coberst

Evolution Says: Truth is Success

It appears to me that Darwin’s theory of Natural Selection informs us that success is truth. Extinction follows specie’s failure to adapt to its environment. Adapting successfully to the environment leads to a long life.

I graduated with an engineering degree in 1959. The first ten years of my career was directed at being a designer of electronic systems. One thing the design experience impressed upon me is that truth was all.

In other words when an engineer thinks that truth is X and X turns out to be non-truth the results invariable, sooner or later, jumps up and bites the engineer in the fanny. The minute that the engineer discovers the error in conceiving the truth that engineer begins the redesign. For the engineer truth is all.

Later in my career I moved into the selling end of the business. I sold stuff to other engineers and I discovered that the selling business has a different metric for success.

When dealing strictly with the world of objects wherein truth equals success I discovered that there are no shortcuts to success. When the sales person discovers that the sale is not being made the sales person looks for another selling approach. In the selling business the sale is all and success equals truth.

When dealing with objects truth is success and when dealing with people success is truth.

But I also discovered that success as truth is often only when the time parameter is short; in the long term truth is really success. I quickly learned that in the short run one can ignore truth but in the long run truth will out.

One great weakness of a democratic form of government is that in the short haul it works well but in the long haul it can and often does lead to disaster. The reason for this is that the culture trains people for the short view while ignoring the long view.

I conclude that it is worth while to think of reality, i.e. truth in this situation, as being like an onion. The linguistic metaphor might be ‘reality is onion’.

One can peel away layers of reality much like that of an onion. All of us live most of our life with our thoughts focused upon the skin of reality. “Seeing is believing”. From our animal nature visual perception is reality; most of us seldom go beyond that view of reality.

Most of us live most of our life much as primitive humans lived their lives. To primitive humans each thing that they face tells them what they, the thing, means and what is to be done with that thing. The apple says “eat me”, the babbling brook says “drink me”, The lightening and thunder says “fear me”.

Education is an attempt to peel away the layers of reality so that we may focus on deeper and more complicated reality. However our culture is primarily focused on making us all better producers and consumers. Production and consumption is king in a culture of consumers.

Darwin teaches us that sooner or later truth jumps up and bites a species in the fanny. That species that cannot adapt to a changing environment will become extinct. We had better start peeling that onion as fast as possible. The peeling process is, in my judgment, self-actualizing self-learning.

Do you think that ‘reality is onion’ is a useful linguistic metaphor?

Gile na Gile

Coberst

As your probably aware I've enjoyed reading your posts and have tried to keep abreast of the wide-ranging scope of your canon - it has contained many beguiling byways and highways - but I think here (for my own part at least and not wishing in any way to prejudge the matter, for the artist is a might sensitive to any ''commentary'', which is always and perhaps necessarily, viewed as abrasive - but come what may!) the wings are unmanning their ill-fitting holsters - seldom has the ''onion'' been painted clearer in my mind - my thanks.

laxdoc

works for me

mlipo

Peel off enough layers of an onion and you get nothing. Well, maybe stinky hands. But if you chop or slice the onion and add it to other ingredients, you might get a pleasant meal and a satisfied belly.

Pedro

NO!

Lucius

Useful to what end? I prefer, "What goes up must come down." It explains a lot, even metaphorically.

Pedro

Coberst: Your reality of Darwin is unreal.
You have grossly misread Darwin's intent. I suspect you haven't really read him. Have only read about him and that source was also wrong. For fun I googled 'natural selection'. The first ten returns (I went no farther) had it backward too. I also noticed that you misread Freud, and take no note of Norman O. Browns confusing Marxism. Your ideas on education are totally 18th century and should be buried along side of Rousseau. I have long been involved in education and can state with certainty that if I attempted to put your educational ideas into practice I would be arrested for child abuse. And well I should be. Excuse my being so harsh today. I had an attack of critical thinking.


Look where that led.

coberst

Pedro

I think CT is like Chess. It is easy to learn the moves of the individual pieces but there is so much more beyond that initial accomplishment.

The neophyte learns the moves that each piece can make, plays a few games and wanders away bewildered as to why anyone could take this matter seriously.

Like chess Critical Thinking is an asset that can influence the judgments one makes in all matters in their life. It can be a strategic tool or a tactical tool—it can change ones world view. It gives in accordance to the investment made.

A very important component of CT is attitude.

