College the institute of higher education. Yeah right, that's what it used to be but not so much anymore. Everyone thinks that they are entitled to go to college. We need to go back to having a focus on getting the intelligent people into college and less intelligent people need to go straight to work after high school. We need a way to evaluate the intelligence of everyone and only allow those that qualify to get a degree in certain areas. Wait we do it's called the ACT. Stop letting people in on restrictions and send them into the workforce. We need people to "Go Build Alabama." You don't need a college degree to do manual labor or flip burgers. If that was to happen then people in college would be able to get an actual education and not a piece of paper that says they completed x number of classes. People would actually get to learn and get into jobs that fit their education instead of fighting for and losing jobs because there is a moron with the same degree as them.
P.S. I commented on Susan's blog
Grading is based on one original post and one response. These two posts add up to ten points per week. The criteria are as follows: Completion; please refrain from poor grammar, poor spelling, and internet shorthand. Reference; mention the text or post to which the reply is directed. Personality; show thoughtfulness, care, and a sense of originality. Cohesiveness; The student should explain his or her thought without adding "fluff" merely to meet the requirement.
Thursday, May 3, 2012
Wednesday, May 2, 2012
Can knowledge be known?
One of the passages in Lyotard that stood out to me was when he said "For it is impossible to know what the state of knowledge is." More than anything, this statement reminded me of a lot of the discussions we had in class throughout this semester. At one time or another, we discussed at length the real substance of knowledge and whether or not we can truly know something. I can safely say that before honors, this type of question would seem absolutely ridiculous to me, but now as I write paper after paper and blog after blog, this kind of question begins to hold a new kind of interest in my mind. This class has brought a whole new legitimacy to doubt in my mind. Like Heidegger would say, the thesis is only such in light of its own antithesis. In the case of Lyotard, this statement has huge implications for those of us who, being in college, are seeking knowledge every day. We cannot learn new things and then treat them as absolute, indisputable knowledge. Doing so would go against everything we have learned in honors. We must go on in our search of knowledge knowing that that very search is relative by nature and cannot be absolutely defined.
P.S. i commented on Lane's
Lyotard is a Ryotard... hehehe. JK. He's actually pretty cool
In reading his work, it is fun to pick out which modern/ post modern authors influenced Lyotard's writings. He speaks of how "no self is an island." Each person's existence is a "fabric of relations." This is much like Heidegger's idea that each man is a mit-dasein, that is a being-with in the world. That means that each man's being is a being of existence that cannot be separated from his world and the other beings around him. Moreover, Percy speaks of how man is a triadic being, he is a being which must be able to relate to others though language or he cannot actualize his being.
Lyotard also speaks of how although language is necessary for the existence of the Self, language as it is today is quite limited. It is not until institutions such as schools, government offices, the work place, etc. remove the boundaries currently placed on language that it can be used to its full potential and the true pursuit of knowledge be undertaken. We have talked a lot this semester about how many theorists have placed boxes around things, and made theories which, while they many aid our understanding of something in the present- they ultimately inhibit free and creative thought on a particular subject. Heidegger speaks on this in great detail.
I commented on Anna Rhodes' ... you know, the one with the really long title that has a lot of exclamation points
Lyotard also speaks of how although language is necessary for the existence of the Self, language as it is today is quite limited. It is not until institutions such as schools, government offices, the work place, etc. remove the boundaries currently placed on language that it can be used to its full potential and the true pursuit of knowledge be undertaken. We have talked a lot this semester about how many theorists have placed boxes around things, and made theories which, while they many aid our understanding of something in the present- they ultimately inhibit free and creative thought on a particular subject. Heidegger speaks on this in great detail.
I commented on Anna Rhodes' ... you know, the one with the really long title that has a lot of exclamation points
A Lack of Wisdom
In our reading it is mentioned that schools today are not the way they used to be. Going to college used to be a large step that only a few people took to higher their education. However, today it is just looked at as the next step in a person's life. It is almost as if people think "well, I'm finished with high school, so the next step must be to go to college." Some people will go and spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on education when they don't even know what they want to do with their life. This low standard for college has resulted in lower standards in the classroom. Instead of being a place of wisdom, where people study amongst one another to come to lofty conclusions about important topics, the freshman year of college for some people is like the 13th grade. I even feel this way in some of my classes here (but definitely not honors!!!) haha. I find it really funny now that there are actually commercials on the TV trying to convince people NOT to go to college. Mike Rowe tries to convince people to take on physical labor jobs and "go build Alabama." It great that everyone wants to get a better education, but the education they are getting is not as good as it used to be. Soon a college degree will mean nothing but just another piece of paper.
I commented on Kaylie's blog
-Susan Berner
I commented on Kaylie's blog
-Susan Berner
Revelation
Yes, yes, I know this is not on Lyotard's work. No, I'm writing on O'Connor's Revelation.
