• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

on Philosophy of Education

Maabus1999

New member
Joined
Aug 2, 2008
Messages
528
MBTI Type
INTJ
Not relevant to this inquiry.

So then anyone who disagrees on how things should be done is not relevant eh? Reminds me of an ENFP I know...

Question then: Do you believe you can create a true IQ test or not?

Another question: What about history? We including this in philosophy? Because with straight intellect and no wisdom...yeah, not my type of education that is going to doom society.
 

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
So then anyone who disagrees on how things should be done is not relevant eh? Reminds me of an ENFP I know...

Question then: Do you believe you can create a true IQ test or not?

Another question: What about history? We including this in philosophy? Because with straight intellect and no wisdom...yeah, not my type of education that is going to doom society.

I must confess, I have no clue what you are talking about nor do I see any relevance of this to the OP.

Disagree with me? You're not even talking about the same subject! To disagree means to express views on the same subject that conflict with mine, you're nowhere close to that!
 

Nocapszy

no clinkz 'til brooklyn
Joined
Jun 29, 2007
Messages
4,517
MBTI Type
ENTP
I was always under the impression that education was for compiling and compounding knowledge.
 

ygolo

My termites win
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
5,986
Intellectual disciplines you mentioned presuppose one's ability to imagine not only the most basic things, but highly complex things. Very few people have the ability to imagine such things to a satisfactory degree and that is why many complex ideas are off limits for them.

It seems to be the case that practicing imagining things can enhance one's imagination slightly, not significantly however. Do you wish to argue that it is possible to enhance one's imagination significantly? For instance, could a person who was at once very unimaginative become a visionary?

I disagree here. Only a basic ability to imagine is a prerequisite. The discipline itself teaches how to design the complex things from the simple elements. There are rules to follow for combination, and rules for how to visualize the complex things, based on simple things.

I do believe it is possible to improve one's imagination significantly in other ways.

One book that will greatly aid in this process is:
Amazon.com: Conceptual Blockbusting: A Guide To Better Ideas, Third Edition: James L. Adams: Books

Drafting and perspective drawing in general will improve your structural/spatial visualization skills.

Designing Software and Circuits will improve your abstract visualization skills, as will solving math problems.

The main impediment people have to imagination is distraction or agitation. Yoga, especially Hatha Yoga, is great at releasing the mind's ability to imagine.

Playing an abstract visualization game like chess will improve those skills.

Playing a spatial visualization game like Tetris will improve those skills.

Also, imagination and memory are intimately linked. Improving one will improve the other.

In addition, one can use NLP. For most people, if they look up and to the right, they will find it much easier to create images.
 

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
I disagree here. Only a basic ability to imagine is a prerequisite. The discipline itself teaches how to design the complex things from the simple elements. There are rules to follow for combination, and rules for how to visualize the complex things, based on simple things..

Could an unimaginative person learn to perform complex mathematical operations? For instance, could an unimaginative person conceive of a way to do a 100 step proof?

I do believe it is possible to improve one's imagination significantly in other ways...

One book that will greatly aid in this process is:
Amazon.com: Conceptual Blockbusting: A Guide To Better Ideas, Third Edition: James L. Adams: Books...[/QUOTE]

Summarize this for me. I do not see how this would enhance one's imagination to a significant degree.

Drafting and perspective drawing in general will improve your structural/spatial visualization skills. ...

That is true, as we have earlier established that it is possible to become more imaginative by engaging in tasks that require one to use imagination. Earlier you were arguing that it is possible to improve one's imagination to a significant degree. Explain how this could be done.

Designing Software and Circuits will improve your abstract visualization skills, as will solving math problems.

The main impediment people have to imagination is distraction or agitation. Yoga, especially Hatha Yoga, is great at releasing the mind's ability to imagine.

Playing an abstract visualization game like chess will improve those skills.

Playing a spatial visualization game like Tetris will improve those skills.

Also, imagination and memory are intimately linked. Improving one will improve the other.

