That may be, but it's fairly well documented that 1:1 tutoring from an expert is absurdly[1] more effective than e.g. classroom teaching. If it wasn't for the fact that it's just as absurdly expensive, it would definitely be the norm.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloom%27s_2_sigma_problem

Excellent article. I always loved 1-1 tutoring, but in grad school I discovered I hated teaching. I read the wiki page and some of the paper, then got to thinking about it more.

It feels like the difference between watching TV and playing a video game. In one case the content is the same for everyone, and you're passively consuming it at the pace set by the broadcaster/teacher. The other case is considerably more interactive and engaging. The pace, difficulty, and even storyline can be adjusted according to the player's abilities and choices.

Not learning the same way is not necessarily an argument to not get a teacher or mentor.

I learn in a very specific way; when studying languages, I was not able to find a language partner who was both consistently available and could adapt to my learning methodology. So I went with someone who was consistently available and supplied the teaching framework myself.

Everyone learns better with a teacher because no matter how you think you learn best, getting feedback from someone who actually knows what they are talking about is required.

It depends on the matter, purely technical & learning subjects is fine.

On personal & spiritual development it's very useful.

You can learn most things on your own and be "fine." But having a teacher accelerates your rate of learning beyond that.

To be honest, i'm impatient and stubborn. When most people explain me things take so long I rather read or google it. Talking is slow, and people take a long time to get to the point.

Often the process of formulating the question by writing it down or talking about leads me to understand the problem and either know where to find the answer or often know the answer. On theoretical matters I hardly ever had a question that wasn't answered properly by someone online or in a book.

I think you're equating teacher with lecturer because of how classes are taught in school. They are not the same thing. A teacher can just be someone that gives you feedback and corrects you when you make missteps. If I recall correctly, this way of teaching is the idea behind Montessori schools.

I had both, in university, but also professinal seniors, or in family.

Same, and it's pretty funny that people are downvoting you for this. Some people truly believe that their subjective perspective is the truth for everyone.

Feedback is necessary for mastery. There is a teacher for every learning style.

For me it’s the “Do X” phrasing that’s the problem. It’s like barking unsolicited, universal life advice at the world. Especially when peppered with instructions like “don’t listen to anyone who tells you different.” It feels as if a lot of bloggers think this imperative, imperious tone is necessary to be noticed and taken seriously.

There’s nothing wrong with blogging about something that works well for you, in case a reader can use [some part of] it in their own lives.

I hear this a lot. I think it's a dangerous crutch. Learning is hard work, no matter how well the given style of teaching matches the preferred style of learning. It's easy to give up any pursuit when it gets to be hard. If you distract yourself with the concern that there might be a mismatch between styles, but the real problem was just that it's a hard subject to master, then you'll waste time shopping around for new styles, starting over, blaming the teacher, criticizing the quality of the materials, etc., when all you really had to do was keep studying and practicing.

See also satisficer vs. maximizer: https://healthymindstherapy.blog/2021/06/12/are-you-a-maximi...