future states. Which is really useful but not “truth”.
it’s not, i don’t know why you’re making a stink about it. i think you just wanted indirect evidence to convince yourself to stop conversing and be able to blame me in your head.
teaching you things like what “understand” means is a large task. are you willing to put in effort by e.g. reading a book chapter, and answering questions to identify what you do and don’t already understand about the matter?
Almost certainly not. I take this as confirmation that “understand” is the key misleadingly-simple word in your quote.
Not at all. It means the ability to explain, not just say what will happen.
When you say “ability to explain”, I hear “communicate a model that says what will happen (under some set of future conditions/actions)”.
There is no such thing as “why” in the actual sequence of states of matter in the universe. It just is. Any causality is in the models we use to predict future states. Which is really useful but not “truth”.
You’re hearing wrong.
it’s not, i don’t know why you’re making a stink about it. i think you just wanted indirect evidence to convince yourself to stop conversing and be able to blame me in your head.