coberst Posted September 23, 2007 Report Posted September 23, 2007 Technology makes passive life seducing “The development of general ability for independent thinking and judgment should always be placed foremost, not the acquisition of specialized knowledge.” --Albert Einstein Our (US) society is not generally tuned to agree with Albert’s opinion. We generally consider education is a commodity, an object of commerce; generally our schools, colleges, and universities prepare us in a specific specialty so that we can fit directly into the cogs of the industrial machine when we graduate. The “development of general ability for independent thinking and judgment” must come after our school days are complete. If we do not begin this process of preparation for independent thinking quickly after schooling it is quite likely we will never acquire the judgment required of an independent critical thinker. There is good reason to consider our first priority is to acquire the certificates necessary for a good job and then to focus our attention upon taking control of our life following our graduation. There is a significant difference between life as it is typically lived and life as it could be. This difference can be lived provided one does not give into a passive role and develops an active roll in determining her or his future. The passive learner rolls with the punches; s/he establishes habits that ‘work’, which allow him or her to ‘get by’. The passive learner seeks to integrate her or him self into the status quo. Our technology makes a passive life seducing. The following two paragraphs are from a recent article in the Washington Post written by a reporter who had rented a car with a GPS guidance system. Again and again, I turned off the calculated route — following my nose across country — and the G.P.S. patiently rearranged its plans. Now and then I heard it say, “Make a legal U-turn at the first opportunity,” and I wondered if I was hearing a sigh of defeat in its crisp, female voice. I set out one morning for a nearly vanished Kansas town. “You have arrived!” said the G.P.S., without irony, as we drove down the tumbleweed streets of our destination. We fought only once, in Emporia. We were leaving the surface road and picking up the Kansas Turnpike. The instructions I heard flatly contradicted my sense of where we were, so I ignored them and found myself heading west, toward Salina, instead of northeast, toward Lawrence. It was a humbling experience. I stopped for coffee. When I started the car, the G.P.S. said, “Resume?” Not a hint of told-you-so in its voice. I said yes, and let it lead me home. The active learner establishes habits directed at constant improvement. I think that many people become active learners directing their efforts at maximizing production and consumption. In fact I guess the American life style is ‘to be the active learner running faster and faster on the industrial tread mill’. The values ingrained in us by our culture ‘tell us’ that that is the natural way to accentuate the positive and eliminate the negative. But there is another way to become an active learner and that is by self-actualization through self-learning directed not at becoming a better producer and consumer but upon establishing a broader perspective, by establishing a different value system. How does a young person who has finished their schooling develop their own value system? How does a young person develop a sound intellectual foundation upon which to build a life? What is a sound intellectual foundation? How does a young person learn to ask the important questions? How does a young person find the answers to these questions? How does a young person become an independent thinker when the culture is constantly singing a lullaby for slumber? Quote
Buffy Posted September 23, 2007 Report Posted September 23, 2007 coberst said: The “development of general ability for independent thinking and judgment” must come after our school days are complete.If this is what you advocate, I'd say you've got a pretty good self-fulfilling prophecy there! The American school system's *emphasis* on critical thinking has been pointed to for years as the key reason why it is superior to Japan and other countries which "score higher" on "passively absorbed knowledge." Be careful what you wish for,Buffy Quote
coberst Posted September 24, 2007 Author Report Posted September 24, 2007 Buffy said: If this is what you advocate, I'd say you've got a pretty good self-fulfilling prophecy there! The American school system's *emphasis* on critical thinking has been pointed to for years as the key reason why it is superior to Japan and other countries which "score higher" on "passively absorbed knowledge." Be careful what you wish for,Buffy I have never seen such a statement before. Unless you are using the phrase "critical thinking" in the most superficial way I find this statement very surprising. It is difficult to imagine a school system any more attuned to rote learning than is ours. Quote
freeztar Posted September 24, 2007 Report Posted September 24, 2007 When I started college at UGA in 1996, I was shocked when my English class was asked why they were in college. Every single person who answered the question stated that they were in college to get their degree so they could secure a good job after leaving college. Not one person mentioned the merits of education. When I graduated from TESC in 2003, it was a very different story. I had learned to think critically and the most important knowledge that I walked away with was the ability to learn. TESC was a much different environment than UGA and I got the impression that people at TESC overwhelmingly had similar goals to mine. So, I think the responsibility primarily lies on the student's head. School, or specifically education, is what you make of it. Quote