The first things I want to say is that O'Connor knows the stigmatism of the South, how many 'good christian' people have the hierarchy of classes. Mrs. Turpin reminds me of several southern ladies I have met and grown up around during my life. I love that she at the end of Revelation, finally gets her revelation. That in the end all Christians are a like, no matter how their life played out. If we were saved by Christ all our 'good' works are worth nothing, there is no competition, no one is better than anyone else.
Mary Grace is another one of my favorite characters in this story because she sees Mrs. Turpin for what she truly is, a hypocrite, who judges by outward appearances. Mary Grace seems to know almost what Mrs. Turpin is thinking, maybe this is because her own mother seems so much like Mrs. Turpin. Mary Grace is infuriated with Mrs. Turpin, because as 'smart' and 'good' and 'whole' Mrs. Turpin believes she is, she is no better than the dirty white trash woman across the room from her.
Also, I believe that Mary Grace represents the extension of grace itself. When she attacks Mrs. Turpin, I think its suppose to symbolize how grace knocks you off your feet. Costly Grace is a sacrifice, and recognizing the call means changing your entire view on reality. Mary Grace calls Mrs. Turpin a ugly old warthog, Mary Grace told Mrs. Turpin what her soul looked like. Once you've been touched by grace, you can't seem to shake what grace has revealed to you, what you are on the inside.... a monster. This view can lead you to seeking out Christ, which is what Mrs. Turpin did. She went searching for something she realized was missing in her 'perfect' country life.
Going off this point is Grace the starting point to the search? I do not know, but that is a question I had.
Anyhow that's something I found interesting about Revelation by Flannery O'Connor!
The first things I want to say is that O'Connor knows the stigmatism of the South, how many 'good christian' people have the hierarchy of classes. Mrs. Turpin reminds me of several southern ladies I have met and grown up around during my life. I love that she at the end of Revelation, finally gets her revelation. That in the end all Christians are a like, no matter how their life played out. If we were saved by Christ all our 'good' works are worth nothing, there is no competition, no one is better than anyone else.
Mary Grace is another one of my favorite characters in this story because she sees Mrs. Turpin for what she truly is, a hypocrite, who judges by outward appearances. Mary Grace seems to know almost what Mrs. Turpin is thinking, maybe this is because her own mother seems so much like Mrs. Turpin. Mary Grace is infuriated with Mrs. Turpin, because as 'smart' and 'good' and 'whole' Mrs. Turpin believes she is, she is no better than the dirty white trash woman across the room from her.
Also, I believe that Mary Grace represents the extension of grace itself. When she attacks Mrs. Turpin, I think its suppose to symbolize how grace knocks you off your feet. Costly Grace is a sacrifice, and recognizing the call means changing your entire view on reality. Mary Grace calls Mrs. Turpin a ugly old warthog, Mary Grace told Mrs. Turpin what her soul looked like. Once you've been touched by grace, you can't seem to shake what grace has revealed to you, what you are on the inside.... a monster. This view can lead you to seeking out Christ, which is what Mrs. Turpin did. She went searching for something she realized was missing in her 'perfect' country life.
Going off this point is Grace the starting point to the search? I do not know, but that is a question I had.
Anyhow that's something I found interesting about Revelation by Flannery O'Connor!
And here we are at the end of the year
Lay down
Your sweet and weary head
Night is falling
You have come to journey's end
Sleep now
And dream of the ones who came before
They are calling
From across the distant shore
Why do you weep?
What are these tears upon your face?
Soon you will see
All of your fears will pass away
Safe in my arms
You're only sleeping
What can you see
On the horizon?
Why do the white gulls call?
Across the sea
A pale moon rises
The ships have come to carry you home
And all will turn
To silver glass
A light on the water
All souls pass
Your sweet and weary head
Night is falling
You have come to journey's end
Sleep now
And dream of the ones who came before
They are calling
From across the distant shore
Why do you weep?
What are these tears upon your face?
Soon you will see
All of your fears will pass away
Safe in my arms
You're only sleeping
What can you see
On the horizon?
Why do the white gulls call?
Across the sea
A pale moon rises
The ships have come to carry you home
And all will turn
To silver glass
A light on the water
All souls pass
I don't know why I posted that, I just thought that it was fitting for a blog post from the geek class. We've come so far, I can't believe my freshman year is almost over.
