Forum Post: Progress thru Discussion...
Posted 12 years ago on Jan. 10, 2012, 9:25 p.m. EST by Listof40
(233)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
I am going to try to follow up from an earlier thread about issues with progress thru dialog...
In my earlier post, I mentioned the 'two modes of reasoning' - 'reasoning by intention' and 'reasoning by reason', and so let's try to further clarify how these directly affect society and discussions...
Essentially, if we look at how we fundamentally begin learning, we start out frequently asking 'why'. I refer to this as 'looking for foundation', which can also actually be important to one's psychological health and well-being as well... Much of cognitive function depends not only on the building of references, but on accurate assignment and correct sorting of logical connections, otherwise the internal learning structure can become unstable, which may cause disorientation, confusion, or even depression.
Unfortunately, we may be often discouraged during early learning when being told 'just because', or 'don't ask so many questions', or 'don't dare question me'. Some adults may actually become hostile to even some simple questioning, viewing it as 'disrespectful', particularly if they had the same type of problematic educational process which may often fail to teach understanding, and this may be perceived as embarrassing if revealed by even innocent questioning.
So a problem can develop when starting to learn in early education, that is if things are not fully explained and the student gets 'behind' or 'lost', it can be very difficult to catch back up, which breaks the learning process, so students may just start 'accepting things'. This can often be encouraged in a 'teach to the test' culture of modern society, where breaking things down and ensuring students don't become overwhelmed is rather rare.
In addition and more generally, as the individual develops, if they realize that society is mostly based on many questionable interests and agendas, and not actually prioritized to fundamental reason itself, out of concern for their immediate well-being, they may tend to quickly turn to just adapting to whatever is socially safest to conform to. They may rapidly lose the spirit to understand and so instead become alienated in the learning process, tending to cause apathy, depression, and even social anxiety.
This where multiple difficulties in priority happens.
Social conformity, social acceptance, social access, money, career or other intentions can begin to overtake reason, truth, and accuracy as priority in learning and development, and instead it may become socially safer to just conform and obey, even when to questionable beliefs and social structures, and so critical and independent thinking begins to become compromised.
There is also a point where those who tend to quickly adapt to the distortion of reason, can come to realize that the 'reason based' students are at a disadvantage and vulnerable to pressure, and when they do not conform are vulnerable as targets, and those in administrative positions will rarely protect those who refuse to conform even to questionable social structures, often claiming that being abused by such social predatory behavior is an important 'social learning process'... (which has very little fundamental merit).
The reality is that because of the current state of society, which has been this way for a very long time, we as individuals are actually largely socially disadvantaged (by economic, social, and various other pressures) when standing up for what is actually fundamentally right, and tend to be rewarded for conforming to superficial postured questionable values. This can make it very difficult for progress in general and also tends to advantage many powerful predatory interests in society.
So it is important that we come together to address the basic aspects of how we fundamentally engage in discussion, and put aside unnecessary contention, so that we are able to successfully build common ground and understanding.
The problems we have in society are almost completely unnecessary, and are really only superficially extended by difficulties in how we dialog.
I will try to post some additional details on specific fundamentals that can help when trying to address core discussion aspects, and how this affects progress in general.
Btw, this is continued from previous thread...(for reference)... http://occupywallst.org/forum/issues-with-progress-thru-dialog/
Dave
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Se-Nq_rBQHk
This was a very interesting and good interview with Noam Chomsky, and with very good questions too... I had not seen that before...
There are some important ideas discussed, and also some broader areas in terms of the structure of activism and how he outlines how it may function in present, and past...
I liked it, thanks... There could be a lot of ideas to look at in the interview... do u have an area of this you think would help us to discuss more of?
Dave
Hi Dave, I am glad to see you have come back and expanded on this topic. Question - are you referring to how we dialog over the internet? or are you referring more specifically to a face to face conversation? As there are very obvious, as well as very subtle, differences between the two.
Hi ithink, thanks...
That is a good question... Probably both areas are important - Internet and regular discussions...
An interesting aspect is that writing things out specifically, can sometimes help us, particularly when we run across difficulties... Sometimes a casual conversational style of language can also have issues if social queues or intent starts to take priority over some content, but this can be helped by having clear goals to build on ideas together...
Probably both ways are very important, particularly for a movement, to try to engage in as much as we can, to communicate ideas across the globe, and also at a local working level too... Always looking for ideas how to build discussion and dialog, if any of us think of any suggestions, any ideas are good in this area...