Buffy Posted September 24, 2007 Report Posted September 24, 2007 coberst said: I have never seen such a statement before. Unless you are using the phrase "critical thinking" in the most superficial way I find this statement very surprising. It is difficult to imagine a school system any more attuned to rote learning than is ours.I know that your goal is to trash education in the US in general, but this general statement has attained meme status in education and its remarkable that you have not encountered it. There are too many references to list them all, but here are a couple: Some educational systems do well at one end, while others do well at the other. For example, countries such as Japan and Singapore have often been recognised as examples of academic excellence because their students seem to have superior mastery of content knowledge in mathematics and science, whereas US education has been viewed as a model by many Asian countries for fostering creativity and problem solving skills. Japan, Singapore, and other countries that excel in imparting knowledge have been deeply concerned about their students’ lack of creativity and problem solving skills, while the US has been worried that its students lack basic knowledge. Transformation and Innovation: System leaders in the global ageWhen everybody is on the same curriculum there is no other choice but to follow the herd. While conformity creates better math students, it demises the aspect of creativity and individuality. The boat may float, but not posses any inspiration or differentiation from the others. The U.S. places a much bigger emphasis on creativity and choice. Thus providing students with opportunities that help them learn about themselves, and develop original ideas. US vs Asian School Systems (quotes selected for ease of finding them rather than being definitive)I know you will quibble with my equating "Problem Solving Skills" and "Creativity" with "Critical Thinking," but I find the restrictive definition that you seem to promote here to eliminate just about any quality or initiative, thus making your statements "a self-fulfilling prophecy." But what's fascinating to me is that this is subjective and irrelevant to the more important question that you completely ignored in my post: coberst said: The “development of general ability for independent thinking and judgment” must come after our school days are complete. Why do you insist that education in critical thinking should be withheld from the curriculum of primary and secondary education? This would appear to *ensure* that the "little people" never have to worry their little heads about thinking critically. How does this create a more educated populace? Everyone can think if you teach them how,Buffy Quote
coberst Posted September 24, 2007 Author Report Posted September 24, 2007 freeztar said: When I started college at UGA in 1996, I was shocked when my English class was asked why they were in college. Every single person who answered the question stated that they were in college to get their degree so they could secure a good job after leaving college. Not one person mentioned the merits of education. When I graduated from TESC in 2003, it was a very different story. I had learned to think critically and the most important knowledge that I walked away with was the ability to learn. TESC was a much different environment than UGA and I got the impression that people at TESC overwhelmingly had similar goals to mine. So, I think the responsibility primarily lies on the student's head. School, or specifically education, is what you make of it. Our educational system is not a work of nature it is designed to be what it is, it is to graduate good producers and consumers. Some few students do make more of it than that but most parents send their children to college so that can get good jobs. Perhaps that is OK provided adults recognize that their learning must begin after their school daze are over. We can no longer afford the luxury of a nation full of inactive brains. The world has become too filled with the technology for destruction and the lack of concern for the destruction of the planet. Quote
coberst Posted September 24, 2007 Author Report Posted September 24, 2007 Buffy I do do not think you are paying attention. I applaud our begining the effort to introduce CT into our schools and colleges. However the effort is very slow in achievement and there is little evidence of anyone graduating with any knowledge regarding CT. As to the comparison of US schools with those in the Eastern culture it is too bad that the Eastern schools are doing such a poor job that our lame efforts in trying to teach youngsters how to think rather than what to think is superior. But the superiority is certainly only relative and not absolute. I cannot comprehend how anyone might disput this rather obvious fact. Quote
