Can First Principles become the core method of the education system?

这问题挺有意思的，就像在问我们是该给孩子一张现成的地图，还是教他们怎么造指南针和读懂星象。

我的看法是，第一性原理很难成为教育体系的“核心”方法，但它绝对应该成为其中一个“必备”的底层能力。

为什么不能是核心？

很简单，因为效率太低了。我们人类文明能发展到今天，靠的就是“站在巨人的肩膀上”。牛顿发现了三大定律，我们直接拿来用就行了，不需要每个中学生都从观察苹果落地开始重新推导一遍。如果什么知识都要求从最原始的公理开始思考，那我们可能一辈子都学不完小学课本。教育的一个重要功能就是高效地传递前人已经验证过的知识和经验，这本质上是一种“类比学习”或“经验学习”，而不是凡事都诉诸第一性原理。

而且，这对老师和学生的要求都太高了。老师得是能引导学生从0到1的宗师级人物，学生也得有极强的抽象思维和探索欲。这在需要大规模、标准化进行的公共教育体系里，几乎是不可能实现的。

那为什么它又必须是必备的能力？

因为世界在变，地图会过时。

传统的教育教给我们的是“地图”，告诉我们A点到B点怎么走最快，遇到什么问题用什么公式。这在过去稳定、变化慢的时代很好用。但现在呢？可能地图上的B点已经消失了，或者出现了一个全新的、地图上没有的C点。

这时候，只会按图索骥的人就懵了。

而具备第一性原理思维的人，他会拿出“指南针”，看看“太阳”，分析“地形”，自己规划出一条全新的路。他会去思考：所谓“路”，本质是什么？不就是从一个点到另一个点的可行路径吗？我为什么一定要走大路？我能不能开船走水路？我能不能挖隧道？

你看，这就是区别。

一个只会被动接受知识的孩子，他学的是“1+1=2”。 一个懂第一性原理的孩子，他会去想，为什么“1”这个符号代表“一个东西”？“+”这个符号为什么代表“增加”？“=”又为什么代表“等同”？搞懂了这些最基础的定义，他就能自己创造和理解更复杂的系统，比如二进制。

所以，一个理想的教育体系，应该是这样的：

1. 基础阶段：以高效的“经验传递”为主。先把地图给孩子，让他们快速掌握人类已经积累的知识，学会公式，背会单词，了解历史。这是基础，是“原材料”。
2. 进阶阶段：逐步引入第一性原理的思维训练。在一些关键的知识点上，带学生“返璞归真”一次。比如，学物理，可以带他们重走一遍伽利略的思辨过程；学商业，可以拆解一个成功的商业模式，看看它满足了哪些最基本的人性需求。

目的不是让他们凡事都去钻牛角尖，而是让他们在脑子里装一个“切换开关”。当现有的知识、方法、地图不够用的时候，他们懂得如何按下这个开关，启动第一性原理模式，回到事物的本质，从源头去寻找新的可能性。

总的来说，第一性原理就像一把隐藏的“屠龙刀”，你不能天天拿着它来切菜（太累），但你必须知道它在哪，并且懂得怎么使用它。因为当真正的“恶龙”（那些前所未有的、颠覆性的难题）出现时，只有这把刀才管用。

This is an interesting question, much like asking whether we should give children a ready-made map or teach them how to build a compass and read the stars.

My view is that first principles thinking is unlikely to become a 'core' method in the education system, but it absolutely should be one of the 'essential' foundational capabilities.

Why can't it be core?

Simply put, because it's too inefficient. Human civilization has progressed to where it is today by 'standing on the shoulders of giants.' Newton discovered the three laws of motion; we can just use them directly. There's no need for every middle school student to re-derive them from observing an apple fall. If every piece of knowledge required thinking from the most primitive axioms, we might never finish elementary school textbooks in a lifetime. A crucial function of education is to efficiently transmit knowledge and experience already verified by predecessors. This is essentially 'learning by analogy' or 'experiential learning,' rather than resorting to first principles for everything.

Furthermore, it places excessively high demands on both teachers and students. Teachers would need to be master-level figures capable of guiding students from zero to one, and students would need exceptionally strong abstract thinking and a thirst for exploration. This is almost impossible to achieve within a public education system that requires large-scale, standardized implementation.

So why must it be an essential capability?

Because the world is changing, and maps become outdated.

Traditional education provides us with 'maps,' telling us the fastest way from point A to point B, and which formula to use for which problem. This worked well in a stable, slow-changing past. But what about now? Point B on the map might have disappeared, or a completely new point C, not on any map, might have emerged.

In such situations, those who can only follow the map will be lost.

However, individuals with first principles thinking will pull out their 'compass,' observe the 'sun,' analyze the 'terrain,' and chart a completely new path for themselves. They will ponder: What is a 'path' at its core? Isn't it just a feasible route from one point to another? Why must I stick to the main road? Can I travel by water? Can I dig a tunnel?

You see, that's the difference.

A child who passively accepts knowledge learns '1+1=2.' A child who understands first principles will ask: Why does the symbol '1' represent 'one thing'? Why does the symbol '+' represent 'addition'? And why does '=' represent 'equality'? By grasping these most fundamental definitions, they can then create and understand more complex systems, such as binary.

Therefore, an ideal education system should be structured as follows:

1. Foundational Stage: Primarily focused on efficient 'knowledge transfer.' Provide children with the map first, allowing them to quickly grasp accumulated human knowledge, learn formulas, memorize vocabulary, and understand history. This is the foundation, the 'raw material.'
2. Advanced Stage: Gradually introduce training in first principles thinking. For certain key knowledge points, guide students to 'return to basics' once. For example, in physics, they could retrace Galileo's thought process; in business, they could deconstruct a successful business model to see which fundamental human needs it satisfies.

The goal isn't for them to overthink every single thing, but rather to equip them with a 'toggle switch' in their minds. When existing knowledge, methods, or maps prove insufficient, they know how to flip this switch, activate first principles mode, return to the essence of things, and seek new possibilities from the source.

In summary, first principles thinking is like a hidden 'dragon-slaying sword.' You can't use it to chop vegetables every day (it's too exhausting), but you must know where it is and how to wield it. Because when true 'dragons' (those unprecedented, disruptive challenges) emerge, only this sword will be effective.