The first time I encounter an unfamiliar subject, I start by trying to identify the different current leading theories and their main points of contention. Then my impulse to evaluate the competing claims for myself motivates my further research, and keeps me critically engaged with the evidence. It’s like I’m building different conceptual models in parallel, and seeing how each new piece fits differently in each one.

I find that can often be better than lectures where the professor is advocating for their own specific theory, or introductory courses where textbooks stick to consensus opinions and avoid open questions. In those cases you’re just passively assembling the model you’re provided—but I find it’s ultimately more enlightening if you try to break things while you’re building them.