Concrete understanding requires adding determinations, not invoking inert background

Evidence

The human desire to know why is as powerful as the desire to know what happened next, and it is a desire of a higher order. Once we have the facts, we inevitably look for the links between them, and only when we find such links are we satisfied that we “understand.” Rote memorization in a science class bores almost everyone. Grasp and a sense of discovery begin only when we perceive why “a body in motion tends to remain in motion” and what an immense effect this actuality has on the phenomena of our lives. — Janet Burroway; Elizabeth Stuckey-French; Ned Stuckey-French, Writing Fiction, Tenth Edition, 471 (#expands, via linked claim)

We have discovered in our teaching of the law that general propositions are empty. We have discovered that students who come eager to learn the rules and who do learn them, and who learn nothing more, will take away the shell and not the substance. We have discovered that rules alone, mere forms of words, are worthless. We have learned that the concrete instance, the heaping up of concrete instances, the present, vital memory of a multitude of concrete instances, is necessary in order to make any general proposition, be it rule of law or any other, mean anything at all. Without the concrete instances the general proposition is baggage, impedimenta, stuff about the feet. It not only does not help. It hinders. — Burton, Steven J, An Introduction to Law and Legal…, 148 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Understanding arises only from perceiving causal links among facts, not from the facts themselves — Janet Burroway; Elizabeth Stuckey-French; Ned Stuckey-French, Writing Fiction, Tenth Edition: A Guide…, 471; Reasoning requires recognizing real logical connections and relationships among facts — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 247; Rules without concrete instances are meaningless hindrances — Burton, Steven J, An Introduction to Law and Legal…, 148 (+9 more)

Related

• Understanding arises only from perceiving causal links among facts, not from the facts themselves (similarity 0.91)
• Rules without concrete instances are meaningless hindrances (similarity 0.79)
• Reflective thinking connects known facts to unknown conclusions through inferences (similarity 0.78)
• The ability to study law depends on recognizing logical connections in cases (similarity 0.78)
• Reasoning requires recognizing real logical connections and relationships among facts (similarity 0.78)

Broader Connections

• Reaching the concrete in thought requires successive abstractions that add conditions of existence. #corroborates (0.80)
• Understanding arises only from perceiving causal links among facts, not from the facts themselves #expands (0.70) — Janet Burroway; Elizabeth Stuckey-French; Ned Stuckey-French, Writing Fiction, Tenth Edition, 471
• Rules without concrete instances are meaningless hindrances #corroborates (0.65) — Burton, Steven J, An Introduction to Law and Legal…, 148
• Reasoning requires recognizing real logical connections and relationships among facts #expands (0.60) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 247
• Reflective thinking connects known facts to unknown conclusions through inferences #expands (0.55) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 761