The Joy and Power of Understanding
I0I
The Joy and Power of Understanding
2026-06-22
Deeper understanding of the code and software systems we work on, is not only pragmatic and practical but highly enjoyable as well.
The usefulness is quite obvious: understanding gives us control and ownership of the systems and code we are responsible for. What we do not understand, we can neither fix nor change.
Interestingly, that deeper understanding not only allows us to be masters of our tools and not their slaves, but also is simply fun and brings lots of joy. There most likely are solid evolutionary reasons behind it - why is comprehension so psychologically satisfying? It actually makes a ton of sense - behaviors and traits that increase our control over the environment should be accompanied by feeling positive emotions strongly.
But, if it is both joyful and powerful, why are we so often prone to skip the struggle to understand and take shortcuts , accepting copy-pasted/generated solutions and generic answers, not analyzed?
Human Nature<br>At our core, we are lazy beings, driven to minimize our energy expenditure and maximize returns on its investment.
This laziness can be a great motivator to automate tedious and expensive processes and tasks, but at the same time, it is our inherent flaw when it comes to learning, expanding our knowledge, skills and by extension - control, influence and power (in healthy hierarchies based on competence).
In the context of a need to understand, given how many answers & solutions to similar problems are available out there on the Internet - recently even more than ever before and in the exact form we need, thanks to Large Language Models (LLMs) - it is no wonder why people skip on understanding so often by taking those shortcuts. Unfortunately, there are many pitfalls in accepting something that seems to work but we cannot explain how and why.
After all, why bother with learning the syntax and inner mechanisms of SQL (or any other query language), when we might just tell the LLM what tables are there and the data we want to retrieve. It is way easier to write a messy English prompt and copy-paste the result than to learn how to do it properly ourselves.
And I hear you, some people would say something along the lines:
Why should I trouble myself with constructing SQL by hand if I know it? LLMs can do it much faster for me and I do not lose anything, since I am already perfectly able to write and read this language.
Well, it really depends; you might be capable of reading and understanding it today, since you have done it repeatedly by hand in the past, but this ability will diminish over time. Eventually, we do lose what we do not use - and passive reading is not enough to keep these skills sharp. Sure, you may argue that since there are LLMs (and other reusable solutions), we will never have to write these types of things again and that the skills of searching, prompting, reading and verifying LLMs' output is all we need - it is the future. Well, given how LLMs work under the hood (probability), I would say that it is a highly optimistic and unfounded claim (ignoring LLMs long-term sustainability for now). Regardless, at their best, LLMs and other search engines are force multipliers - but we must have the force first and keep it strong. What is this force exactly? It definitely is not the ability to prompt and read the output. I do not see how we can develop and keep it sharp, if we are generating and copy-pasting solutions (maybe with a bit of refinement) all the time. Fortunately or not, struggle is a necessary component of deeper learning and mastery.
Of course, context is king here. For some skills, areas that we rarely use and do not care about that is totally fine, but our core skills and knowledge regularly used must be kept as strong as possible - otherwise, what is that defines us as software developers and problem solvers? Isn't it exactly our knowledge, experience, judgement and skills? It is impossible to develop and even keep it by just reading the code and solutions of other people and machines - we have to be actively engaged in the building and creation process ourselves.
That is why, in the context of understanding, we must fight against our lazy nature on a regular basis - spending much more energy than is required in order to keep expanding our knowledge, skills and by extension - control, influence and power. We ought to read the docs and sources. Grasp the reasons behind solutions under consideration. Know our tools and understand the tradeoffs they introduce. Engage creatively and design solutions & algorithms ourselves - do not just search/prompt and passively verify, hoping to get some working solution; somehow, someday, maybe.
Short- vs Long-term productivity tradeoff<br>Practically speaking, does it always make sense to grasp the code and solutions we work on fully?
Of course not - it depends and it is a spectrum.
Throwaway script that...