In addition, one can use NLP. For most people, if they look up and to the right, they will find it much easier to create images.


Explain how these activities could improve one's imagination to a significant degree. The main obstacle to this thesis that I see is that imagination is not a skill that is clearly observable, like one's logical analysis capabilities. The faculties that are responsible for imagination are amorphous because of this we are not exactly clear on what is necessary to cultivate such skill. We know that the activities you mentioned above do cultivate imagination purely inductively, or our experiences show that people who have engaged in such tasks have enhanced their imagination. The problem remains, however, that we do not know exactly how their imagination was enhanced. For example, certain activities we may find in this book Amazon.com: Conceptual Blockbusting: A Guide To Better Ideas, Third Edition: James L. Adams: Books... will ignite the imaginations of some, but not others. Yet, instructions concerning logical reasoning, if properly presented should ignite the reasoning faculties of all. The only exception we may find to this is on the higher levels of reasoning, those to be found in advanced study of logic and mathematics, but in that case, the problem appears to be not with the instructions concerning how logical analysis is to be conducted, but with the student's lack of imagination.

For example with logical analysis, we have a very clear explanation regarding what one must do to become more proficient at logical analysis. Many mathematics and logic books have thorough instructions regarding this matter, yet this is far from the case for imagination.
 

ygolo

My termites win
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
5,986
Could an unimaginative person learn to perform complex mathematical operations? For instance, could an unimaginative person conceive of a way to do a 100 step proof?

No. But the point I am making is that the capability of the person doing the imagining was honed on smaller things, on simpler things.

Just like memory, the imagination is also special purposed.

The skill is built up through practice. By the time someone is capable of doing a 100-step proof, their imagination capabilities have been honed to do that.


Summarize this for me. I do not see how this would enhance one's imagination to a significant degree.

It is essentially a book of exercises aimed at improving one's imagination. The exercises mainly allow you to access your modalities at will, and enable you to switch between modes of representation.

That is true, as we have earlier established that it is possible to become more imaginative by engaging in tasks that require one to use imagination. Earlier you were arguing that it is possible to improve one's imagination to a significant degree. Explain how this could be done.

I suppose "significant" is a relative term.

Frankly, so is "imagination."

There are many types. One could imagine sights, sounds, and sensations in any combination. What is imagined could be vivid or ephemeral, abstract or rich, colorful or bland, correspond to real world objects or have nothing at all to do with reality.

The particular ability to imagine chess moves for instance does not exist in people who don't know chess. Ask a master how he plays blind-fold chess. He does not imagine the board and pieces in vivid detail--in fact, this has little more use for him than an for an amateur who can actually see the whole board and still blunders. The Master's representation is more partial and abstract. It relates how pieces are attacked and supported, how much room pieces have to maneuver, what his plan is in the game, and what his opponent is planning to do. It is chess-specific imagination built-up from playing chess.

Similarly, for a mathematical proof. I am by no means a professional, but I am certainly much better at imagining the structure of a mathematical proof than I was before I started my Math degree.

When first learning, perhaps I thought of individual statements, and trid to see particular rules to be applied to transform an expression into another. This is still useful, and I use it from time to time, but later, the process becomes more abstracted, quicker, more ephemeral, almost kniesthetic. I can plan simpler proofs from beginning to end and be fairly confident I can finish the details, I can also speculatively try entire strategies, and approaches to a problem, have them not work, and still learn quite a bit about the original problem. A younger me, would have had to start back from scratch.

All this is Math-Proof-specific imagination, built-up from doing math proofs.

When designing computer programs, an amateur may flow-chart, or think expressly in code. But with experience, an expert can think in high level design patterns or a modeling language, and be confident the actual code can be implemented. This is programming-specific imagination and built up through practice.

