“We are kept keen on the grindstone of pain and necessity,” wrote H.G. Wells.
Just a few months ago an aching lower back pain woke me up to the awful fact that something was wrong. I made an appointment with the local chiropractor, who took and examined an X-ray of the lower vertebrae. The visual result showed a deteriorating disk which was causing two vertebrae to gradually conform to the collapsing cartilage, causing pain and discomfort. I asked the doctor how this could happen! I was surprised that with all the healthy food and lifestyle I subscribed to I would have such a problem. He asked if I were sitting much. It dawned on me that I had not been moving frequently, but had been sitting most of the day to read, study, write curriculum and rest. My exercise program had all but gone out the door and I was stationary most of the day. He confirmed the future verdict. I would soon be experiencing more and more pain and possibly surgery if I did not change my ways and improve my movement. He taught me that the disks do not inherently receive nourishment through the skeletal system on their own. When the body bends, the vertebrae squeeze nutrients into the disk, which strengthens it. With a lack of movement, the disks receive little to no nutrients and they begin to shrink. Vertebrae, then, grow closer to each other and can eventually fuse together causing excruciating back pain. My eyes were open as my mind exploded with images of walking canes, walkers, wheelchairs, and hospital beds. No, this was not the path I desired to tread. A change would happen. The Chiropractor prescribed frequent daily movement besides special stretches and regular exercise. I purchased a Fitbit Charge 2 from Costco and began my regimen, but that was not all. I began contemplating the significance of all aspects of personal improvement.
While pain and necessity tend to furnish powerful wake-up calls, some people choose the easy path of medical assistance, while others go about setting goals and continue moving toward the accomplishment of those goals. It would seem that the consistent goal for personal happiness consists of good health and well-being physically, mentally, emotionally and spiritually. Admittedly, differing opinions may feel that bodily degeneration is part of life and generally accepted, for instance, the ubiquitous handicapped sign. Nevertheless, The obvious goal for personal happiness, which consists of good health and well-being, is that a person should continually be moving and improving the character, the body, and the spirit.
Improving the character requires tenacity and diligence to prune the weaknesses and build the strengths. Aristotle teaches the idea of potentiality and the movement towards what we are capable of learning and doing. He uses the Greek word energeia to describe the potency, or potential, of something or someone. In his translation of Nicomachean Ethics, Joe Sachs describes how to understand this energeia as “being-at-work-ness.” Aristotle believed that a human was always tending toward either improvement or degeneration depending on whether or not he was being-at-work to improve. Essentially, if one is to improve their character, one must exert effort and energy to swim upstream against the strong current of apathy and complacency. President Gordon B. Hinckley said, “Rise to the great potential within you.” It is a privilege and a divine decree to become what one was created to become. Margaret D. Nadauld invited the women of the LDS church to rise up, “Women of God can never be like women of the world. The world has enough women who are tough; we need women who are tender. There are enough women who are coarse; we need women who are kind. There are enough women who are rude; we need women who are refined. We have enough women of fame and fortune; we need more women of faith. We have enough greed; we need more goodness. We have enough vanity; we need more virtue. We have enough popularity; we need more purity.” It is not enough to sit motionless where one now finds herself. In fact, it is a nontruth to sit motionlessly. One seems always to move, either forward or backward, but the only movement which requires effort is to move in a positive advancing direction. Set goals; move forward.
Improving the physical body similarly requires persistent daily movement and proper nourishment. Although nourishing the body is of considerable importance, I will focus on movement. The most beneficial is the non-exercise activity thermogenesis (NEAT) throughout the day. It involves the regular movement around the home or office, climbing the stairs, doing tasks, walking from the car to the store, standing up, reaching for things, etc. The vertebrae and disks benefit the most from NEAT and stretching. I can vouch for it as my back has fully recovered from several months of daily movement and stretching. A Fitbit or other exercise tracking device is useful in reminding one to stand up hourly and move. Making time each week to exercise aerobically improves the heart and alternating with strength training strengthens the muscles and increases stamina in the overall body. The trick to continued physical improvement ultimately depends upon the automaticity of daily movement, or as Aristotle would teach, the being-at-work-ness, of building the strength of all bodily functions.
