学习不是一种经验

Learning Is Not Experience

翻译

The word learning has great significance.

There are two kinds of learning.

For most of us learning means the accumulation of knowledge, of experience, of technology, of a skill, of a language.

There is also psychological learning, learning through experience, either the immediate experience of life, which leave a certain residue, of tradition, of the race, of society.

There are these two kinds of learning how to meet life: psychological and physiological; outward skill and inward skill.

There is really no line of demarcation between the two; they overlap.

We are not considering for the moment the skill that we learn through practice, the technological knowledge that we acquire through study.

What we are concerned about is the psychological learning that we have acquired through the centuries or inherited as tradition, as knowledge, as experience.

This we call learning, but I question wether it is learning at all.

I am not talking about learning a skill, a language, a technique, but I am asking whether the mind ever learns psychologically.

It has learned, and with what it has learned it meets the challenge of life.

It is always translating life or the new challenge according to what it has learned.

That is what we are doing, is that learning?

Doesn't learning imply something new, something that I don't know and am learning?

If I am merely adding to what I already know, it is no longer learning.

生词统计

单词	音标	翻译
immediate	ɪˈmiːdiət	adj. 立即的、直接的、最接近的
residue	ˈrezɪduː	adj. 必然的、确信、无疑的
demarcation	ˌdiːmɑːrˈkeɪʃn	n. 划分、划界、界限
overlap	ˌoʊvərˈlæp	n. 重叠的部分、共同的兴趣（责任）、重叠时间、交接时期
century	ˈsentʃəri	n. 世纪、百年

原文阅读

The word learning has great significance.

There are two kinds of learning.

For most of us learning means the accumulation of knowledge, of experience, of technology, of a skill, of a language.

There is also psychological learning, learning through experience, either the immediate experience of life, which leave a certain residue, of tradition, of the race, of society.

There are these two kinds of learning how to meet life: pyschological and physiological; outward skill and inward skill.

There is really no line of demarcation between the two; they overlap.

We are not considering for the moment the skill that we learn through practice, the technological knowledge that we acquire through study.

What we are concerned about is the psychological learning that we have acquired through the centuries or inherited as tradition, as knowledge, as experience.

This we call learning, but I question whether it is learning at all.

I am not talking about learning a skill, a language, a technique, but I am asking whether the mind ever learns psychologically.

It has learned, and with what it has learned it meets the challenge of life.

It is always translating life or the new challenge according to what it has learned.

That is what we are doing, is that learning?

Doesn't learning imply something new, something that I don't know and am learning?

If I am merely adding to what I already know, it is no longer learning.