Explain how these activities could improve one's imagination to a significant degree. The main obstacle to this thesis that I see is that imagination is not a skill that is clearly observable, like one's logical analysis capabilities. The faculties that are responsible for imagination are amorphous because of this we are not exactly clear on what is necessary to cultivate such skill. We know that the activities you mentioned above do cultivate imagination purely inductively, or our experiences show that people who have engaged in such tasks have enhanced their imagination. The problem remains, however, that we do not know exactly how their imagination was enhanced. For example, certain activities we may find in this book Amazon.com: Conceptual Blockbusting: A Guide To Better Ideas, Third Edition: James L. Adams: Books... will ignite the imaginations of some, but not others.

What we are talking about here is representation. How does one represent what one is thinking about in ones mind? We may not be able to see the representations of other people until expressed, but they are often expressed. What does an artist, painter, or musician express?

The notion of "enhancement" is also a very fuzzy one. Studies of experts in many fields show that the experts themselves maybe the ones with the least vivid of representations--they act on a much more sub-conscious level, and may have the hardest time explaining what it is that they do (or rather explain a much simpler process than what they actually do).

There are many objects of analysis or study when doing an activity. These objects of study will need a representation in ones mind. Once studied, these representations are often stored as memory (as per the discussion above, we will have chess-specific memory, math-proof-specific memory, computer-programming-specific memory). At a later time, these previously imagined representations are pulled forth from memory and enhanced or reused in new imagination activities.

Yet, instructions concerning logical reasoning, if properly presented should ignite the reasoning faculties of all. The only exception we may find to this is on the higher levels of reasoning, those to be found in advanced study of logic and mathematics, but in that case, the problem appears to be not with the instructions concerning how logical analysis is to be conducted, but with the student's lack of imagination.

For example with logical analysis, we have a very clear explanation regarding what one must do to become more proficient at logical analysis. Many mathematics and logic books have thorough instructions regarding this matter, yet this is far from the case for imagination.

Logic and reasoning does not work in a vacuum. They work on particular representations.

In many disciplines, these representations are formalized in some way (whether they are chess pieces, mathematical symbols, elements in a schematic, or phenomenon in the physical world).

When we judge the quality of reasoning, we are also judging the quality of representation.
 

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
No. But the point I am making is that the capability of the person doing the imagining was honed on smaller things, on simpler things.

Just like memory, the imagination is also special purposed.

The skill is built up through practice. By the time someone is capable of doing a 100-step proof, their imagination capabilities have been honed to do that.




It is essentially a book of exercises aimed at improving one's imagination. The exercises mainly allow you to access your modalities at will, and enable you to switch between modes of representation.



I suppose "significant" is a relative term.

Frankly, so is "imagination."

There are many types. One could imagine sights, sounds, and sensations in any combination. What is imagined could be vivid or ephemeral, abstract or rich, colorful or bland, correspond to real world objects or have nothing at all to do with reality.

The particular ability to imagine chess moves for instance does not exist in people who don't know chess. Ask a master how he plays blind-fold chess. He does not imagine the board and pieces in vivid detail--in fact, this has little more use for him than an for an amateur who can actually see the whole board and still blunders. The Master's representation is more partial and abstract. It relates how pieces are attacked and supported, how much room pieces have to maneuver, what his plan is in the game, and what his opponent is planning to do. It is chess-specific imagination built-up from playing chess.

Similarly, for a mathematical proof. I am by no means a professional, but I am certainly much better at imagining the structure of a mathematical proof than I was before I started my Math degree.

When first learning, perhaps I thought of individual statements, and trid to see particular rules to be applied to transform an expression into another. This is still useful, and I use it from time to time, but later, the process becomes more abstracted, quicker, more ephemeral, almost kniesthetic. I can plan simpler proofs from beginning to end and be fairly confident I can finish the details, I can also speculatively try entire strategies, and approaches to a problem, have them not work, and still learn quite a bit about the original problem. A younger me, would have had to start back from scratch.

All this is Math-Proof-specific imagination, built-up from doing math proofs.

When designing computer programs, an amateur may flow-chart, or think expressly in code. But with experience, an expert can think in high level design patterns or a modeling language, and be confident the actual code can be implemented. This is programming-specific imagination and built up through practice.