Finally, the third area of improvement toward happiness is strengthening the spirit. Knowing one’s divine nature as a child of God does more for the spiritual energeia, than anything else. Both improving Character and strengthening the physical body boost the spiritual capacity. By enlightening the mind to truth and nourishing the lifeblood, one looks upward to their Creator with an intense desire to come closer to Him who heals, comforts, blesses, and guides. Being-at-work-ness looks like a person who studies the scriptures, communes with God through prayer, sing hymns of praises, repents often, makes and keeps sacred covenants in the temple, prepares himself weekly to take the Sacrament and improve his soul through the Atonement of Jesus Christ.
There are those that believe it is easier to coast, not worrying about self-improvement. What good can come from exerting effort in something so difficult when it is natural to drift along where life is taking them? No doubt these are the people who perceive there is no great reward in swimming upstream or possibly those who place the victim hat upon their head who feel they are behind in the race and cannot compete with those who are trying. In the short-term cruising along appears easier, but in the long run, their character, physical body, and spirit will certainly degenerate.
Other naysayers feel that no matter what they do to improve, that degeneration is inevitable. They feel that they have tried but to no avail. They are bombarded with setbacks and obstacles. For them, there is no point in improving self when the tide is strong against them. They are correct that obstacles stand in the way, that vicissitudes riddle life’s opportunities, but to them, I say they are denying agency and effort. They are denying their responsibility to improve self and society. They are ultimately denying the greatest happiness that comes from mastering oneself. What would have happened if Mother Theresa would have been overcome by her poverty and stopped her devoted service that saved hundreds? Great men and women let nothing shroud or impede their goals, but they face every deterrent, every obstacle, every hurdle and eventually their weaknesses become strengths.
Individual improvement begins with a desire, a goal, and the determination to be continually at-work-ness. It is a repetitious and habitual pattern of becoming. The consistent goal for ultimate happiness, which consists of good health and well-being should be that a person continually is moving and improving. Improvement builds an honorable character, movement builds a strong back and body, and both inspire lasting spiritual health. The daily practice of setting and achieving goals is to greatness as the moving and bending of the vertebrae is to a healthy spinal disk. Good Life depends upon it.
Friday, April 20, 2018
Wednesday, March 14, 2018
Family History and the Lost Art of Cursive
Does the old-fashioned cursive writing bring any sort of advantage in our modern age? Why are the schools not teaching it anymore? Is it true that no reason exists to continue learning it? Although some experts believe that cursive should be taught in the schools, Dr. Morgan Polikoff, an expert in K-12 education policy states, “The fact is that cursive isn’t used in the vast majority of professions or day-to-day activities for the vast majority of people, so it’s hard for me to see how learning cursive conveys any sort of advantage.”
While the conventional methods of printing or keyboarding are more popular in our schools today, children should first learn cursive handwriting for various reasons, but before going into the rationale, consider a compelling reason for learning cursive. In the recent 2018 Rootstech Conference in Salt Lake City, one of the popular speakers discussed the long-term risks of not teaching cursive in our public schools. Cursive is like a passenger train traveling into the vast and exciting unknown, it connects the dots for transcribing historical records. With the advance of technology, along with an army of indexers spending nearly 15 million hours in 2016 alone, full-time missionaries and volunteers indexed 274.8 million records. The key to indexing is understanding how to read in cursive. For centuries the vital records have been completed in cursive handwriting. Anyone interested in their family history will encounter the cursive writ in cards and letters, marriage licenses, birth certificates, draft records, pensions, diaries, etc. Even the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution are written in cursive. How will people understand the documents if they never learned cursive? Cursive is the connecting key to unlock the mystery of genealogical records.
Before learning to print, school children should first learn cursive handwriting for three reasons, it is easier to learn than print, can be more legible than print, and especially, for the purpose of this article, grown children can eventually interpret and be inspired by centuries’ worth of historical documents to not only further the cause of family history, but gain a sense of family unity.