freeztar Posted September 26, 2007 Report Posted September 26, 2007 coberst said: Our educational system is not a work of nature it is designed to be what it is, it is to graduate good producers and consumers. I partially agree. Based on my experience posted above, most of the students in that case seemed to have the goal of obtaining a diploma as a job-securing asset. This is not always the case though. Quote Some few students do make more of it than that but most parents send their children to college so that can get good jobs.Indeed, but again, state funded schools exist that hold critical thinking as an icon of scholastic pursuit. This is mainly dictated by the staff. A job opportunity IS a convenient incentive to pay off that ball-and-chain student loan. CT and tech operate independently imo. Quote Perhaps that is OK provided adults recognize that their learning must begin after their school daze are over. Learning begins at birth...and it carries on uninterrupted for the most part. Quote We can no longer afford the luxury of a nation full of inactive brains. "The luxury of a nation full of inactive brains" is actually descriptive of the planet-wide humanitarian plight, imho. Quote The world has become too filled with the technology for destruction and the lack of concern for the destruction of the planet. While I cry about the injustices of the world, I also smile at the progress we make. I believe "technology for destruction" is ultimately the same tech used as "technology for construction". Choices... Quote
coberst Posted September 26, 2007 Author Report Posted September 26, 2007 freeztar Learning by social osmosis begins at birth and does continue throughout our life. I consider learning to be too important to be satisfied with learning by social osmosis. It is our technology for construction that has morphed into technology for destruction. We kill and destroy to make the world safe for more technology for construction. Quote
Devonin Posted September 26, 2007 Report Posted September 26, 2007 This is a thread that is intrinsically about the way the benefits of technology encourage people to be lazy, idle, and deficient in their ability to think, with a firm undertone that such cases are to be avoided at all costs. This is also a thread that Coberst has copy/pasted (from 2006 originally as nearly as I can tell) into at least 6 forums in the past 2 days. I find this hypocritical in the extreme, to use such a lazy and idle means of communication to decry lazy and idle means of communication. On other forums Coberst routinely cross-posts to, I have been in discussion with various moderators and senior members and we've determined a few things. 1/ Coberst constantly posts word-for-word versions of his threads in multiple places.2/ Coberst constantly posts word-for-word replies into his threads in multiple places.3/ Coberst gives little to no evidence that he -ever- reads a thread he did not start himself, and certainly is not active in discussion with other people about ideas that are not his own.4/ Coberst is so extensive in his cross-posting inattentively with no respect for his fellow forummates, that he just in the past few days referenced something "One reader responded" in the very thread that person had made their statement, a statement he had -already- responded to earlier in the thread. The general consensus could decide whether he was some combination of bot, cross-poster using blogging software to automate his posts, or simply a pseudo-academic who enjoys the sight of his own text online but is not at all interested in actually engaging people in discourse or even considering topics that are not of his own choosing. His identical topics are easily found using google and his thread title, but I can happily provide links to other areas where identical topics and responses are being posted. Part of me feels a little bad posting this onto this particular forum, since it actually seems to be one of the very few that he's actually actively participating in, in a way that implies he actually reads your responses, but given the way that he has routinely simply failed to address points raised by other people, in favour of pasting a response from another forum makes me feel obliged to say something. I get the impression from his thread and postcount, that this might actually be his home forum, so again if I've somehow cast doubt on some beloved forum member I apologise, but it galls me to no end to see philosophy, critical thinking and open free discussion fora being used as a vehicle for disrespectful spouting of opinion without any actual visible attempts to take part in the personal, deliberate back and forth exchange of ideas that is supposed to define those fields. Quote
Buffy Posted September 26, 2007 Report Posted September 26, 2007 We've noticed. He's really "Mostly Harmless," and if you argue with him directly you can even get an interesting reply... We have already checked on the background of Mr. Cyrano Jones. He is a licensed asteroid locator and prospector. He's never broken the law, at least not severely. For the past seven years, with his one-man spaceship, he's obtained a marginal living by buying and selling rare merchandise, including, unfortunately, tribbles, Buffy Quote
coberst Posted September 30, 2007 Author Report Posted September 30, 2007 'The single most effective weapon against our deployed forces'By Rick AtkinsonWashington Post Staff Writer Sunday, September 30, 2007; Page A01 "We all drank the Kool-Aid," said a retired Army officer who worked on counter-IED issues for three years. "We believed, and Congress was guilty as well, that because the United States was the technology powerhouse, the solution to this problem would come from science. That attitude was 'All we have to do is throw technology at it and the problem will go away.' . . . The day we lose a war it will be to guys with spears and loincloths, because they're not tied to technology. And we're kind of close to being there." Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.