What we are talking about here is representation. How does one represent what one is thinking about in ones mind? We may not be able to see the representations of other people until expressed, but they are often expressed. What does an artist, painter, or musician express?

The notion of "enhancement" is also a very fuzzy one. Studies of experts in many fields show that the experts themselves maybe the ones with the least vivid of representations--they act on a much more sub-conscious level, and may have the hardest time explaining what it is that they do (or rather explain a much simpler process than what they actually do).

There are many objects of analysis or study when doing an activity. These objects of study will need a representation in ones mind. Once studied, these representations are often stored as memory (as per the discussion above, we will have chess-specific memory, math-proof-specific memory, computer-programming-specific memory). At a later time, these previously imagined representations are pulled forth from memory and enhanced or reused in new imagination activities.



Logic and reasoning does not work in a vacuum. They work on particular representations.

In many disciplines, these representations are formalized in some way (whether they are chess pieces, mathematical symbols, elements in a schematic, or phenomenon in the physical world).

When we judge the quality of reasoning, we are also judging the quality of representation.

I have 1 question. We have a very clear and a systematic notion of how one's logical reasoning skills could be cultivated. This is because logical reasoning is completely objective.

Yet we do not have such a clear and a systematic notion with regard to cultivation of imagination. This is because imagination, as a cognitive faculty, is much less clear and objective than logical reasoning. I think this is what you have had in mind when you said that imagination is a relative term.

There can be no doubt that one's imagination could be improved, but, because it is an amorphous cognitive faculty, and we therefore do not understand how exactly imagination works, we cannot expect to discover a very reliable way to cultivate our imagination.

Consider the following examples in support of the claim that imagination is amorphous and we are unclear regarding how it functions; if you show a Texan a cowboy hat, he will envisage more images than a man from Alaska. If you show color yellow to a person who regards yellow as their favorite color, they will be inspired to think about color yellow more and therefore will envisage more images than the person who regards yellow as their least favorite color. There may be some very general techniques regarding how imagination could be cultivated, but in many cases, the internal condition of the psyche of the person whose imagination is to be cultivated holds an important role, as we notice person A is often impacted differently from person B. There are many psychological nuances regarding imagination that we are not aware of, nor do we have a reliable way of being aware of simply because imagination is a very amorphous and a subjective cognitive faculty.

Thus, I stand by my thesis that the purpose of education is to first and foremost cultivate our logical reasoning skills. If we manage to cultivate imagination as well, that shall be a noteworthy bonus, however, we should not except to reach such an objective for reasons mentioned earlier in this post.
 

Orangey

Blah
Joined
Jun 26, 2008
Messages
6,354
MBTI Type
ESTP
Enneagram
6w5
It sounds like ygolo is saying that the imagination will be cultivated automatically in the process of teaching people the basic skills (logical, mathematical, literary, etc...). So even if we do not have a systematic way to set out and improve someone's imagination directly, it will nevertheless be the indirect consequence of learning at successively higher levels.
 

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
It sounds like ygolo is saying that the imagination will be cultivated automatically in the process of teaching people the basic skills (logical, mathematical, literary, etc...). So even if we do not have a systematic way to set out and improve someone's imagination directly, it will nevertheless be the indirect consequence of learning at successively higher levels.

That sounds rather plausible, however, my point was that cultivation of imagination should not be part of our educational agenda. Only activities that could be presented in a systematic fashion should be part of our agenda. To promote activities that cannot be systematically presented means to promote activities that we do not have a clear understanding of.

Cultivation of imagination should be implicit in our agenda for reasons that you mention, but not explicit for the reasons I mentioned in this post.
 

Maabus1999

New member
Joined
Aug 2, 2008
Messages
528
MBTI Type
INTJ
This theory still seems like you are trying to teach a computer more then a person, by concentrating so much on logic and reasoning. Being imagination is often illogical, I see this as a detriment to creativity by concentrating only on increasing logic and reasoning skills. It is like explaining the logic behind certain theories in quantum physics i.e. there is none but they can't be proven wrong either.