Schools and parents should be teaching their children the art of cursive from the beginning stages of education simply because it is far easier to learn than printing. Only three main strokes make up the letters, whereas print requires six. Writing in cursive implements skills and patterns since each lowercase letter begins at the bottom line and moves upward while printing is more chaotic. In printing, one must start at different points depending on the letter.
Additionally, cursive writing can be more legible than print. In cursive, the pencil flows continuously and orderly and leaves less chance for errors, including too much spacing between letters or no distinction between the end of a word and the beginning of the next.
The most compelling reason for learning cursive, however, is to read, understand, and interpret historical documents, which lead to a deeper understanding of familial bonds. As family history research is becoming more popular among the millennials, they and subsequent generations will face cursive writing in the profusion of vital documents needed to verify their research. Researching family documents are an important part of gaining self-confidence. The youth in families who enjoy meals together and who research and discover their family stories have more confidence to face adversity and misfortune. A New York Times article stated, “The single most important thing you can do for your family may be the simplest of all: develop a strong family narrative.” Family stories give individuals a sense of being part of a larger family. Imagine the confidence gained in reading about both the joy and the sorrows in the journals of ancestors who crossed the Atlantic, served as indentured servants and crossed the plains to come west.
In a changing world that demands new methods and styles, and while it is necessary to keep up with the times, it is not a good idea to throw the baby out with the bathwater. The knowledge of cursive is to the historical records as pepper spray is to the Doberman Pincer. Children ought to be learning the art of cursive at the beginning of their education and contrary to popular opinion, cursive is easier to learn, can be more legible than print, and most importantly, is essential for reading, understanding, and connecting with family through historical documents. It matters to each and every one of us particularly in the current age of broken homes, broken souls, disharmony and disunity. The study of our heritage empowers us to connect, and cause us to have, as Mormon said, “many mighty miracles” among men.
While the conventional methods of printing or keyboarding are more popular in our schools today, children should first learn cursive handwriting for various reasons, but before going into the rationale, consider a compelling reason for learning cursive. In the recent 2018 Rootstech Conference in Salt Lake City, one of the popular speakers discussed the long-term risks of not teaching cursive in our public schools. Cursive is like a passenger train traveling into the vast and exciting unknown, it connects the dots for transcribing historical records. With the advance of technology, along with an army of indexers spending nearly 15 million hours in 2016 alone, full-time missionaries and volunteers indexed 274.8 million records. The key to indexing is understanding how to read in cursive. For centuries the vital records have been completed in cursive handwriting. Anyone interested in their family history will encounter the cursive writ in cards and letters, marriage licenses, birth certificates, draft records, pensions, diaries, etc. Even the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution are written in cursive. How will people understand the documents if they never learned cursive? Cursive is the connecting key to unlock the mystery of genealogical records.
Before learning to print, school children should first learn cursive handwriting for three reasons, it is easier to learn than print, can be more legible than print, and especially, for the purpose of this article, grown children can eventually interpret and be inspired by centuries’ worth of historical documents to not only further the cause of family history, but gain a sense of family unity.
Schools and parents should be teaching their children the art of cursive from the beginning stages of education simply because it is far easier to learn than printing. Only three main strokes make up the letters, whereas print requires six. Writing in cursive implements skills and patterns since each lowercase letter begins at the bottom line and moves upward while printing is more chaotic. In printing, one must start at different points depending on the letter.
Additionally, cursive writing can be more legible than print. In cursive, the pencil flows continuously and orderly and leaves less chance for errors, including too much spacing between letters or no distinction between the end of a word and the beginning of the next.
