Feynman distinguishes between recognising a label and understanding the thing the label refers to. Knowing the name of a bird, formula or concept may be useful, but it does not by itself explain its behaviour, properties or relationships. In the wider passage, he uses the example of a bird to show that terminology can create an impression of knowledge without providing much understanding of the subject itself.

The quotation reflects an approach to learning based on observation, explanation and inquiry rather than vocabulary alone. Feynman suggests that deeper knowledge comes from examining what something does, how it works and why it behaves as it does. The point is not that names are unimportant, but that they are tools for communication rather than substitutes for comprehension. The distinction applies broadly in education: being able to repeat correct terms is different from being able to explain, investigate and use the ideas they represent.

Full quotation

“You can know the name of that bird in all the languages of the world, but when you’re finished, you’ll know absolutely nothing whatever about the bird. You’ll only know about humans in different places, and what they call the bird. So let’s look at the bird and see what it’s doing—that’s what counts. (I learned very early the difference between knowing the name of something and knowing something.)”