And I still don't know what you are going to do about increasing wisdom, which is often more important then intellect, when it comes to society as a whole (which I stand that the purpose of education is to improve not only yourself, but society).
 

Orangey

Blah
Joined
Jun 26, 2008
Messages
6,354
MBTI Type
ESTP
Enneagram
6w5
And I still don't know what you are going to do about increasing wisdom, which is often more important then intellect, when it comes to society as a whole (which I stand that the purpose of education is to improve not only yourself, but society).

I would be interested in hearing how you would propose to "teach" wisdom to someone.
 

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
This theory still seems like you are trying to teach a computer more then a person, by concentrating so much on logic and reasoning. Being imagination is often illogical, I see this as a detriment to creativity by concentrating only on increasing logic and reasoning skills. It is like explaining the logic behind certain theories in quantum physics i.e. there is none but they can't be proven wrong either.

And I still don't know what you are going to do about increasing wisdom, which is often more important then intellect, when it comes to society as a whole (which I stand that the purpose of education is to improve not only yourself, but society).

Define wisdom, as I do not understand what exactly you're talking about.
 

Maabus1999

New member
Joined
Aug 2, 2008
Messages
528
MBTI Type
INTJ
I would be interested in hearing how you would propose to "teach" wisdom to someone.

History and experience. How do you teach experience? You have to create it, and usually involving scenarios involving history. Traveling is one of the better ways from my personal experience as a child. Problem is most education systems don't know how to do it, but I admit it is very hard and have had very few educators know how to do it. Logic and reasoning can definitely increase the speed you can achieve both, but without studying/understanding history or experiencing things, you can not create that knowledge. Now look how a great majority of people seem to have a complete lack of wisdom, even people who are very "intelligent" and "logical", and do stupid mistakes left and right. It is why we constantly are repeating mistakes as a society...

Define wisdom, as I do not understand what exactly you're talking about.

See above in a way. Understanding history creates wisdom. Creating experience creates wisdom. Combined with logical reasoning, it will compound itself in an educational environment. Once someone is taught to create "wisdom" by understanding and evaluating history and their experiences correctly (and logic doesn't always apply with experiences), they will be a much stronger asset to society. Since education, in my opinion, is in reality to better yourself AND society, I think this is necessary in order to minimize mistakes that could have been avoided. In a way you avoid situations like what we have now with the world economy which is a crisis of confidence. Plus try to explain some of the stranger anomalies in the current economic situation with someone who has been educated only in logic/philosphy/rhetoric. They would be hard pressed to understand it (just like most PhD economists can not explain easily why the two strongest currencies are the countries with the lowest interest rates. Logically, it makes no sense.) This may be off topic, but is more of an example of how not understanding history or being taught "wisdom" by learning from the past. It is a lost art. Heck, as I talk CNBC International is talking about how no one currently has any sense of "wisdom" on how to react in this market, which they go on to say if they looked at history it would've been easier to stop for what happened. History and the early formation of experience/how to understand it is also very important.
 

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
History and experience. How do you teach experience? You have to create it, and usually involving scenarios involving history. Problem is most education systems don't know how to do it, but I admit it is very hard and have had very few educators know how to do it. Logic and reasoning can definitely increase the speed you can achieve both, but without studying/understanding history or experiencing things, you can not create that knowledge. Now look how a great majority of people seem to have a complete lack of wisdom, even people who are very "intelligent" and "logical", and do stupid mistakes left and right. It is why we constantly are repeating mistakes as a society...



See above in a way. Understanding history creates wisdom. Creating experience creates wisdom. Combined with logical reasoning, it will compound itself in an educational environment.


Just teach people to think critically, they will seek out their own experiences.