Anyways, I should probably get to my point. When we split up into groups on Tuesday, Meghan Johnston and I were tasked with noting Lyotard's points on scientific experimentation and didactics. One point that struck me was that the teacher should instruct the student in a way that the student, could, after a while, become a peer of the teacher concerning the subject being taught. It seems to me that the general mentality of many people today is "I've known about it longer, therefore I know more than you." While I myself am guilty of the same thing more often than not, I thought it must have been a problem in Lyotard's time (which was 1979, let me add, the same year as the release of Rock Lobster, My Sharona, and Charlie Daniel's famous piece, The Devil Went Down to Georgia)
That's about as far as my argument gets is that I've known/done this longer, therefore I'm smarter/better than you. I appreciate the leaving of this mentality in the honors group, and I hope to do the same with the next batch of honors freshmen next year.
~Cody Martin
PS. Commented here
~Cody Martin
PS. Commented here
Knowledge! Knowledge! Come and Get It! Step Right Up! NEW! Try our Knowledge with Whipped Cream on top!
This is what I think of when I read Lyotard’s scary
predictions.
Lyotard’s remarks about knowledge frighten me a little. It’s
interesting to notice that he wrote the book in the 1970’s. If you read it
closely you will begin to recognize that he somewhat predicts the future with
his logic. Lyotard noticed that knowledge would have to keep up with
technology. He said this would create problems in two ways: in research and in
the transfer of knowledge (aka. Professor to student, or article to reader,
etc.) He later goes on to say that knowledge would become a commodity, “
Knowledge is and will be produced in order to be sold, it is and will be
consumed in order to be valorized in a new production…knowledge ceases to be an
end in itself” (4). Now, hold on.
This is where it begins to get scary to me. Once something becomes a commodity
it is not as free and pure (in my mind) as it was before. The purity of Knowledge
is essentially what I have always loved about it. Granted not all knowledge is
“pure.” In fact pure is not even the right word. It has always seemed to me
that knowledge is something that is beyond the reach of corrupting physical
powers. That is what I have loved about Honors. To me it seemed to be a group
of students pursuing a more pure and deeper knowledge than the mundane skills
of the malaise. However, in a way what he says makes sense. Knowledge has
become a commodity. After all, you have to have money to go to college.
Education requires expensive tools also. Knowledge is sold. Admissions
counselors sell a university to you and professors make money off of knowledge.
Lyotard goes on to say that since knowledge will be a
commodity it will be the new frontier in the world (5). There is no more land to be conquered.
Now states will compete to get the newest technology first. In his time I
believe there were already signs of this like sending men on the moon and the
cold war’s atomic bombs. The states are now beginning to compete for knowledge
and technology.
All of this is strange to me. Perhaps I’m a nostalgic
person, but upon reading Lyotard I feel like I’m living in a sci-fi movie. This
age is too much for me.
By the way, this is my last Honors blog ever! That’s crazy!
It’s been good and I will miss it! You will never encounter another class like
Honors. Embrace it! I can’t wait
to hear from you guys in the fall as you discover the classics! Keep
Struggling!
Tantum e tenebris receptum constabit
I commented on "What's the Point of College" by Amanda Gaster
I commented on "What's the Point of College" by Amanda Gaster
Information Overload.
Before I start on my actual blog, I would just like to say that the movie was awesome, and also that i'm loving how we keep breaking down our literature for this semester. Initially, I read Bonhoeffer for the class assignment. Then, I read it again with the perspective lens of finding the meaning of life through Bonhoeffers pages, so I could use that info in my larger paper. Now I'm reading through one more time with the perspective of finding grace for my final essay. It's like picking meat off of a chicken bone. Except it takes years to get to the bone under all the meat.
Now for my actual blog. As I was reading through the first couple pages of Lyotard, I was reminded of what Dr. Talmage said at the beginning of class on Tuesday. He said that this piece of literature has the potential for the most practical application in our daily lives. Then I read the first couple of pages, and I was reminded of this commerical from a couple of years ago.
http://youtu.be/NHmzzLt8WFA
That commercial plus this passage from Lyotard has inspired me for my blog:
And it is fair to say that for the last forty years the "Leading" sciences and technologies have to do with language: Phonology and theories of linguistics, ...These technological transformations can be expected to have a considerable impact on knowledge. Its two principle functions- research and the transmission of acquired learning- are already feeling the effect, or will in the future. With respect to the first function (of knowledge), genetics provides an example that is accessible to the layman: it owes its theoretical paradigm to cybernetics. ... As for the second function, it is common knowledge that the miniaturization and commercialization of machines is already changing the way in which learning is acquired, classified, made available, and exploited.It is reasonable to suppose that the proliferation of information-processing machines is having, and will continue to have, as much of an effect on the circulation of learning as did advancements in human circulation (transportation systems) and later in the sounds and visual images (the media)."
Long passage, but it got me thinking. It's saying that the advancement of communication has quickly expanded the transmission of learning. He referenced to quickened transportation, such as the improved usage of automobiles and also referenced media such as television or movies. I wonder how after a couple of decades of this novel how Lyotard saw the changes in technology advancing our communication. At the time of his death in 1998, he had seen the emerging of the internet, cellphones, and other advancements in communication.
