Does an Intellectual Life Endanger Peace of Mind?

[coberst]

Does an Intellectual Life Endanger Peace of Mind?

 

Few individuals discover and display a talent, a personal resonance that can truly excite public appreciation. Those who do display such a resonance are truly rewarded. However, I am not particularly interested in those few but I am interested in considering all the rest of us who have resonances (talents?) and especially all those that remain undiscovered by ourselves.

 

I am of the opinion that we all have a number of personal resonances (talents?) that if discovered give great emphasis to our life’s satisfaction. Those individuals who discover and exploit such a personal resonance can find great self-satisfaction. If that particular resonance strikes a social resonance then the accompanying social display of appreciation can add to the personal satisfaction to the individual.

 

I think a successful artist is a good example of what I speak. The singing artist who happens not only to discover a particular musical talent and, if that talent is in accord with a public musical taste, that individual would reap great personal and economic satisfaction. The actor or painter, or any of many possible talents that are appreciated by the public would serve as examples of what I mean by resonance.

 

It seems that society and all its institutions are focused upon making everyone of us efficient producers and consumers. Nothing prepares us for self-discovery when such discovery is not supportive of a drive to produce and consume. I think that most social pressure from birth to death is directed at the drive to make us effective producers and consumers.

 

I chose to use the word “resonance” rather than talent because I think our sense of the meaning of the word “talent” will distort the point I wish to make. “Talent” is such a ‘produce and consume’ word. In fact we have little vocabulary available when discussing what I mean.

 

At mid-life when our career ambitions dim and our family are cared for is the time that is available to us to begin to de-emphasize the world of ‘production and consumption’ and begin exploring the world of the intellect directed as an end-in-itself’. Our intellects have been so totally directed as a means to an end that we will have some difficulty thinking of knowledge and understanding that is considered as an end-in-itself.

 

Our first encounter with resonance, as the word is normally used, might have been when we first discovered on the playground swing that a little energy directed in synchronization with the swing’s resonant frequency would produce outstanding movement. What a marvelous discovery. We might make similar marvelous discoveries if we decide, against all that we have learned in the past, that the intellect can be used as an end-in-it-self.

 

I also think that if a person reaches mid-life without having begun an intellectual life that person will be unlikely to begin such a life. It appears to me that if we do not start such an effort before mid-life we will never have an intellectual life. After our school daze are over it might be wise for a person to begin the cultivation of intellectual curiosity even though there may not be a lot of time available for that hobby.

 

Get a life—get an intellectual life!

[Eclogite]

It seems that society and all its institutions are focused upon making everyone of us efficient producers and consumers.

I am concerned about the absolute nature of this statement. In what way would these organisations push us towards being efficient consumers and producers?

 

The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds

The National Trust

The Royal National Lifeboat Institute

The Royal Shakespeare Company

Oxfam

The Footlights

The Monster Raving Loony Party

The Royal Society

The British Museum

 

and other similar institutions.

[coberst]

I am concerned about the absolute nature of this statement. In what way would these organisations push us towards being efficient consumers and producers?

 

The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds

The National Trust

The Royal National Lifeboat Institute

The Royal Shakespeare Company

Oxfam

The Footlights

The Monster Raving Loony Party

The Royal Society

The British Museum

 

and other similar institutions.

 

I was speaking about the United States; however I am confident that it applies also to Great Britton because they function also under the Iron Law of Oligarchy.

 

Quickie from Wiki:

“The iron law of oligarchy is a political theory, first developed by the German syndicalist sociologist Robert Michels in his 1911 book, Political Parties. It states that all forms of organization, regardless of how democratic or autocratic[citation needed] they may be at the start, will eventually and inevitably develop into oligarchies. The reasons for this are the technical indispensability of leadership, the tendency of the leaders to organize themselves and to consolidate their interests; the gratitude of the led towards the leaders, and the general immobility and passivity of the masses.”

 

An oligarchy controls public policy in America. The oligarchy consists of those who manage the great wealth of American institutions. This oligarchy designs our educational system to graduate good producers and consumers and does not desire independent thinkers.

 

CA (Corporate America) has developed a well-honed expertise in motivating the population to behave in a desired manner. Citizens as consumers are ample manifestation of that expertise. CA has accomplished this ability by careful study and implementation of the knowledge of the ways of human behavior. I suspect this same structure applies to most Western democracies.

 

A democratic form of government is one wherein the citizens have some voice in some policy decisions. The greater the voice of the citizens the better the democracy. The greater the intellectual sophistication of those citizens the better the democracy.

 

In America we have policy makers, decision makers, and citizens. The decision makers are our elected representatives and are, thus, under some control by the voting citizen. The policy makers are the leaders of CA; less than ten thousand individuals, according to those who study such matters. Policy makers exercise significant control of decision makers by controlling the financing of elections.

 

Policy makers customize and maintain the dominant ideology in order to control the political behavior of the citizens. This dominant ideology exercises the political control of the citizens in the same fashion as the consuming citizen is controlled by the same dominant ideology.