Dave
There can be no (cultural) progress through dialog, because of the balkanization of information and ideology. People simply disregard all information which conflicts with their ideology. Memes are the only way to bypass this selective bias. Occupy is working exactly because of that.
This is a somewhat cynical view, and with maybe some overstatement... people 'disregard all information' that conflicts with their viewpoint... ?
People change their views and beliefs all the time, and this is often by education and discussion...
If people disregard all things that conflict with their current position, we would never be able to change our minds, which of course is not the case... Ideology is just holding of one or more ideas for a certain amount of time, we can change our minds about things, particularly if new information becomes available, or if we engage in objective discussion, it is actually a choice we can make to look to improve ideas and how we relate...
While I agree that polarizing views are an issue, it can also be perpetuated if we do not look at many underlying social structures and cultural aspects that may tend to train us to limit our thinking and not expand our views...
Education and doctrination is not proof that we cannot learn new ideas, it actually shows that we can learn ideas by an educational process, and is also be affected by how we specifically engage when looking at these areas...
Part of learning is making associations between ideas, we can then put values on ideas and things, and when we learn new associations we can also adjust and re-evaluate based on new information or discussion, this is what reasoning allows us to do... we are able to look at ideas and take new positions, or even consider multiple viewpoints...
The idea that we cannot learn to discuss and exercise reasonable judgment based on discussing things and improving our understanding, but are somehow forced to only accept previous old ideas, and only grope for self-interest alone is probably a rather questionable characterization of human capacity...
You may have concerns about problems with ideas in the past, and various problems in other movements, but we should also try to be open to discussing things with a view to improve things as well...
Dave
"this is a somewhat cynical view" actually my friend, it is an objective view based on scientific research - http://tinyurl.com/7qfevu9
That is an interesting article...
This does not imply that we cannot use reasoning aspects when discussing ideas, just that maybe in rhetorical campaign mode these two weren't so much.
Even if Tom Hanks wasn't using 'reasoning measurement areas' either in this particular situation, I don't think this dictates the capacity for everyone in all other discussions or for the reasoning potential for the rest of humanity in general...
It is important to try to encourage and help each other in our capacities, abilities, and potentials, including opportunities for reasonable discussion....and not to discourage each other by trying to downplay what we are able to do and can choose to do, including discussing things constructively...
Dave
you are focusing on the headline using the word "political" when in fact it's a wider truth about how the human mind works. Politics is just an example.
We should also realize science itself is also actually just an attempt at a reasoning approach as well... The spirit of this is not to just flexibly hold on to ideas, but as new information, and new ways of looking at things are put forward, we can examine them and also revise or ideas and positions based on discussion, reasoning, and new info...
Scientific thinking could not work if we were not able to reason critically or independently revising ideas or positions based on new information and new ways of looking at things...
There can also be concerns with over-simplifying some things when implying "the symptom is the cause"... For example if someone breaks their arm, we should avoid just claiming that it is 'our nature to fall down' that 'caused' the issue, instead of seeing that the specific situation is what was the main factor, and that we can take steps and be careful to avoid other problems...
The mind can also adapt, and so we can examine new ideas and new ways of looking at things, which is one of the mind's basic aspects...
Dave
I don't know how old most of you who reply are but when I was growing up I never had a problem regarding the things you mention.
I learned to pick coal to keep the house warm when I was 8. I used to take bottles to the store for a refund to buy the toys I wanted.
I got a job at the age of 14 delivering groceries on a bicycle (even during snow storms) and the money I made from that job paid for my dental work.
In school everyone "had" to particiapte for if they didn't they would be "repremanded" and sent to the principles office.
You never quesitoned "authority" because there was "no need to".
You always knew where you needed to be and when.
You also knew to respect your elders and not talk back to them. If you did, when you got home you would be wipped with the belt.
When I was growing up, there never was a concern about what others had or did not have, or being depressed, opressed, outcasted.
I never really had any reason to think that I may have been disadvantaged becasue It was never an issue and I never felt I was disadvantaged.
Everyone got along and when there was a dispute a "fist fight" settled the problem and everyone moved on as friends
We never had this issue of "self worth" because we had "self worth".
As a result of my upbringing, I have always had whatever I wanted and never once did I think there was a "barrier" that I couldn't overcome.
Life is good.
Both you and the OP have a point; I'd say that you two are largely talking past each other on this issue. Basically, the way you grew up and the way I grew up don't necessarily sound all that different, even though I come from the Bronx and was only born in 1993. I got a lot of things, and was lucky enough not to have to pick up a full-time job in high school, but the way things worked was that academics were my job. I didn't work outside of that because school was comprised of 60- to 80-hour weeks; first with my mom at the table from when I was four or five up through eighth grade and then at Bronx Science until this fall when I started at MIT.