There are people who falsely believe for themselves to be intelligent but are not and make same mistakes consistently. An intelligent person tends to be reflective and by definition of intelligent, has the capability to understand complex situations. Because he is reflective and intelligent he will reflect on his circumstances and avoid errors as a result of critical analysis of his situation.

The study of history gives us knowledge of some very general psychological and sociological phenomena, or how people tend to behave as individuals and in groups. This may be a small part of philosophy, which is now known as the following; philosophy of psychology, philosophy of sociology and philosophy of history.



So, I still do not understand where you're going with this appeal to cultivation of 'wisdom'.

Moreover, you still have not defined wisdom, you have provided no more than some very general and unconnected ideas.
 

Maabus1999

New member
Joined
Aug 2, 2008
Messages
528
MBTI Type
INTJ
Just teach people to think critically, they will seek out their own experiences.

Ok explain that one in more detail. As an example, some would say that more critical thinkers will avoid risk and therefore miss out on the positive experience and aspect of risk. Understanding the concept of risk, then being taught the wisdom behind it is very important in understanding mistakes, how to avoid them, and when you may need to make them.

Yeah, I don't fully understand how critical thinking is going to make you want to experience things, and may in fact, make you avoid them...

Wisdom's definition is "knowledge of what is true or right coupled with just judgment as to action". Again I am saying I find this to be of importance to learning, and not understanding how to make correct judgments make all of your education, in my opinion, worthless. The issue is Wisdom can be subjective, depending on how you look at it its source, and you are approaching this objectively through only logic and reasoning. While it looks great in explaining and writing out an argument, it is impractical and does not work in the real world. However, someone has already mentioned this so I am just repeating a said comment.

Prove the thesis by experience via application. That is how I look at things. Anything else, is, well, something I don't really care about. My experience just says this will not work, as do others with teaching experience.
 

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
Ok explain that one in more detail. As an example, some would say that more critical thinkers will avoid risk and therefore miss out on the positive experience and aspect of risk. Understanding the concept of risk, then being taught the wisdom behind it is very important in understanding mistakes, how to avoid them, and when you may need to make them.

Yeah, I don't fully understand how critical thinking is going to make you want to experience things, and may in fact, make you avoid them...

Critical thinking allows you to assess all situations objectively. This will allow you to conduct risk assessment and will enable you to have a clear idea when you want to have new experiences and when you do not.

Your claim that a critical thinker, or any other kind of a person will tend to do A or B simply states that such a person's psychological dispositions will lead him to behave in a certain way. Or quite simply his instincts will compell him to.

A critical thinker will be able to avoid this because he will have the liberty of doing what is most rational to do rather than simply what he feels like doing.
 

Maabus1999

New member
Joined
Aug 2, 2008
Messages
528
MBTI Type
INTJ
Critical thinking allows you to assess all situations objectively. This will allow you to conduct risk assessment and will enable you to have a clear idea when you want to have new experiences and when you do not.

Your claim that a critical thinker, or any other kind of a person will tend to do A or B simply states that such a person's psychological dispositions will lead him to behave in a certain way. Or quite simply his instincts will compell him to.

A critical thinker will be able to avoid this because he will have the liberty of doing what is most rational to do rather than simply what he feels like doing.

This is reactionary still. You are waiting for the experience to come to you to evaluate. I am saying you need to force experiences upon someone to learn, and a critical thinker who has not had an experience before will make mistakes at times. Not thinking otherwise is a flaw being nothing is perfect.

From an educational stand point, who will understand the world more? Someone who has traveled and learned, or one who has been stagnant? Who will have more "wisdom" to solve a problem that involves something in the world, if they were equal in your other tenets. That is one practicality of education I think you are missing where someone will develop quiet differently, with one being more superior then the other.
 

ygolo

My termites win
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
5,986
I have 1 question. We have a very clear and a systematic notion of how one's logical reasoning skills could be cultivated. This is because logical reasoning is completely objective.

Yet we do not have such a clear and a systematic notion with regard to cultivation of imagination. This is because imagination, as a cognitive faculty, is much less clear and objective than logical reasoning. I think this is what you have had in mind when you said that imagination is a relative term.

