> I recall my high school chemistry teacher's response when I was trying to understand why certain reactions happened: "just accept that these reactions happens and memorise them for the test. Don't try to understand it"

> I did not become a chemist.

That kinda sounds like you got tripped up by the lie-to-children phase (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lie-to-children), demanding an explanation requiring advanced concepts before you've mastered the basic ones.

▲

squigz 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

This kinda sounds like you're blaming GP for their teacher being shit? Yes, you can't understand advanced chemistry concepts before establishing a basic understanding; that does not mean a teacher cannot help a student come to a better understanding with an answer. An answer better than "Do not try to understand it". I don't know how you could justify that answer being appropriate to give to a student.

▲

palmotea 3 days ago | parent [-]

> An answer better than "Do not try to understand it". I don't know how you could justify that answer being appropriate to give to a student.

"Do not try to understand it now," is a perfectly appropriate answer, if the answer is beyond the scope of the class and the lesson is focusing on something else. I would be ideal to identify when that topic would be covered, but it might have to be a hand-wave "in college," because it's quite possible the teacher doesn't actually know the particular "why" question (especially in a subject as empirical as Chemistry).

	▲	squigz 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		That isn't what the teacher said though. "just accept that these reactions happens and memorise them for the test. Don't try to understand it" And in either case, there are far better ways to phrase that that aren't going to demotivate a kid to learn - "that's pretty advanced! We'll talk about that later in the year" or something along those lines. More likely though, is that this teacher didn't know, didn't care, and couldn't stomach saying the words "I don't know; let's find out together" to a highschooler - which also would have been a far more productive answer!

▲

navigate8310 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

There's a difference between lying versus explaining why the reasoning of OP is wrong or right and that they are onto something that they'll learn in future classes. The teacher could just give resources to further pique OP's interest but at the same time explain clearly that they cannot write advanced reasonings in exams. And that they must rote learn the false models at least for exams.

▲

amarant 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Honestly, I think a lie would've been better than what I got. That might've kept my curiosity alive. The response I got made me detest chemistry for about 10 years.