<p><span class="h-card" translate="no"><a href="https://types.pl/@bhaktishh" class="u-url mention">@<span>bhaktishh</span></a></span> <span class="h-card" translate="no"><a href="https://mathstodon.xyz/@jonmsterling" class="u-url mention">@<span>jonmsterling</span></a></span> <span class="h-card" translate="no"><a href="https://mathstodon.xyz/@ohad" class="u-url mention">@<span>ohad</span></a></span> I certainly don't want to question your own personal experience here - I don't doubt that the course is not effective for you. My only disagreement is with the general principle implied here - I have successfully built understanding through rote memorization in the past. At the time, I hated it and it felt useless, but something was happening in the background of the mind that I didn't appreciate until later, and it ended up being useful. Similarly to my PhD time - I learned tons of tacit knowledge simply through close association with my adviser, much of it hard to put into words.</p><p>Not claiming that this is happening for you here (how would I know?), nor that it's always an efficient route (clearly not - your experience here is a counterexample). But I think that a broader idea of what learning is would have been a useful perspective for younger me, so I figured I'd broadcast it a bit on the coattails of your post.</p>
