>>2560669
Hmm. I am very interested in this. If you could provide studies on the products of autodidactism vs mentor learning, that would be swell. But I am concerned with the biases that we may encounter in the academia since most educational institutions are most likely going to be against autodidactism. Good thread.

I believe in a little of both.

You're never going to learn by solely relying on others or shunning others.

Always seek the advice of experts, but be wise with your judgments. Don't let someone claiming to be an expert corrupt your view.

There are many things which I believe can only really be learnt from "autodidactism", most of which is artistic fields, but seek an expert on things such as the materials -- which paints go with which types of canvas, how to go about studying anatomy correctly.

There are many things which should definitely not be self-taught, really any medical field. I much rather trust a doctor with a doctorate from a college than someone who claims to be a self-taught doctor.

>>2560669
>What is the limit of self-learning in this regard?
tbqh, you are only limited by either your own personal drive, or lack of financial resources.

You can learn as much as you want, but certain forms of learning do take money.

books cost money
computers cost money
musical instruments cost money
internet costs money

granted you can get by with low quality any of these and still learn quite a bit autodidactively there is a point (at least in certain disciplines) where one can be limited by financial resources.

take engineering for example, you can study everything you want from a book, but is that REALLY learning engineering? Or is it just learning math? Maybe buying some wood and building a small solar powered boat is engineering as you have now learned how to succesfully apply engineering principles.

In certain disciplines, without application, you cannot completely learn the subject matter. (music would have been a better example maybe)

Without refreshing the thread and after much pondering, I wanted to write this first. I think I realized some--but certainly not all--of the answer to my post, but not the particular questions I posed to the board, but the essence of it. This may sound seemingly autistic; however, I wanted to write this first before looking at the response/s because I think when you pose a question to someone you're asking them to do your thinking for you in a way. Also people might pose a question that is sidelining or changes its course or an insult to dispirit you.

I guess the basis of it is as follows. Self-learning is actually what one does all the time. One is always learning or more particularly is being informed in some way or another.

Put another way. I almost see autodidactism as practice, and mentored education/classwork as performance. One must put forth a lot of effort to first learn what they are being 'taught', but really one teaches himself or herself. Also gurus and mentors have to be earned. Just look at admissions standards and funding standards and tell me otherwise lol. But I have heard it said that when the student is ready the master will appear.

Just my two cents I suppose.

I think I might privilege self-learning over mentored learning in my posts, but I definitely value mentored learning more. Albeit I guess one could argue that you are your own master and that you are your own best teacher.

>>2560698
I wish I could. I briefly majored in education in college and I had to read a lot of selected texts by John Dewey, Maria Montessori, Aristotle, etc. Let me raid my old hard drive and see if I have any of it. There might be something there. Thanks for the compliment. You are right though. I think the Academy (as much I love it) is self-concerned though, and that's fine because institutions need to protect themselves and their interests. At what cost to us and the system I am unsure.

>>2560715
Great point. I had totally forgotten medicine and dentistry and nursing and pharmacy, etc. because I never seriously considered those as a vocational path, but you're absolutely right. Again you're right about the arts. I think it's a balance. Bun bu ichi or whatever the pithy maxim about different modes of learning would be as opposed to brains and brain or pen and sword.

>>2560721
Material concerns are very real. It is the one thing that is holding me back from rushing into graduate school and pursuing the dream. I have to really put forth my effort into looking into outside funding as opposed to just institutional funding.

Engineering and music are great examples of what I would term applications. I hesitate to categorize music as science, art, or performance because it fits into a lot of different things. I have heard that albeit I have not studied music.

I would also throw in a lab science, albeit one could say that the world is there lab or some idea if they're Victor Frankenstein tier or something.

>but is that REALLY learning engineering? Or is it just learning math?
Rhetorical or not...I think it's a 30% yes and 70% no--understanding is half the battle. If one can perform something that demonstrates understanding, I think if you can teach it that demonstrates mastery. Just my arbitrary definitions though.

Thanks for the great responses. Hopefully there's more to discuss.