You’re arguing that human error doesn’t allow for the same results which I agree with. But if you want to achieve the goal of being better at something through practice, you have to rely on more than just hoping that by chance, your error will achieve a better result than the last time you tried. That does not contribute towards learning to be better at a task. You must make conscious decisions to correct mistakes. If said decision changes something you did last time, I wouldn’t call that “doing the same thing”.
squaresinger@lemmy.world 21 hours ago
Two points:
Back in school, it took my teacher maybe a minute to explain the theory behind shooting a three-pointer in basket ball. It’s super easy to know the correct theory and do all the cognitive decision making to do it right. But then it takes dozens of hours, or even hundreds of hours, to actually getting it right. Even though there’s no concious change or decision, it’s just pure practice.
Second point: “I’m going to get a drink.” - “I’m gonna do the same.”
Is the second person going to imitate every single motion of the first one identically? Or is the second person just also going to get a drink, maybe not even the same drink?
DrSteveBrule@mander.xyz 20 hours ago
First point I disagree with completely. As I already said, when practicing something like shooting three pointers, you are making conscious decisions on what you need to fix and work on to get better. If you shoot the first time and get an air ball because the ball came up short, you will have to make the decision to put more power into your shot to make the ball go further. If your ball goes too far left, next time you consciously aim more to the right. Practice isn’t the magical ability to be good at something because you did it a lot. It takes more effort than simply doing the bare minimum.
As for your second point, that is a slang use of the word. It is not meant to be taken literally. Where I think we fundamentally disagree is that I and many of the other users here seem to take the original quote you posted as being more literal than you take it. I interpret the original quote to mean that no outside factors manipulate the expected results. Human error is negligible.
Imagine you are holding a ball. You want to observe what happens if you suddenly let go of it. Will it fall down? Will it float in the air before you? Will it fly off in some random direction? You let go and it obviously falls down. You do that a million times because you hope that eventually it will stop falling down. This is an example of what I think the original quote is implying. No amount of practicing dropping a ball will change the results of gravity having a predictable effect on it.
All of your examples assume that the phrase “the same thing” is taken to be figuratively. That there is some element of “but not exactly the same” attached to the each example.
I’ll be honest here, I really don’t know the origins of the quote is or what the context was. But I do feel that you are in the minority when it comes to believing that the part that says “the same thing” isn’t meant to be taken literally. But that doesn’t necessarily make you wrong either. I quite enjoyed where this debate went even if neither of us was convincing to the other, I can still respect your argument. I said I felt you were trolling at first, but I can see how it can be left to interpretation.