> ## Content Index
> Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.hypermodern.online/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further.

# Comprehension VS understanding: the iPhone-ification of everything
- URL: https://www.hypermodern.online/comprehension-vs-understanding-the-iphone-ification-of-information/
- Published: 2026-08-29T09:44:59.000Z
- Updated: 2026-08-31T02:07:54.000Z
- Author: David Cash

> “Because there are three classes of intellects: one which comprehends by itself; another which appreciates what others comprehend; and a third which neither comprehends by itself nor by the showing of others; the first is the most excellent, the second is good, the third is useless.”  
>  
> ***― Niccolò Machiavelli, The Prince***

Having awareness of what something is or does permits us, as humans, to perceive or fully grasp it. 

Now isn't that a vague sentence. 

What I'm describing is the way I see "Comprehension" differentiating from "Understanding" as we, as a species, attempt to wrap our minds around a never-ending, exponentially expanding onslaught of new information. 

In our hypermodern times, we collectively need to reconsider how we take in and process information. 

While experiencing the phenomen that the world is progressing at a rate faster than we can comprehend that we call hypermodernity, it stands to reason that we as individuals can't have the capacity to understand everything on a deeper level– we need to pick and choose the areas of discipline in which we'd like to develop our knowledge base and, in some cases, become experts in said fields. 

Now, going back to the title of this essay: Comprehension vs understanding. 

Many of you reading this will already be scratching your heads because you believe that "comprehension" and "understanding" are synonyms. 

In the world of hypermoderity and the hyper-rapid cacophony of ever-expanding knowledge, we need to redefine these terms more specifically to have a chance of navigating vast amounts of disparate information, all of which is developing and changing at ever more exponential rates. 

So, for the purpose of this essay, the other essays on this site, and my upcoming book, I invite you to consider the following differentiation: 

**Comprehension:**  
*The high-level understanding of what something is and what it can or can't do*   
  
**Understanding:**  
*An in-depth knowledge of what something is and how it works.*

These definitions are intentionally simplified to make this comparison as easy to comprehend as possible for all. According to [**Collins Dictionary**](https://grammar.collinsdictionary.com/english-usage/what-is-the-difference-between-comprehension-and-understanding?ref=hypermodern.online), 

>  
>  
> "If you have an understanding of something, you have some knowledge of it, or you know how it works or what it means.   
>  
> The past decade has seen huge advances in our general *understanding* of how the ear works.  
>  
> The job requires an *understanding* of Spanish.  
>  
> You cannot use comprehension with this meaning."

Even more specifically, to give us a collective understanding of what exactly I mean by all of this, [according to Dr. Gebhard Rusch](https://www.hypermodern.online/ghost/#/editor/post/6a92946fef7781000195cd0b), linguist and Academic Director of the Institute for Media Research at the University of Siegen (Germany):

>  
>  
> "Comprehension and understanding should be differentiated very carefully. They are far from being identical. \[...\] Comprehension covers only the subjective mental, intellectual, or philosophical aspects of communicative processes. \[...\] Understanding is the mechanism encoding the social values, norms, and conventions in the heads of readers, students, and all other participants in litterary communication."

Rusch argues that the reciprocal nature of communication, debate, and education required to "understand something" supersedes the basic notion of comprehension wherein we simply need to know what a word, thing, or theory is; and not necessarily possess any deeper knowledge of that thing beyond the empirical. 

In the past, this differentiation didn't really matter outside of the confines of philosophy, advanced linguistics, or academia. However, in the age of hypermodernity, we collectively need to comprehend what is happening, what things are, and, on the highest level, what they can do for us. BUT, we don't need to understand how everything works. 

I like to refer to comprehension of complex topics, inventions, words, ideas, etc., as the "iPhone-ification" of information. 

What do I mean by this? 

Well, most of us reading this book (\~70% of the world's population) own a smartphone. We can all understand that a smartphone is a cellular device that connects us with people beyond geographic proximity, and since most of us own smartphones, these devices can also navigate the web, provide access to services, tools, and much more. 

That all being said, how many of us actually understand the inner workings of a smartphone? How do the circuitry and internal components   
  
a) come together to form the device on a hardware level, and   
  
b) how do those physical technical components result in the functionality of the smartphone as a device on a software level? 

According to the research firm [*SlashData*](https://www.slashdata.co/?ref=hypermodern.online), there are 47.2 million developers worldwide. These software and hardware engineers represent approximately **0.93% of the world population**. 

So, we live in a world where less than 1% of humans actually understand how the devices that control 30-50% of our waking lives work. But that doesn't stop the other 99% of us from understanding what smartphones are, why they can be useful to us, and, principally, how to use the devices themselves. 

This is very important. 