As far as school was concerned, it was never a matter of being punished for not working or not participating; it was simply drilled into my brain that if I wanted to make anything of myself then education was the way to do it, and it was made clear to me multiple times that if I didn't want to waste my life pumping gas or bagging groceries I was going to do whatever I had to do to succeed.
Authority wasn't that simple; there was my dad (who was rather dysfunctional, and was more into nitpicking and setting us up to fail than into helping us succeed) and then there was my mom (who put in the time right alongside me and then some, always giving it her all but demanding that I do the same in return out of respect). In my case, discipline wasn't (and as far as I'm concerned shouldn't be) accepted from an outside source, but was and should be developed internally and then held onto as a personal yardstick for how l live my life.
As far as self-esteem and economics were concerned, my life looked hard on the outside but in reality we managed to get a hell of a lot done and my mom, my sister, and I became incredibly tight-knit. I never thought of myself as poor, because in the ways that mattered we managed to pull off a middle-class lifestyle on a pauper's budget. Near the end my dad lost his job and things got tough enough that we needed Food Stamps for a few months to get by, but in the end it paid off dramatically. In the sense that mattered, I can say that we lived quite austerely at times, but were never in fact poor.
The OP's concern is that the poor are in fact deprived of that upbringing these days. They, too, live austerely, but it's not the same kind of austerity that you and I were lucky enough to have. With us, there were a ton of obstacles standing in our way, but we also had access to a ton of resources (including a particular kind of tough love and mentorship) that made damn near every one of those obstacles surmountable in the end. What many of the poor are now facing is a situation in which the obstacles are there, but not the necessary resources or training to get around them that you and I got, and what was difficult but doable and in the end empowering for us is insurmountable in many cases for them.
Basically, if you're poor right now and living in an inner city environment you're able to eke out a subsistence living but no more, and there is no clear path (however difficult or convoluted) to anything better. The "don't question me" that he's talking about isn't "shut up and trust me now and I'll explain it later" but rather "who the hell are you that you think you know anything?" and the latter is motivated not by a desire to teach or a need to act now and talk later but by genuine resentment.
Similarly, conformity in that environment is often not about "do what they're doing because it works and I'll explain why it works when you're ready" but "it's less work for me if I only have to do things one way and I'm not going to bother to get to know you enough to do what works for you" on the part of the adults and "none of us can be bothered to do what matters; why the hell should you?" on the part of peer groups, and that again is corrosive.
This is a nice reply, and good info... is also insightful to how we each are often brought up in different circumstances... Steve's post too shows us different backgrounds as well...
We as individuals are raised in many kinds of circumstances, and even have different types of temperaments, and so often learn differently, but also looking at common ways we build reasoning and discussion from ideas and facts are important to examine and develop, so is healthy in general and to consider as well...
As you mention, it is important to be encouraged as we learn to try to work ideas out, to help make sense of all the information we receive... is good you were encouraged in helpful ways... and good luck at MIT!
Also, someone sent me this link a couple days ago and is also somewhat interesting look at things in this regard...
http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2012/01/03/144495483/why-a-teen-who-talks-back-may-have-a-bright-future
I think the important consideration is that we try learn to think critically and independently in important areas, so we dont end up accepting things by default without much examination, it is unfortunate though when attempts at discussion can devolve into hostility or contention, as the article describes, and so we should try to avoid this as much as possible as well...
Dave
The article makes sense; the idea is that discipline and responsibility shouldn't simply be imposed from outside as the word of God, but nor are they inherent attributes that develop naturally in people even in neglectful environments. Rather, discipline, responsibility, rationality, and logic are taught as much by example as anything else, and in some cases adversity can be one of the best teachers there is.
I agree... almost any discussion can become a learning experience when there is concern to find positive ways thru difficulties and issues... that willingness or spirit to set aside limiting ideas and find areas we can agree, is probably healthy for us ... and encourages when we see this in others, like in this movement as well...
How do you see this in terms of attempts at progress, even in other movements historically? I'm hoping we can find a successful way forward, even with so many issues in society in so many areas...
Dave
Article 5 convention NOW!
