- This topic has 4 voices and 9 replies.
-
Posts
-
Can we know only what we are prepared to know?If an individual has never learned to add and subtract that individual cannot learn how to divide and multiply. Our American educational system, K-12, attempts to teach minimum fundamentals that prepare an individual to function within our high tech society. Our colleges and universities generally augment these fundamentals with some form of specialized knowledge that will make it possible for graduates to obtain good jobs. Few graduates from our American educational system are prepared to comprehend the very complex type of problems our society encounters. In a democracy such as ours the citizens can choose the politicians to act as their representatives in government. In a democracy such as ours the citizen can veto any public policy that they do not comprehend even though it might be necessary for the survival of the American culture and perhaps even of the survival of the human species.Under such circumstances is a democratic form of government adequate? If not what form of government is adequate? Is it possible for us to educate citizens to the higher level of sophistication that is required to manage a sophisticated high tech society such as ours?
What does this have to do with history, primarily Western Civilization? (which is what this board is for)
Aren't you talking about ?bermensch, someone with knowledge and wisdom that outshines the common man? You sound very much like Nietzsche in this post. I am waiting for you to drag out Hegelianism or Marxism.
Can we know only what we are prepared to know?If an individual has never learned to add and subtract that individual cannot learn how to divide and multiply. Our American educational system, K-12, attempts to teach minimum fundamentals that prepare an individual to function within our high tech society. Our colleges and universities generally augment these fundamentals with some form of specialized knowledge that will make it possible for graduates to obtain good jobs. Few graduates from our American educational system are prepared to comprehend the very complex type of problems our society encounters. In a democracy such as ours the citizens can choose the politicians to act as their representatives in government. In a democracy such as ours the citizen can veto any public policy that they do not comprehend even though it might be necessary for the survival of the American culture and perhaps even of the survival of the human species.Under such circumstances is a democratic form of government adequate? If not what form of government is adequate? Is it possible for us to educate citizens to the higher level of sophistication that is required to manage a sophisticated high tech society such as ours?
Coberst, with all due respect you have made this same post on some 40 other message boards:http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Our+American+educational+system,+K-12,+attempts+to+teach+minimum+fundamentals+that+prepare+an+individual+to+function+within+our+high+tech+society.&hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&hs=4AM&start=10&sa=N&filter=0Some may consider this spam, and given the fact that they don't really deal with history I have to question your motivation for all of this.
I claim that comprehending is a hierarchy and can usefully be thought of as a pyramid. At the base of the pyramid is awareness that is followed by consciousness, which is awareness plus attention. Knowing follows consciousness and understanding is at the pinnacle of the pyramid.Two aspects of this comprehension idea deserve elaboration: consciousness and understanding.When I was a youngster, probably seven or eight, my father took me with him when he drove to a local farm to pick corn for use in the caf? the family managed. We drove for a significant amount of time down local dirt roads to a farm with a field of growing corn.We went into the fields with our bushel baskets and filled them with corn-on-the-cob. Dad showed me how to choose the corn to pick and how to snatch the cob from the stalk.On the drive home I was amazed to observe the numerous fields of corn we passed on the way back to town. I can distinctly remember thinking to myself, why did I not see these fields of corn while we were driving to the farm earlier?Today I have an answer to that question. I now say that on the way to the farm I was aware of corn-on-the-cob but on the way back home I was conscious of corn-on-the-cob. There was a very significant difference in my perceptions regarding corn-on-the-cob before and after the experience.We are aware of many things but conscious of only a small number of things. We were aware of Iraq before the war but now we are conscious of Iraq. There is a very important distinction between awareness and consciousness and it is important for us to recognize this difference.To be conscious of a matter signifies a focus of the intellect. Consciousness of a matter is the first step, which may lead to an understanding of the matter. Consciousness of a matter is a necessary condition for knowing and for understanding of that matter. Consciousness is a necessary but not sufficient condition for knowing and understanding to take place.When discussing a topic about which I am knowledgeable most people will, because they recognize the words I am using, treat the matter as old stuff. They recognize the words therefore they consider the matter as something they already know and do not consider as important. Because they are aware of the subject it is difficult to gain their attention when I attempt to go beyond the shallowness of their perception. The communication problem seems to be initially overcoming their awareness and reaching consciousness.Understanding is a long step beyond knowing. Understanding is the creation of meaning. Understanding represents a rare instance when intellection and emotion join hands and places me in an empathetic position with a domain of knowledge. When I understand I have connected the dots and have created a unity that includes myself. I have created something that is meaningful, which means that I have placed that domain of knowledge within my domain that I call my self. I understand because I have a very intimate connection with a model of reality that I have created. It is that eureka moment that happens rarely but is a moment of ecstasy. As Carl Sagan says ?understanding is a kind of ecstasy?.When I read I almost always read non fiction. I have tried to read fiction and to learn from reading what is considered to be good literature. However, my effort to read good literature fails because I thing that learning by reading good literature is a very inefficient means for gaining knowledge and understanding.I claim that I can acquire more knowledge in one hour by reading non fiction than I can while reading good literature for ten hours. That is, I claim that learning by reading non fiction is ten times more efficient than learning by reading fiction, i.e. good literature.