There can be no doubt that one's imagination could be improved, but, because it is an amorphous cognitive faculty, and we therefore do not understand how exactly imagination works, we cannot expect to discover a very reliable way to cultivate our imagination.

Consider the following examples in support of the claim that imagination is amorphous and we are unclear regarding how it functions; if you show a Texan a cowboy hat, he will envisage more images than a man from Alaska. If you show color yellow to a person who regards yellow as their favorite color, they will be inspired to think about color yellow more and therefore will envisage more images than the person who regards yellow as their least favorite color. There may be some very general techniques regarding how imagination could be cultivated, but in many cases, the internal condition of the psyche of the person whose imagination is to be cultivated holds an important role, as we notice person A is often impacted differently from person B. There are many psychological nuances regarding imagination that we are not aware of, nor do we have a reliable way of being aware of simply because imagination is a very amorphous and a subjective cognitive faculty.

Thus, I stand by my thesis that the purpose of education is to first and foremost cultivate our logical reasoning skills. If we manage to cultivate imagination as well, that shall be a noteworthy bonus, however, we should not except to reach such an objective for reasons mentioned earlier in this post.

I agree with you that the use of imagination is significantly more person specific.

It sounds like ygolo is saying that the imagination will be cultivated automatically in the process of teaching people the basic skills (logical, mathematical, literary, etc...). So even if we do not have a systematic way to set out and improve someone's imagination directly, it will nevertheless be the indirect consequence of learning at successively higher levels.

That was one point I was making. But it goes deeper.

Representation is a central problem. Before the creation of a digital computer, people could make names for themselves by creating a charting mechanism that would allow someone to see patterns that could not easily be seen otherwise.

There are large books devoted simply to the cataloging of examples and counterexamples of mathematical concepts, because the representations greatly aid in understanding.

Reading a book like:
Amazon.com: Counterexamples in Topology: Lynn Arthur Steen, J. Arthur Seebach: Books
are meant simply to be read to imagine the examples given as a means to further understand concepts.


That sounds rather plausible, however, my point was that cultivation of imagination should not be part of our educational agenda. Only activities that could be presented in a systematic fashion should be part of our agenda. To promote activities that cannot be systematically presented means to promote activities that we do not have a clear understanding of.

Cultivation of imagination should be implicit in our agenda for reasons that you mention, but not explicit for the reasons I mentioned in this post.

I think some explicit development of imagination is important and possible. It is true that it is a more subjective and personal thing.

However, the work on imagination (like with Conceptual Blockbusting, NLP, meditation practice, and imagining examples in mathematics) is likely to yield great dividends.
 

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
This is reactionary still. You are waiting for the experience to come to you to evaluate. I am saying you need to force experiences upon someone to learn, and a critical thinker who has not had an experience before will make mistakes at times. Not thinking otherwise is a flaw being nothing is perfect.

From an educational stand point, who will understand the world more? Someone who has traveled and learned, or one who has been stagnant? Who will have more "wisdom" to solve a problem that involves something in the world, if they were equal in your other tenets. That is one practicality of education I think you are missing where someone will develop quiet differently, with one being more superior then the other.

Keep in mind, here we are dealing with post-graduate students. These are adults and not children. Whether to have experience or not to have experiences is their personal choice. The best we can do is to recommend having experiences as opposed to not having them, and first and foremost equip them with the proper tools to assess such experiences. (Critical Thinking faculties).

I see your point concerning the merits of having experiences as opposed to not having them, but I cannot imagine how we could incorporate experiences into our curriculum. Can you?
 

Naiad

New member
Joined
Aug 31, 2007
Messages
9
MBTI Type
INFJ
Educational progressivism could be a way to combine critical thinking skills and hands-on experience. By teaching students the scientific method and actively showing them how that method can apply to real-world problems, students learn how to think critically about occurrences that happen in their own life.
 
Top