[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Alfred Korzybski ad nauseum






>
> > From: "darren simo" <wannafarm@hotmail.com>
>
> > The whole idea of primary and secondary school
> > is to teach the student how
> > to learn, not just to force feed obscure
> > quotes, formulas etc. to be
> > repeated by rote down through the ages of their
> > lives.
>
>On the contrary, I bet most places do force feed
>their students; the "idea" of school has had a
>lapse in its application. (If ever it did not.)
>
>So far as I know, in both Canada and Australia,
>where I've lived and grown up, there is no broad
>institutionalized primary or secondary curriculum
>of critical thinking, nor of observation or
>listening skills, nor guidance in formulating
>good questions or in differentiating between
>degrees of specificity and generality of
>statement.
>
>I suspect that if children were taught this stuff
>in tandem with the usual content, the kids
>themselves would begin initiating change toward a
>more engaging, self-directed, dynamic atmosphere.
>In my wilder dreams, I dare believe they could
>realize themselves enough to desegregate the
>arbitrary age groupings and reunite the sciences
>and the humanities into a free-for-all of playful
>discovery.

Hey I did not say the school system was correct in their approach to 
reaching their goal, just what the goal is.
>
>
> > I may not hold a
> > doctorate in the english language(in fact I
> > fail final year english), but I
> > know that simple words describing clear
> > instructions are easy to remember.
>
>In line with my comments above, "simple words
>describing clear instructions" have little to do
>with cultivating intelligent reactions to the
>shifting complexity of daily life as a human.

Yes but these "simple words describing clear instructions" if then taken and 
put into use are the basis of a person learning for themselves how something 
is done.
>
>
> > For instance if vocal tradition is the only way
> > to keep information in your
> > memory why is PDC taught that way.
>
>I did not say that vocal tradition is the *only*
>way. I do believe that modern knowledge can be
>memorized to some extent--but it doesn't
>necesarily foster the ability or the *desire* for
>complete or efficient learning.
>
>In my last post, I failed to draw an explicit
>connection between primal pattern languages and
>the most general statements produced by modern
>inquiry. I had hoped to convey my dislike for
>unmemorable, dry, graceless, witless scientific
>principles and my love for the summary and
>accessibility of knowledge in the patterns (read:
>song, saga, dance, art) of otherwise less
>knowledgable peoples. I love contemporary
>learning, but I want to know *life*--not mere
>verbalism.

So far no-one has said "tradition is the only way to keep information in 
your memory" but alot of people, including the Mollison quote are hinting 
down the road that anything else is a waste of time.
My view is simply that any source of new information is something that 
should be cherished. "dry, graceless, witless scientific principles" that 
does not mean it is useless in formation and many different ways exist to 
help retain the knowledge as some others have said. For me the best way to 
retain information is, where possible to actually put it into a practical 
exersize and see what actually occurs, thereby bringing into play all the 
other stimula (ie senses) to add memory.


> > From: "Lawrence F. London, Jr."
>
> > Maybe a billion or two are doing intense
> > permaculture but either not labelling it as
> > such or at all or calling it something else
> > :-)
>
>The word 'permaculture', as you will recall, was
>contracted from 'permanent culture' and
>'permanent agriculture'. But 'permanent culture'
>addresses the broadest character of what we are
>trying to achieve, and should be taken as more
>fundamental. Permanent agriculture, although
>foundational for physiological survival, does not
>represent the gamut of "human nature". So
>although we have billions of people doing
>agriculture in one sense or another, I doubt we
>have that many people attending to the broadest
>issues of culture in the complex modern sense. I
>dare say we might have millions working on this
>with varying degrees of efficacy, but certainly
>not billions. And so we come back to my original
>point (with the segue via Mollison). Touche!


Did not permaculture start as permanent agriculture and then grow to include 
the culture side of things. That means that we could already have billions 
of permaculturists in the world, it is just some still need a little bit 
more schooling in some areas of permaculture than in others(thats if you 
beleive that the only way to follow permaculture is following


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp