The Feynman Technique—how to learn anything:

The Feynman Technique is a foundational learning method that prioritizes simplicity and depth of understanding.

It was developed by Richard Feynman—an American theoretical physicist who won the Nobel Prize in 1965 for his groundbreaking work in quantum electrodynamics.
So yes, you could say that Richard Feynman was intelligent...

But there are a lot of intelligent people in the world.

Feynman's true genius was found in his ability to convey extremely complex ideas in simple, elegant, digestible ways.
He had observed that complexity and jargon are often used to mask a lack of deep understanding.

As a rule:

If someone uses a lot of acronyms, complexity, and jargon to explain something to you, they probably don’t understand it.

We've all encountered this type of "expert"...
The Feynman Technique is a learning framework that forces you to develop a deep, elegant understanding of a given topic.

It involves four key steps:
(1) Set the Stage
(2) ELI5 (Explain It To Me Like I'm 5)
(3) Assess & Study
(4) Organize, Convey & Review

Let's cover each step:
Step 1: Set the Stage

What’s the topic you want to learn?

Starting with a blank page, write the topic at the top and jot down everything you know about it.

Read & research the topic. Add any new learnings or insights as you develop them.

Step 1 sets the stage for the process.
Step 2: ELI5

Here's where it gets fun...

Attempt to explain the topic to a child—figuratively (or literally if you're ambitious!).

On a new blank page, write down everything you know about your topic—but now pretend you are explaining it to a child.

Use simple language!
Step 3: Assess & Study

Reflect on your performance—form an honest assessment.

How well were you able to explain the topic to a child? Where did you get frustrated? Where did you turn to jargon?

These are the gaps in your understanding!

Read and study more to fill them.
Step 4: Organize, Convey & Review

Organize your elegant, simple language into a clear, compelling story or narrative.

Test-and-Learn: Convey it to a few others, then iterate and refine accordingly.

Review your new, deep understanding of the topic.

Remember: Simple=Beautiful
The Feynman Technique is a powerful framework for learning anything.

The best entrepreneurs, investors, and thinkers have leveraged this technique—whether they know it or not!

Their common genius: the ability to abstract complexity and convey ideas in simple, digestible ways.
It's easy to overcomplicate and intimidate—we all know people who try to do this.

But don't be fooled--complexity and jargon are often used to mask a lack of deep understanding.

Be better.

Use the Feynman Technique. Find beauty in simplicity.
The Feynman Technique is a personal favorite—I use it every single day.

Follow me @SahilBloom for more threads on business, finance, and decision-making.

I also go deeper on these topics in my newsletter. Join the 56,000+ others and subscribe below! https://t.co/qMB8i60ney
And be sure to check out my new podcast with @gregisenberg —Where It Happens—for casual conversations with amazing guests on the most interesting topics in business and tech. https://t.co/MPmloxBHZH

More from Sahil Bloom

More from Principles

You May Also Like

This is NONSENSE. The people who take photos with their books on instagram are known to be voracious readers who graciously take time to review books and recommend them to their followers. Part of their medium is to take elaborate, beautiful photos of books. Die mad, Guardian.


THEY DO READ THEM, YOU JUDGY, RACOON-PICKED TRASH BIN


If you come for Bookstagram, i will fight you.

In appreciation, here are some of my favourite bookstagrams of my books: (photos by lit_nerd37, mybookacademy, bookswrotemystory, and scorpio_books)
This is a pretty valiant attempt to defend the "Feminist Glaciology" article, which says conventional wisdom is wrong, and this is a solid piece of scholarship. I'll beg to differ, because I think Jeffery, here, is confusing scholarship with "saying things that seem right".


The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.


Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)


There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.


At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?