Hi Lemmy! It is obvious that being a fast learner is advantageous. People like people that can get up to speed quickly and contribute to a project or team. Heck, I could put 'fast learner' on a resume and no one would think that's weird. But what about slow learners?

Is there ever a time where it would have been better to learn a skill or get acquainted with something more slowly?

Are there any general benefits across all circumstances where being a slower learner can be advantageous?

And if there are any positives to taking more time to learning, is it something you could ever bring up on a resume or job interview? Would you ever find yourself saying to a hiring manager "I'm a slow learner, and here's why that's a good thing for your organization." Or is it some abstract, unquantifiable positive thing like "I struggle to get good at things and that has built character," or something like that?

TL;DR: In Avatar the Last Airbender terms, if you could have a choice between being a slow learner and struggling with everything (child Zuko) or learning fast and dominating at everything (child Azula), why would anyone ever choose the former?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 4 points 2 hours ago

I sometimes say I've got a mind like a rock... it takes a long time to get things in there, but once they are there, they aren't going anywhere. Another way to look at it is that there is a difference between max speed and max distance. I am very patient, and I will keep learning something to the point of mastery , but have little use for quickly acquired, disposable information and skills. As a learner, I will not go as fast as most, but I will be able to go further.

It is also helpful in teaching situations. When you have learned something slowly, it can make you more able to teach it to someone else.

There is a popular book called Thinking, Fast and Slow, which examines this in more detail.

  • source