I wonder how he would react to the technology of today. We take most of it for granted, but look at the expansion of communication and knowledge we have today. Decades ago, students would have to go the library. Now... You go on Google and find anything you need to know about any subject. You have online resources and libraries to guide you on your quest for truth. You have it all on a computer far surpassing the technology of what Lyotard had. We have computers that fit in our laps! Not even mentioning the hand-held computers we call cell-phones, which allow us to find information at absolutely any time. At the touch of a button, one can connect with anyone in the world and talk, and see their face! The communication that we experience today is remarkable and allows us to find knowledge and wisdom much easier than only a short time ago.
Commented on Nick Hampton's "Education".
Now for my actual blog. As I was reading through the first couple pages of Lyotard, I was reminded of what Dr. Talmage said at the beginning of class on Tuesday. He said that this piece of literature has the potential for the most practical application in our daily lives. Then I read the first couple of pages, and I was reminded of this commerical from a couple of years ago.
http://youtu.be/NHmzzLt8WFA
That commercial plus this passage from Lyotard has inspired me for my blog:
And it is fair to say that for the last forty years the "Leading" sciences and technologies have to do with language: Phonology and theories of linguistics, ...These technological transformations can be expected to have a considerable impact on knowledge. Its two principle functions- research and the transmission of acquired learning- are already feeling the effect, or will in the future. With respect to the first function (of knowledge), genetics provides an example that is accessible to the layman: it owes its theoretical paradigm to cybernetics. ... As for the second function, it is common knowledge that the miniaturization and commercialization of machines is already changing the way in which learning is acquired, classified, made available, and exploited.It is reasonable to suppose that the proliferation of information-processing machines is having, and will continue to have, as much of an effect on the circulation of learning as did advancements in human circulation (transportation systems) and later in the sounds and visual images (the media)."
Long passage, but it got me thinking. It's saying that the advancement of communication has quickly expanded the transmission of learning. He referenced to quickened transportation, such as the improved usage of automobiles and also referenced media such as television or movies. I wonder how after a couple of decades of this novel how Lyotard saw the changes in technology advancing our communication. At the time of his death in 1998, he had seen the emerging of the internet, cellphones, and other advancements in communication.
I wonder how he would react to the technology of today. We take most of it for granted, but look at the expansion of communication and knowledge we have today. Decades ago, students would have to go the library. Now... You go on Google and find anything you need to know about any subject. You have online resources and libraries to guide you on your quest for truth. You have it all on a computer far surpassing the technology of what Lyotard had. We have computers that fit in our laps! Not even mentioning the hand-held computers we call cell-phones, which allow us to find information at absolutely any time. At the touch of a button, one can connect with anyone in the world and talk, and see their face! The communication that we experience today is remarkable and allows us to find knowledge and wisdom much easier than only a short time ago.
Commented on Nick Hampton's "Education".
a blog post
I didn’t get as far in the reading where he talks about education really but from what I’ve read from the blogs I think I get the gist of it. I know it’s a little off base but it brings me back to my education class I’m taking and let me just stand on my soapbox for a second. The education system does not give teachers enough room to truly teach so basically we’re learning how to take tests and memorize facts… there is very little application involved. My sister observed a teacher who taught his students how to solve problems based on the options off their multiple choice test… they had no idea how to actually solve the problem on its own but they could plug in the numbers to get the answer. I’m not saying that’s terrible and they should know how to test but it’s not truly educating them. If that’s all they’re being taught in high school then how can they be expected to do anything else when they go to college? Really it’s almost at a point where I’m like why go to school at all if there’s not even enough leeway for teachers to teach. I don’t even know how applicable that is to Lyotard but I’ve been real upset about it the last couple days.
The group I was in on Tuesday discussed a lot about the language games with a little help from some former honors students. Lyotard gives three different observations about these rules and I thought the third one was the most interesting one. He says “to speak is to fight” and then goes on to say that in language games one doesn’t necessarily play to win, but it’s for the sheer joy of the game itself. I thought it was entertaining…
Famous Last Words
"In the end, it's not the years in your life that counts, it's the life in your years"
"I do the very best I know how - the very best I can; and I mean to keep on doing so until the end."
-Abraham Lincoln, 16th president of the United States of America
The final reading that I was assigned to read for Honors Literature 212 was Lyotard's The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge; more specifically, I have studied Ch.8 The Narrative Function and the Legitimation of Knowledge. In this section Lyotard describes that in his search for knowledge he desires that science and facts be separated from narratives. In other words, when discoveries are made and truth is derived from these facts, they are almost instantly added to a grand narrative of what they represent and how they fit into previously devised theories and philosophies of what the world is and should be. Though society has largely moved away from these, we are still prone to wander back to meta-narratives which, according to Lyotard, create unrealistic societal expectations and subvert the legitimation of knowledge. He notes that to even describe this process requires some sort of narrative style explanation. In fact, he finds it hard to escape narratives at all when it seems that he really just wants to get at straight, unadulterated knowledge. Just the facts, no emotional ties to confuse them and no deep desires to subvert them. As a matter of fact, he cites Plato and Aristotle as primary influences for what he calls "modern thinking." Lyotard is a man of statistics and factual evidence, not grand epics of thought and movement, and for that I only have one thing to say...