In the coming days, weeks, months, and years, we will witness the emergence and subsequent adoption of technologies, philosophies, concepts, and phenomena that fundamentally alter how we experience the world around us. 

It is important that we stop trying to understand everything. 

In order for something to be useful to us, we merely need a comprehension of what that thing is and how we can or can't use it. 

To use a much less high-tech example, most of us comprehend how to light a candle. However, how many of us truly understand the mechanics of a) the lighter or match producing the fire to light the candle and b) the thermodynamics of the ignition of the flame combusting the wick of the candle and how exactly that all works on a scientific level? 

(That was a rhetorical question)

In our hyper-modern times of constant flux, this should be seen as a blessing. 

We don't need to understand what's going on, what things are, or why they're being presented into our lives; we only need to comprehend what those things are and what they can or can't do for us. Excuse me for repeating myself.   
  
We should strive to comprehend more and understand less if we want to have a chance of successfully interpreting the ever-changing world around us. 

Before closing out this chapter, while I've been championing us to "comprehend" more and "understand" less, I'll mention one more aspect of understanding that deserves recognition–

I have completed a high school diploma and subsequently earned a Bachelor's and a Master's degree, and have considered pursuing a PhD at some point in my life. 

- In high school, we seek to educate ourselves on a wide range of topics, where the principal goal is initially to understand the world around us within the confines of modern academia and its rigid educational categories.  
    
(More on that in another one of my essays).  
    
Towards the end of **high school**, some of us are given the opportunity to pick courses in an effort to begin specializing our knowledge of specific fields towards an elementary to intermediate understanding of how concepts and theories actually work, ie being able to solve complex math equations due to a deeper knowledge of mathematics, its rules, and experience solving for numerous variations upon academic themes within said category.
- For those of us who go on to pursue an **Undergraduate degree**, with the exception of undeclared majors, we draw a line in the sand and decide what subject matter we would like to glean a deeper understanding of. That becomes our major, and we pursue a deeper understanding of that subject matter over the course of the 2-4+ years of our initial university degree.
- In Post-secondary academia, this is exacerbated further–  
    
In a master's degree, we dive deeper into specific areas of understanding beyond the general grasp of a field of thought.  
    
This is perpetuated even further in a PhD, where we are expected to not only understand a specific subset of a specific field, but to find an even more hyper-specific subject matter to understand further through personal research and contemplation in an effort to contribute to and evolve our collective understanding of said topic.

![](https://storage.ghost.io/c/b3/8a/b38afdc5-eaeb-495a-93c0-ba7c17f9c3aa/content/images/2026/08/the-illustrated-guide-to-a-phd1-1.jpg)

cc [Matthew Might](http://matt.might.net/?ref=hypermodern.online), a computer science professor at the University of Utah

[Read Might's article on this matter ](https://matt.might.net/articles/phd-school-in-pictures/?ref=hypermodern.online)

This is how academia has functioned, for the most part, since the late 18th and early 19th centuries, with evidence of humans pursuing Master's and PhD degrees dating back to the 12th century.  
  
However, as mentioned in my previous essay, *weirder and weirder*, we've completely blown past the theorized exponential rate of change of Moore's Law, once perceived as "doubling every year." We are, in reality, experiencing constant flux and an ever-increasing, unquantifiable rate of exponential growth across all aspects of our lives. Due to the intrinsic uncertainty and constant change in how the world around us functions, we need to rethink the very fabric of our perception, generally speaking, and I encourage you, dear reader, to begin to question everything we collectively accept as the "**truth**." 

But I digress. 

 Should we change the entire academic system? 

Perhaps...

(I have another essay that further contemplates this notion). 

But, for the purposes of this specific comparison and conversation, I encourage us to remember our comprehension of our smartphones when faced with new technologies, theories, or realities that initially baffle, confuse, or frighten us. 

We do not need to understand everything– 

Quantum computing, Robots, AI, the Blockchain, Extended Reality eyewear, extraterrestrials; these things may become pervasive aspects of our lives, and, if we aren't familiar with them, we can be perturbed or scared by the exponential rate at which they can become more and more relevant in and to our lives. 

When we approach new ideas and paradigms with an initial goal of basic comprehension vs understanding, we set ourselves up for success, and inherently give ourselves the superpower of being able to have a highschool-eque general knowledge base of most, if not all, relevant information and/or innovations becoming popularized in the grand scheme of our world. 

So with all that being said, I hope this gave you a better comprehension of our hypermodern times and our immediate and long-term future. 

Thank you for reading– back again tomorrow. 

\-- David Cash | August 29, 2026

> "Nothing in life is to be feared; it is only to be understood. Now is the time to understand more, so that we may fear less."   
>  
> **— Marie Curie**