Listof40 wrote:
So a problem can develop when starting to learn in early education, that is if things are not fully explained and the student gets 'behind' or 'lost', it can be very difficult to catch back up, END-----
After watching the US educational system emphasize high tech from about 1993 on, then give all high tech manufacturing to China and India through GATT, I say home schooling is going to be the peoples way. We got f'd by global foundations, congress an presidents. Norman Dodd details how it went with teh dumbing down at the beginning of the current mess.
http://www.realityzone.com/hiddenagenda2.html
Well that is an interesting link, but not sure what to make of some of it.. We probably share a healthy concern for education, but there is a lot of conflicting information and theories out there..
This doesn't mean something isn't true, but we should try to focus on what we can confirm, because otherwise it can become a battle of conflicting beliefs or info, which may not help us so much sometimes... However I definitely share your concerns about questionable influences on the educational process...
So we probably share a common concern for education in general, if we can focus on how to improve the content of discussion and education itself, this can help us further...
Home schooling can be fine too, but education in schools should also be improved... What do you think are some ideas how to further improve public schools?
Dave
Focus on human beings meeting their own needs directly is probably the one thing we can do that will move towards sustainability from the public schools.
Through an Article 5 convention we can recover the intent needed in the school systems. Following the dumbing down conducted by global foundations to make Americas educational system "uniform", the schools stopped educating about Article V and most technology and science moved into the domain of corporations.
We will not be allowed to change as we need to with the current politial power structure, so educational reform is quite out of reach now.
Our government has been secrectly infiltrated. The schools do not teach the truth of the past. In fact, it is fairly well hidden and hard to find a consolidation of fact that represents how we got to where we are. I've compiled most of what I can find and created a picture more complete than I've been able to find elsewhere.
http://algoxy.com/poly/emergency_powers_statutes.html
Now, the content of discussion is a favorite subject. So favored is this subject I developed a software concept for a new form of message board or forum.
It enables the users to create priority and filter out the less relevant info. I've made a page about it. I call it, "Poll-toPost"
http://algoxy.com/poly/poll_to_post.html
Some interesting info... Certainly there are questionable interests influencing the system, and have in the past...
One way of looking at these kinds of things, is that the breakdown in communications, between each other, even on an individual level, affects our ability to come together and address these issues effectively... Another way of saying this, is that the larger issues of society to a degree may just actually be symptoms of a more fundamental disconnect with our reasoning itself, that expresses itself through all these problems...
Another way of even saying this is, is that if we as independent critical thinkers cannot find a way to overcome disagreement and find a reasonable way forward to consensus, to fix the problems we already share concerns about, how can we expect to address more highly unreasonable agendas or ideas that may be directly hostile to healthy society...
If we can solve these fundamental discussion core issues, our progress will probably improve to where we can move forward successfully... I will be trying to follow up on some of these more specific ideas in this area as well...
Do you see areas of how we as a society may miss opportunities to agree, or miss ways to discuss in ways that will help us? Also as well, do you see some specific ways where we can find ways to come together, even though some of us may directly disagree?
Dave
Article 5 convention NOW!
Listof40 wrote:
One way of looking at these kinds of things, is that the breakdown in communications, between each other, even on an individual level, affects our ability to come together and address these issues effectively END-----
Insightful. Few realize that. I tracked it down to an intentional use of manipulative symbology (semiotics in media) along with teaching cognitive distortions (in media).
Here is a list of cognitive distortions that were utilized in sitcoms, cartoons, soap operas, game shows, reality shows etc. Very subtle scripting demonstrated their uses for us and during junior high school we tried them out and got to understand them. Okay for attitude based communication, but people will have to unlearn it to deal with reality.
Maybe we are in VERY serious trouble for this specific reason. I've seen extensive uses of cognitive distortions on this forum and no where that they were found was any agreement made. Those people went off to find people that would accept their distortions or could reciprocate them in acceptance.
Hi Christopher,
I am following up this thread with 'part3' etc...
Hopefully this makes some sense in regards to logic in general and our current discussion on the subject... let me know what u think, or any further points, etc...
http://occupywallst.org/forum/progress-thru-discussion-p3/
Dave
Hi Christopher,
Yes, there are probably many ways that tv and media can position storylines and be selective about what gets aired or printed... and this can have a lot of influence on the culture and can even affect how we perceive things if we are not aware of it, or if we don't take steps to find alternative info, films, and other ways to discuss, forums, etc...
I also agree there can be social aspects and reasoning methods that can affect discussion in society in general, and you have an interesting list of ways of looking at this....
I think your examples are good, and are approachable, and that helps when looking at general logic too, etc...
I will try to continue a bit more with some further principles i meant to post as well... hopefully by tomorrow or so...
Dave