 

An enlightened citizen is the only means to gain more voice in more policy decisions. An enlightened citizen is much more than an informed citizen. Critical thinking is the only practical means to develop a more enlightened citizen. If, however, we wait until our CT trained grade-schoolers become adults I suspect all will be lost. This is why I think a massive effort must be made to convince today’s adults that they must train themselves in CT.

 

 

“Thomas R. Dye, Professor of Political Science at Florida State University, has published a series of books examining who and what institutions actually control and run America. to understand who is making the decisions that affect our lives, we also have to understand how societies structure themselves in general. Why the few always tend to share more power than the many and what this means in terms of both a society's evolution and our daily lives. they examined the other 11 institutions that exert just as powerful a shaping influence, although somewhat more subtle: The Industrial, Corporations, Utilities and Communications, Banking, Insurance Investment, Mass Media, Law, Education Foundation, Civic and Cultural Organizations, Government, and the Military.”

[Eclogite]

Let's suppose that the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds has indeed been taken over by an oligarchy. In what way can this oligarchy push individuals towards being efficient consumers and producers? The institution is a charity dedicated to protection of bird life. If anything its members oppose consumption, since excessive consumption tends to lead to the loss of habitat.

 

I encourage you to look at their website and tell me in what way they are pushing individuals towards becoming efficient consumers and producers. True, they may encourage members to make purchases of items, but this is to raise funds to pursue their goals of bird protection and most (if not all) of the items have relevance to those goals.

 

I just am at a loss to see how this organisation, the others I have listed, and many more like them are seeking to achieve what you describe. Indeed, as far as I can see these institutions are important elements in the promotion of enlightenment and the creation of informed citizens. Please either acknowledge that your intial statement was flawed or demonstrate how such an institution does push individuals towards becoming efficient consumers and producers.

[coberst]

Eclogite

 

We are all embedded within our culture. Humans seem much like bovine in that they are often just standing staring blankly into the distance or stampeding with the herd.

 

The Iron Law of Oligarchy informs us that leadership tends to seek its well being. When the culture is driven by a set of values determined by the principal value of maximizing production and consumption allmost all institutions, in a herd like manner, use the cultural values much like a paradigm; that is to say all institutions in a bovine like manner are governed by the production and consumption paradigm.

 

Only those well situated within the ability for Critical Thinking are capable of recognizing the ideology in which they live and in that recognition comprehend how to step outside of the thundering herd and thus recognize the problems relative to the herd like behavior.

 

Just like the Wall Street oligarchy the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds most likely sees it self as only doing what comes naturally.

 

The first step toward solving our problems is to learn CT (Critical Thinking).

 

CT is an acronym for Critical Thinking. Everybody considers themselves to be a critical thinker. That is why we need to differentiate among different levels of critical thinking.

 

Most people fall in the category that I call Reagan thinkers—trust but verify. Then there are those who have taken the basic college course taught by the philosophy dept that I call Logic 101. This is a credit course that teaches the basic principles of reasoning. Of course, a person need not take the college course and can learn the matter on their own effort, but I suspect few do that.

 

The third level I call CT (Critical Thinking). CT includes the knowledge of Logic 101 and also the knowledge that focuses upon the intellectual character and attitude of critical thinking. It includes knowledge regarding the ego and social centric forces that impede rational thinking.

 

Most decisions we have to make are judgment calls. A judgment call is made when we must make a decision when there is no “true” or “false” answers. When we make a judgment call our decision is bad, good, or better.

 

Many factors are involved: there are the available facts, assumptions, skills, knowledge, and especially personal experience and attitude. I think that the two most important elements in the mix are personal experience and attitude.

 

When we study math we learn how to use various algorithms to facilitate our skill in dealing with quantities. If we never studied math we could deal with quantity on a primary level but our quantifying ability would be minimal. Likewise with making judgments; if we study the art and science of good judgment we can make better decisions and if we never study the art and science of judgment our decision ability will remain minimal.

 

I am convinced that a fundamental problem we have in this country (USA) is that our citizens have never learned the art and science of good judgment. Before the recent introduction of CT into our schools and colleges our young people have been taught primarily what to think and not how to think. All of us graduated with insufficient comprehension of the knowledge, skills, and attitude necessary for the formulation of good judgment. The result of this inability to make good judgment is evident and is dangerous.

 

I am primarily interested in the judgment that adults exercise in regard to public issues. Of course, any improvement in judgment generally will affect both personal and community matters.

 

To put the matter into a nut shell:

1. Normal men and women can significantly improve their ability to make judgments.

2. CT is the domain of knowledge that delineates the knowledge, skills, and intellectual character demanded for good judgment.

3. CT has been introduced into our schools and colleges slowly in the last two or three decades.

4. Few of today’s adults were ever taught CT.

5. I suspect that at least another two generations will pass before our society reaps significant rewards resulting from teaching CT to our children.

6. Can our democracy survive that long?

7. I think that every effort must be made to convince today’s adults that they need to study and learn CT on their own. I am not suggesting that adults find a teacher but I am suggesting that adults become self-actualizing learners.