Don't agree with you at all about reading solely non-fiction (what about Twain, Hemingway, and Faulkner? Are you going to tell us we can't get an education of American history, life, and ideology from them and other great authors?), but I am reading Herodotus now with an emphasis on Book VI. And it rocks!!
You are splitting hairs. How do awareness and consciousness fundamentally differ? I dont see the distinction, it must be exceedingly fine.
You are splitting hairs. How do awareness and consciousness fundamentally differ? I dont see the distinction, it must be exceedingly fine.
Do you ever drive your car when not conscious of driving and when you pass a wreck you start driving while being conscious of driving. Have you ever looked in the yellow pages for a shoe store only to discover a local shoe store that you pass twice ever day going to and from work that you were never conscious of.I claim that comprehending is a hierarchy and can usefully be thought of as a pyramid. At the base of the pyramid is awareness that is followed by consciousness, which is awareness plus attention. Knowing follows consciousness and understanding is at the pinnacle of the pyramid.Two aspects of this comprehension idea deserve elaboration: consciousness and understanding.When I was a youngster, probably seven or eight, my father took me with him when he drove to a local farm to pick corn for use in the caf? the family managed. We drove for a significant amount of time down local dirt roads to a farm with a field of growing corn.We went into the fields with our bushel baskets and filled them with corn-on-the-cob. Dad showed me how to choose the corn to pick and how to snatch the cob from the stalk.On the drive home I was amazed to observe the numerous fields of corn we passed on the way back to town. I can distinctly remember thinking to myself, why did I not see these fields of corn while we were driving to the farm earlier?Today I have an answer to that question. I now say that on the way to the farm I was aware of corn-on-the-cob but on the way back home I was conscious of corn-on-the-cob. There was a very significant difference in my perceptions regarding corn-on-the-cob before and after the experience.We are aware of many things but conscious of only a small number of things. We were aware of Iraq before the war but now we are conscious of Iraq. There is a very important distinction between awareness and consciousness and it is important for us to recognize this difference.To be conscious of a matter signifies a focus of the intellect. Consciousness of a matter is the first step, which may lead to an understanding of the matter. Consciousness of a matter is a necessary condition for knowing and for understanding of that matter. Consciousness is a necessary but not sufficient condition for knowing and understanding to take place.When discussing a topic about which I am knowledgeable most people will, because they recognize the words I am using, treat the matter as old stuff. They recognize the words therefore they consider the matter as something they already know and do not consider as important. Because they are aware of the subject it is difficult to gain their attention when I attempt to go beyond the shallowness of their perception. The communication problem seems to be initially overcoming their awareness and reaching consciousness.Understanding is a long step beyond knowing. Understanding is the creation of meaning. Understanding represents a rare instance when intellection and emotion join hands and places me in an empathetic position with a domain of knowledge. When I understand I have connected the dots and have created a unity that includes myself. I have created something that is meaningful, which means that I have placed that domain of knowledge within my domain that I call my self. I understand because I have a very intimate connection with a model of reality that I have created. It is that eureka moment that happens rarely but is a moment of ecstasy. As Carl Sagan says ?understanding is a kind of ecstasy?.
Do you ever drive your car when not conscious of driving and when you pass a wreck you start driving while being conscious of driving. Have you ever looked in the yellow pages for a shoe store only to discover a local shoe store that you pass twice ever day going to and from work that you were never conscious of.
No, I try to be conscious of everything I do. I amost think you are talking of daydreaming. You write a good piece, but i see little of substance.Lastly copying and pasting 90% of your previous post does not strengthen your argument. Repetition does not make truth.
Do you ever drive your car when not conscious of driving and when you pass a wreck you start driving while being conscious of driving. Have you ever looked in the yellow pages for a shoe store only to discover a local shoe store that you pass twice ever day going to and from work that you were never conscious of.
No, I try to be conscious of everything I do. I amost think you are talking of daydreaming. You write a good piece, but i see little of substance.Lastly copying and pasting 90% of your previous post does not strengthen your argument. Repetition does not make truth.
Sometimes it takes a little thought and imagination! Unfortunately our schools and colleges teach us what to think and not how to think. This will be good practice if you try.
I guess I am a drone then because I dont buy you metaphysical meanderings. Metaphysics are good for one thing and it is unprintable in a civilized forum.
Sometimes it takes a little thought and imagination!
Is that like playing pretend? If school taught me what to think, I would be unashamedly liberal and drink my kool-aid like at least 52% of the rest of the population.