Sucks to be you.
Lyotard's way of thinking is twisted because he is assuming that story can be separated from statistics and narrative separated from truth, when in fact they are all inseparable. Narrative is not something that can just be deconstructed and removed from human thought because we are wired to think in narratives. Machines can look at Lyotard's kinds of facts easily without considering the grand picture, but what makes man great is his ability to imagine and perceive greater things beyond just the raw data that we find through science, because narratives are a science in themselves. Yes, there have been some terrible metanarratives, such as Marxism and Nazism, but w/out narratives there would be no stories or philosophy at all, which would put Lyotard out of a job. Besides, as a professor, is he not supposed to formulate his teaching plan into some sort of narrative that he can express to his students rather than just give them straight data, because he knows full well that the former is the only way they will learn. Also, the idea that narratives hinder the legitimation of knowledge is ridiculous. I venture to say that I have learned some of my greatest life lessons from Lord of the Rings and Star Wars and those will define my search for knowledge far more than this book ever will. This is possible because narratives speak to the human heart and mind more than anything else - they are not just a part of life but are as integral to it as music and breath.
If there's one thing I've learned throughout Honors, it's that there is actually a huge narrative that has begun since the Fall of Man. The same problems that we deal with now (truth vs false, reason vs passion, stale vs energy, love vs hate, etc.) have been debated all throughout history in a wide variety of ways and it's not going to stop any time soon. Life often moves in cycles, and there will always be new facts and new questions that arise to challenge the common perceptions. Lyotard has brought his challenges to the challenges he sees, and myself and many others have come to challenge him. So while things do not necessarily change in this world, there is always new beauty and new possibilities to be found, and in the death of Christ we find truth and and life that we cannot find anywhere else, and that's something I wonder if Lyotard realizes. We cannot have a soul without narratives! Never forget that God spoke this world into existence and made us individually; we were designed to have our own stories within His own. That's what those quotes above are about - the all-encompassing search that defines our lives and the story that creates, interwoven with many different others whether we realize it or not. That's why Socrates will always be my favorite philosopher, because he recognized the grander designs of our existence and never stopped searching for those truths, even unto his death. So to conclude this blog I quote the great searcher himself: "The end of life is to be like God, and the soul following God will be like Him."
Thank you for reading, please comment as you please. I commented on Nick Hampton's Education???
Sucks to be you.
Lyotard's way of thinking is twisted because he is assuming that story can be separated from statistics and narrative separated from truth, when in fact they are all inseparable. Narrative is not something that can just be deconstructed and removed from human thought because we are wired to think in narratives. Machines can look at Lyotard's kinds of facts easily without considering the grand picture, but what makes man great is his ability to imagine and perceive greater things beyond just the raw data that we find through science, because narratives are a science in themselves. Yes, there have been some terrible metanarratives, such as Marxism and Nazism, but w/out narratives there would be no stories or philosophy at all, which would put Lyotard out of a job. Besides, as a professor, is he not supposed to formulate his teaching plan into some sort of narrative that he can express to his students rather than just give them straight data, because he knows full well that the former is the only way they will learn. Also, the idea that narratives hinder the legitimation of knowledge is ridiculous. I venture to say that I have learned some of my greatest life lessons from Lord of the Rings and Star Wars and those will define my search for knowledge far more than this book ever will. This is possible because narratives speak to the human heart and mind more than anything else - they are not just a part of life but are as integral to it as music and breath.
If there's one thing I've learned throughout Honors, it's that there is actually a huge narrative that has begun since the Fall of Man. The same problems that we deal with now (truth vs false, reason vs passion, stale vs energy, love vs hate, etc.) have been debated all throughout history in a wide variety of ways and it's not going to stop any time soon. Life often moves in cycles, and there will always be new facts and new questions that arise to challenge the common perceptions. Lyotard has brought his challenges to the challenges he sees, and myself and many others have come to challenge him. So while things do not necessarily change in this world, there is always new beauty and new possibilities to be found, and in the death of Christ we find truth and and life that we cannot find anywhere else, and that's something I wonder if Lyotard realizes. We cannot have a soul without narratives! Never forget that God spoke this world into existence and made us individually; we were designed to have our own stories within His own. That's what those quotes above are about - the all-encompassing search that defines our lives and the story that creates, interwoven with many different others whether we realize it or not. That's why Socrates will always be my favorite philosopher, because he recognized the grander designs of our existence and never stopped searching for those truths, even unto his death. So to conclude this blog I quote the great searcher himself: "The end of life is to be like God, and the soul following God will be like Him."