The standard mode of education might be described in this way. A teacher with a pitcher of knowledge walks from desk to desk in the classroom pouring from her pitcher into a cup held by each student a portion of the knowledge in the teacher’s pitcher. Each student receives a small amount of knowledge at each class session. At the end of the day the student has a cup of knowledge and the student is expected to remember this knowledge or store it in some container at home for further consumption. The student is expected to consume this knowledge so that, at a later date, the teacher can test the student to determine if, in fact, the student has absorbed the information dispensed by the teacher.

From this scenario we see that the student is synonymous to an empty vessel that is filled with content by the teacher. The teacher has something valuable that is transmitted to the student. The student is a passive taker of knowledge dispensed by the teacher.

The standard mode of education throughout K-12 and throughout college is similar to that which I have portrayed in the above example.

This form of education is didactic in nature. It is a rote form of education. The student is a passive receptacle absorbing the knowledge the teacher has. There is little if any active participation by the student.

The standard mode of education is teaching by telling. The basic assumption in such a method is that knowledge can be absorbed and restated and that this restatement is indication that there exists understanding.

The standard teacher/pupil teaching technique accentuates the importance of acquiring knowledge. The Socratic technique accentuates the importance of understanding and Critical Thinking. Being knowledgeable of a matter and understanding a matter are very different categories of comprehension.

I think it is correct to assume that knowledge can be imparted by a teacher to an individual more quickly and efficiently using the standard technique whereas the Socratic technique, while developing understanding, is much less efficient in imparting knowledge. Here, as in everything else there is a trade off. In a set period of time more knowledge can be imparted using the standard mode.

The question then becomes: is it more important to have citizens with greater knowledge and less understanding or citizens with greater understanding and less knowledge?

I suspect that we must examine what we mean by “citizen”. Is the student being prepared for the role as “consumer”, as we so often hear our self labeled, or is the student being prepared for the role of responsible citizen in a liberal democracy as the ideal might dictate? There is a price to pay for which role we wish the student to eventually play. A more knowledgeable student will be one unaccustomed to dialogue wherein understanding is the major goal as opposed to accumulation of knowledge.

Our educational system is almost completely dedicated to rote teaching. Our system is almost totally a system of teaching by telling. Why is this so?

A didactic technique of educating young people is the most efficient way of inculcating facts into the memory of children. It seems to me that it is necessary to teach facts to children as quickly and as efficiently as possible during their early years. Examples of facts are such things as dates of battles, capital cities of states, the name and locations of states in the US, matters of facts regarding geography, history mathematics etc. Knowledge of facts is a fundamental and necessary component of any education system for young people.

Facts also include systems of discreet steps designed to accomplish a task. For example, the step by step processes for adding a column of numbers, or subtracting two numbers, or the multiplication or division of numbers. These step by step processes are called algorithms. Algorithms are used to program computers to perform tasks and algorithms are used to define the logic for building bridges, or doing bookkeeping tasks, or removing the appendix from a patient, or filling a decayed tooth, etc. Algorithms are the logical steps for accomplishing almost any task relating to the interaction between humans and matter. Algorithms define the patterns humans use to solve many of the problems encountered in life.

It is vital that we have knowledge of many and varied types of algorithms. The more our lives are controlled by technology the more algorithms we must know.

However, there are no known algorithms for many problems that we face daily. Where we fail to have algorithms we must find ways to facilitate understanding.

How does the Socratic technique, or as it is more often called the dialogue method, enhance understanding by a student?

A classroom that is focusing on a dialogue technique of instruction would be one wherein there would be the usual teacher and a number of pupils. A question or a matter of interest would be introduced and pupils would be asked to give their opinion on the matter. Each student voicing a point of view would be subject to questions by members of the class and the instructor and each would be expect to defend the opinion as best they can. Such a class program would require, in many cases that the students come to class well prepared and ready to become an active participant.

The subject might be the American war in Iraq, for example. One can imagine in such a case that there would be many different points of view. Some students might be from homes wherein varying political affiliations might be held. Some students may be Muslims or Jews of Protestants. Such a question would elicit many and strongly held views. The views of all students would be subjected to questions focusing upon the quality of the argument supporting a view and perhaps questions that might focus upon the biases exposed by the view. Assumptions would be examined and questioned. The whole process is directed toward establishing a critical habit of thought in all students.

William Graham Sumner, a distinguished anthropologist states the ideal:

“The critical habit of thought, if usual in a society, will pervade all it’s mores, because it is a way of taking up the problems of life.”

avon

What a load of onions.

naylor182

Come now, I think it's a theory of many layers!