8. I am convinced that learning the art and science of Critical Thinking is an important step toward becoming a better citizen in today’s democratic society.

 

 

 

Bertrand Russell on Critical Thinking

 

“ABSTRACT: The ideal of critical thinking is a central one in Russell's philosophy, though this is not yet generally recognized in the literature on critical thinking. For Russell, the ideal is embedded in the fabric of philosophy, science, liberalism and rationality, and this paper reconstructs Russell's account, which is scattered throughout numerous papers and books. It appears that he has developed a rich conception, involving a complex set of skills, dispositions and attitudes, which together delineate a virtue which has both intellectual and moral aspects. It is a view which is rooted in Russell's epistemological conviction that knowledge is difficult but not impossible to attain, and in his ethical conviction that freedom and independence in inquiry are vital. Russell's account anticipates many of the insights to be found in the recent critical thinking literature, and his views on critical thinking are of enormous importance in understanding the nature of educational aims. Moreover, it is argued that Russell manages to avoid many of the objections which have been raised against recent accounts. With respect to impartiality, thinking for oneself, the importance of feelings and relational skills, the connection with action, and the problem of generalizability, Russell shows a deep understanding of problems and issues which have been at the forefront of recent debate.” 20th WCP: Bertrand Russell on Critical Thinking

[Eclogite]

Coberst, that is all very interesting, but could you take the time to address the central point raised in my post and to answer the specific question. It is possible that the answer is implicit in your reply, but I am unable to see it. To recap, I wish to know in what way you think the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds is pushing individuals towards becoming efficient consumers and producers.

 

You might also wish to comment on my belief that the founders, current management and most members of this society have employed critical thinking when arriving at the conclusion that bird life should be protected and that they should play in a role in that protection.

[coberst]

Coberst, that is all very interesting, but could you take the time to address the central point raised in my post and to answer the specific question. It is possible that the answer is implicit in your reply, but I am unable to see it. To recap, I wish to know in what way you think the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds is pushing individuals towards becoming efficient consumers and producers.

 

You might also wish to comment on my belief that the founders, current management and most members of this society have employed critical thinking when arriving at the conclusion that bird life should be protected and that they should play in a role in that protection.

 

 

I know nothing specific about The Royal Society.

 

I cannot answer your question in the matter of specifics and also I have no specific knowledge about who is or is not a Critical Thinker.

 

I will say that in the US I suspect that 95% of the population knows little or nothing about CT because it has seldom been taught in or educational systems. Almost everyone thinks that they are a critical thinker but that is because almost no one understands CT.

 

We generally teach by telling. We teach what to think and not how to think. As a result tradition reins supreme and that is why almost everyone has a value system headed up by how to maximize production and consumption.

[Eclogite]

I know nothing specific about The Royal Society.

It is quite unreasonable to expect that you should have any specific knowledge of it, or of the other institutions I mentioned. But surely, as a consequence of that knowledge, it is inappropriate, inaccurate, perhaps downtright wrong, to claime as you did "It seems that society and all its institutions are focused upon making everyone of us efficient producers and consumers."

 

Would you be prepared to modify that statement so that the all reads many? this may seem like a pedantic point, but I suggest it is anything but. If your statement is true then we are truly locked into self sustaining, inward looking, automatic society. The outlook for such a society is bleak. On the other hand if the statement is false, as I beleive it to be, then those institutions whose goals have arisen from application of the very critical thinking you advocate and who strive towards those goals with more of the same, these same institutions offer a way out of the dilema you feel faces humanity in general.

 

You opened your response by noting you knew knothing specific about the Royal Society (for the Protection of Birds). I do. I know, through objective and critical consideration of that society that it is not dedicated to "making everyone of us efficient producers and consumers". I know, with equal certainty, borne out of the same rigorous application of critical thinking, that there are other institutions - some of which I have listed - of whom this is also true. In the light of these points will you acknowledge that your statement is too general?

[coberst]

 

Would you be prepared to modify that statement so that the all reads many? this may seem like a pedantic point, but I suggest it is anything but. If your statement is true then we are truly locked into self sustaining, inward looking, automatic society. The outlook for such a society is bleak. On the other hand if the statement is false, as I beleive it to be, then those institutions whose goals have arisen from application of the very critical thinking you advocate and who strive towards those goals with more of the same, these same institutions offer a way out of the dilema you feel faces humanity in general.

 

 

 

You make a good point. I was wondering why we got off on the pursuit of the Royal Society.

 

I would appreciate if you were to elaborate on this statement: "On the other hand if the statement is false, as I beleive it to be, then those institutions whose goals have arisen from application of the very critical thinking you advocate and who strive towards those goals with more of the same, these same institutions offer a way out of the dilema you feel faces humanity in general."

[Knothead]

I know I'm not as smart as you guys, but I'm pretty sure that I'm smarter than my dog.

The thing is though, I hardly ever see my dog worrying about things or moping around the house. While I on the other hand often find myself waking up in the middle of the night dwelling on things in my life that at that hour seem to be out of my control.

Who was it that said "ignorance is bliss"? And were they serious?