Thank you for reading, please comment as you please. I commented on Nick Hampton's Education???
Education???
Out of all the things that we read and discussed in my group, I only really understood one of them. My understood portion came from Chapter 12: Education and Its Legitimation through Performativity.
Lyotard writes about postmodern education. He writes that school, or more specifically, a school of higher learning, is no longer a place where a few “elite” go to learn ideas that set them apart from the rest of the people in a world without knowledge. We discussed that now, going to college is the expected norm which everyone is supposed to do. No longer do people go to school to become intelligent, now they go to school to be trained for one job and to receive a piece of paper which allows them to be accepted into the world of adulthood.
As we discussed this, I thought back to a quote from one of my favorite teachers of my high school career, Mr. Gary Hall. As a senior, about once a week he would tell me, “All you have to do is play the game they want you to play for the rest of the year, then you’re good to go.” I believe Mr. Hall’s wise words fit perfectly with the idea that Lyotard presents here.
I commented on Amanda Gaster's post...
What's the point of college?
This quote from Lyotard stood out the most to my group: “The transmission of knowledge is no longer designed to train an elite capable of guiding the nation toward its emancipation, but to supply the system with players capable of acceptably fulfilling their roles at the pragmatic posts required by its institutions” (48). Basically this means that now college is viewed as the “next step” or “what’s expected”; whereas, college used to be beyond the norm—it was where the thinkers went to learn and grow and emerge to make a difference in the world. Now it has become a sort of trade school- you go, get a degree to do a job instead of going to learn. Yes, you do have to learn to get a degree, but it’s a specialized program—linear thinking instead of deep thinking. Instead of reaching up for ideas and hazy dreams that just might change the world, the focus is more on reaching out and grasping physical skills that have already been proven over time to get the job done. I think that’s why I enjoy Honors so much… it’s not part of my degree. I could take regular English and meet the requirement, but the challenge of Honors allows me to reach up, to dream, and to discover things that I never would’ve seen if I only focused on nursing and learning those skills to do a job. I’m learning that college is about so much more than getting a degree to do a job… it is about life and the pursuit of truth. Thank you to my Honors family and my professors for this wonderful year… I have learned so much and grown as a person. I cannot wait to continue this search for truth with you all next year, thank you for electing me to serve as part of your Council. Keep searching for truth, my friends!
Tantum e tenebris receptum constabit
P.S. Commented on Rachel’s “Nursing Major Nerdiness”
Tantum e tenebris receptum constabit
P.S. Commented on Rachel’s “Nursing Major Nerdiness”
Knowledge
We are supposed to be reading Lyotard, and from the little bit of reading I did do, I found from what I do understand of it that we are talking about knowledge and the different "kinds" of knowledge there are. There is the knowledge that is still learning. For example, a scientist may find a hypothesis and searches out to find the answer. He may or may not find it. Yet, the scientist continues to search for the answer.
I do wonder though, in this idea of knowledge, what exactly is it? Knowledge is the " the fact or condition of knowing something with familiarity gained through experience or association (2) : acquaintance with or understanding of a science, art, or technique." (As the dictionary would say it.) So it is knowing of something. In order to truly know something you learn about it. Is there ever a place where there is no more way to Know more? Is there a highest transcendent to where we have reached all that can ever be known? I would think not. In a visual example, I will use Christianity and knowing God. As a Christian we seek to learn more and more about God, our creator. Will we ever reach the ultimate place of knowledge and knowing God completely? Absolutely not! We couldn't possibly know God completely by the time we are down to our very last breath on earth.
So I believe that defining the "kinds" of knowledge is relevant and essential when understanding it.
This is just some thoughts I had when the idea of knowledge was brought up by Lyotard.
I do wonder though, in this idea of knowledge, what exactly is it? Knowledge is the " the fact or condition of knowing something with familiarity gained through experience or association (2) : acquaintance with or understanding of a science, art, or technique." (As the dictionary would say it.) So it is knowing of something. In order to truly know something you learn about it. Is there ever a place where there is no more way to Know more? Is there a highest transcendent to where we have reached all that can ever be known? I would think not. In a visual example, I will use Christianity and knowing God. As a Christian we seek to learn more and more about God, our creator. Will we ever reach the ultimate place of knowledge and knowing God completely? Absolutely not! We couldn't possibly know God completely by the time we are down to our very last breath on earth.
So I believe that defining the "kinds" of knowledge is relevant and essential when understanding it.
This is just some thoughts I had when the idea of knowledge was brought up by Lyotard.
Honors final; Elliot and I.
I'm in the waste land again. I use this blog during paper writing to help me sort through how I really feel. Sometimes it just doesn't come out in a formal paper until it has come out right here.
I've always loved Elliot, always found it to be some of the most beautiful and comforting writing i could read. If you know me then you've heard me give this speech before. Elliot speaks to me in a number of ways. The first was the way in which he freed up my perception of poetry. Before I read him I read a great deal of Tennyson and was more used to the idea of a poem having structure and almost a sing-song rhyme. Elliot's poetry slapped me in the face because i FELT the words exactly as he said them. The would dip and dive and stop just at the right moments, paying no attention whatsoever to what i thought a poem should do.
The second thing is the feeling of absolutely loneliness and separation Elliot's poems have. Particularly Prufrock and the Waste Land. I think this loneliness and separation from the world is always there. We have a difficult time acknowledging it sometimes, but there's great freedom in it. For me it is like the last lines in the musical Les Miserables (yes, i know it's a book but these lines are from the Musical)
do you hear the people sing?
lost in the valley of the night
it is the music of a people
who are climbing to the light
for the wretched of the earth
there is a flame that never dies
even the darkest night will end
and the sun will rise.
they will live again in freedom
in the garden of the LORD
they will walk behind the ploughshare
they will put away the sword
the chain will be broken and all men will have their reward.
It is a blessed thing to have the freedom of seeing that we are all Les Miserables. That on this earth, peace may not come, the right may not ever prevail and despite our best efforts the innocent will die. But for the "wretched of the earth" this suffering is not the end, there is no meaning in it, other than the meaning that this world cannot possibly be what life is really about. that we are pilgrims in this waste land, we do not belong to it.
I've always loved Elliot, always found it to be some of the most beautiful and comforting writing i could read. If you know me then you've heard me give this speech before. Elliot speaks to me in a number of ways. The first was the way in which he freed up my perception of poetry. Before I read him I read a great deal of Tennyson and was more used to the idea of a poem having structure and almost a sing-song rhyme. Elliot's poetry slapped me in the face because i FELT the words exactly as he said them. The would dip and dive and stop just at the right moments, paying no attention whatsoever to what i thought a poem should do.
The second thing is the feeling of absolutely loneliness and separation Elliot's poems have. Particularly Prufrock and the Waste Land. I think this loneliness and separation from the world is always there. We have a difficult time acknowledging it sometimes, but there's great freedom in it. For me it is like the last lines in the musical Les Miserables (yes, i know it's a book but these lines are from the Musical)
do you hear the people sing?
lost in the valley of the night
it is the music of a people
who are climbing to the light
for the wretched of the earth
there is a flame that never dies
even the darkest night will end
and the sun will rise.
they will live again in freedom
in the garden of the LORD
they will walk behind the ploughshare
they will put away the sword
the chain will be broken and all men will have their reward.
It is a blessed thing to have the freedom of seeing that we are all Les Miserables. That on this earth, peace may not come, the right may not ever prevail and despite our best efforts the innocent will die. But for the "wretched of the earth" this suffering is not the end, there is no meaning in it, other than the meaning that this world cannot possibly be what life is really about. that we are pilgrims in this waste land, we do not belong to it.
Tuesday, May 1, 2012
Nursing Major Nerdiness
My group cheated. First we asked Kala Holt to help us, then Amy Wright, and then Sara Dye.
We really learned a lot from our wise honors ancestors though (:
In section 3 "Language Games"he explains that there are rules and social cues which govern our conversations with one another.
"What he means by this term is that each of the various categories of utterance can be defined in terms of rules specifying their properties and the uses to which they can be put -in exactly the same way as the game of chess is defined by a set of rules determining properties of each of the pieces"
I once heard a young man speak at a TEDx conference about autism and language. The kid is BRILLIANT. He is a philosophy nerd and he taught himself how to overcome his "disability". He has literally turned Autism into his superpower. He taught himself to observe social cues and interpersonal relationships in high school and began to recognize and record each unspoken law. He then used these rules to apply to his own relationships. He said having autism is like there is a big set of rules that everyone else knows about, and you are left out of- it often creates huge walls in communication between people with Autism and without. The problem is actually from a under developed Wernicke's area in the cerebral cortex of the brain, and generally another portion of the brain is over developed. Often kids with autism have amazing math and science skills, memorization, or even a great capacity for philosophical literature, but lack the social skills to have a "normal" conversation with another person. The skills which most of us learned in kindergarten stand before the autistic child as a canyon of loneliness.
Thus my first link to "Language Games" was back to the information I learned about Autism both in classes and from this candid young man at TEDx. Lyotard addresses these games and rules which he observes and applies it to knowledge and those implications. Our interactions being affected by a social construct of rules made by society made for communication within that society. But how interesting to study one who cannot understand the social rules and therefore the construct which they find themselves...
"The observable social bond is composed of language 'moves' "
#PostmodernClinicalApplication
*Amanda I capitalized within my hashtag so as to be more professional*
We really learned a lot from our wise honors ancestors though (:
In section 3 "Language Games"he explains that there are rules and social cues which govern our conversations with one another.
"What he means by this term is that each of the various categories of utterance can be defined in terms of rules specifying their properties and the uses to which they can be put -in exactly the same way as the game of chess is defined by a set of rules determining properties of each of the pieces"
I once heard a young man speak at a TEDx conference about autism and language. The kid is BRILLIANT. He is a philosophy nerd and he taught himself how to overcome his "disability". He has literally turned Autism into his superpower. He taught himself to observe social cues and interpersonal relationships in high school and began to recognize and record each unspoken law. He then used these rules to apply to his own relationships. He said having autism is like there is a big set of rules that everyone else knows about, and you are left out of- it often creates huge walls in communication between people with Autism and without. The problem is actually from a under developed Wernicke's area in the cerebral cortex of the brain, and generally another portion of the brain is over developed. Often kids with autism have amazing math and science skills, memorization, or even a great capacity for philosophical literature, but lack the social skills to have a "normal" conversation with another person. The skills which most of us learned in kindergarten stand before the autistic child as a canyon of loneliness.
Thus my first link to "Language Games" was back to the information I learned about Autism both in classes and from this candid young man at TEDx. Lyotard addresses these games and rules which he observes and applies it to knowledge and those implications. Our interactions being affected by a social construct of rules made by society made for communication within that society. But how interesting to study one who cannot understand the social rules and therefore the construct which they find themselves...
"The observable social bond is composed of language 'moves' "
#PostmodernClinicalApplication
*Amanda I capitalized within my hashtag so as to be more professional*
Sunday, April 29, 2012
My Nightmares
First and foremost, I think Lyotard swayed my ever-present
indecision on whether or not I think I am committed enough to even think about
writing a thesis. You may now count me
in on the thesis crowd. Frankly, I don’t
know if Lyotard even makes sense to me or if I just have it in my head that I
have a good grip on this. When I first
started coming across his bolder statements, I thought he might be Voltairing
it up. Then I realized that someone as
fixated on the function and use of language as I am would not dare to abuse it
so satirically. I realized that he was
completely and terrifyingly serious, and I can’t say that I want him to be. I will admit that I have not read the entire
book yet, nor can I say that I will complete it this week amidst the million
other things that I have to do—and maybe that is making excuses, but I like to
be honest about what I am doing. Since I
am being frank instead of Sam, the very likelihood of me being in class is slim
to none, and I hate that I will miss a discussion on language. Now I am reading Lyotard after reading
Dorothy Sayers’ “The Lost Tools of Learning” and honestly, I think they look at
language very similarly. Education, on
the other hand…they are certainly polar opposite. Sayers believes in a very medieval structure
of education and the learning, and Lyotard is the furthest thing from medieval
(Google trivium and quadrivium). I don’t
think he thinks that is even possible, at least not with society the way it
is. And I think it may only be a Western
problem, this whole language/education issue—and as I told Schuler in my reading
journal I am very willing to be wrong about that. But I wish I knew more about Eastern thought,
especially since I have every intention of living in the East one day.
Back to the whole point, if you have heard me talk about
Orwell at all then you know how much I like him. Language has power over people, over thought,
over a culture. If someone controls the
language, they control the way you articulate what you are thinking, or if you
are even able to do so. In 1984, Orwell uses the Party’s language Newspeak
to address this issue of language as a social construction. The purpose of Newspeak was to condense the
English language down to the bare minimal, removing Latin roots etc. so that
the people could not express emotions effectively or think for themselves. With such a confined language, thought cannot
go any further. And Newspeak is the reason I hate abbreviating words and text speak. I text speak frequently for the humor of it, but it is dangerous. I want to say language
is not a social construction, and I do my best to speak my mind in a way that
it is not. But I fail, and miserably so.
“Narratives, as we have seen, determine criteria of competence and/or illustrate how they are to be applied. They thus define what has the right to be said and done in the culture in question, and since they are themselves a part of that culture, they are legitimated by the simple fact that they do what they do.” p.23
“Narratives, as we have seen, determine criteria of competence and/or illustrate how they are to be applied. They thus define what has the right to be said and done in the culture in question, and since they are themselves a part of that culture, they are legitimated by the simple fact that they do what they do.” p.23
I could probably go on for hours about my struggles with
language, and that is more than likely the reason I will more than likely study
linguistics and/or anthropology in grad school.
COMMENTED ON AMANDA'S
COMMENTED ON AMANDA'S
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)