The most compelling reason for learning cursive, however, is to read, understand, and interpret historical documents, which lead to a deeper understanding of familial bonds. As family history research is becoming more popular among the millennials, they and subsequent generations will face cursive writing in the profusion of vital documents needed to verify their research. Researching family documents are an important part of gaining self-confidence. The youth in families who enjoy meals together and who research and discover their family stories have more confidence to face adversity and misfortune. A New York Times article stated, “The single most important thing you can do for your family may be the simplest of all: develop a strong family narrative.” Family stories give individuals a sense of being part of a larger family. Imagine the confidence gained in reading about both the joy and the sorrows in the journals of ancestors who crossed the Atlantic, served as indentured servants and crossed the plains to come west.
In a changing world that demands new methods and styles, and while it is necessary to keep up with the times, it is not a good idea to throw the baby out with the bathwater. The knowledge of cursive is to the historical records as pepper spray is to the Doberman Pincer. Children ought to be learning the art of cursive at the beginning of their education and contrary to popular opinion, cursive is easier to learn, can be more legible than print, and most importantly, is essential for reading, understanding, and connecting with family through historical documents. It matters to each and every one of us particularly in the current age of broken homes, broken souls, disharmony and disunity. The study of our heritage empowers us to connect, and cause us to have, as Mormon said, “many mighty miracles” among men.
Thursday, November 16, 2017
Shakespeare's Richard III Examined
Machiavelli, the father of Modernity, seems to think that if human nature is malleable, then he can shape the common mentality into any needful tool to sanction his decisions. Truth is not what he seeks, but “truth” that the prince may put in practice and call truth. Machiavelli seems to be removing the pillar of Christianity and the Ancient Aristotelian virtues in order to create a new ruler, who acquires state without the limiting influence of Christian principles and virtues.
Machiavelli on appearances, “Let a prince then win and maintain the state — the means will always be judged honorable and will be praised by everyone; for the vulgar are always taken in by the appearance and the outcome of a thing, and in this world, there is no one but the vulgar.” It sounds harsh, but Machiavelli may be the devil’s preacher. He has projected the power to turn good men bad and bad men worse still.
From the very start, we see the evil designs of Richard’s pretentious actions in Henry VI, “I can add colors to the chameleon, change shapes with Proteus for advantages.” (Part III, III, ii, 191) The audience witnesses his crooked twists and turns as he murders anyone in his path to the throne, but deceiving the rest. Before the people, Buckingham promotes Richard’s feigned appearance as he vocally observes Richard holding the Bible, “Two props of virtue for a Christian prince, to stay him from the fall of vanity; and see, a book of prayer in his hand—true ornaments to know a holy man.” (3.7.98) The Bible, a sign of religious instruction and inspiration and a hand, the sign of good action and leadership. The meaning, of which, never enlightens the limited intellect of the people. Maybe they are duped, but their cheers are forced and weak, but that without an alternative, they acquiesced. Meanwhile, Richard is elevated by his appearances.
Richard uses subtle, notorious and murderous schemes to destroy nations, whether completely or merely reduce the minds of whole nations to ignorance. Richard III is Shakespeare’s attempt to display the evil intrigue. As Machiavelli might say of him, he has “always led a wicked life at every stage,” (Prince, VIII, 51) and had a Machiavellian virtue of mind that he rose through the ranks and has been “determined to become prince and to hold with violence and without obligation to others,” (51) as he kills all in his way. Continuing to the end of the play, one witnesses how Richard III “maintains [his kingdom] with many spirited and dangerous decisions” (52) And yet, Machiavelli would say that Richard did not follow his advice. He did his treacherousness with “brutal cruelty and inhumanity and his infinite wickednesses do not allow that he be among the most excellent men.” (52)
Apparently, Richard ought to have studied more faithfully his master teacher, Machiavelli, for he did not surround himself with barons, rather, he killed everyone who surrounded himself…except for Buckingham. (IV, 25) Additionally and according to Machiavelli, Richard would have best attempted to do all the injuries together to appease his observers. What “taste[s] less…offend[s] less” (VIII, 55)
Machiavelli on appearances, “Let a prince then win and maintain the state — the means will always be judged honorable and will be praised by everyone; for the vulgar are always taken in by the appearance and the outcome of a thing, and in this world, there is no one but the vulgar.” It sounds harsh, but Machiavelli may be the devil’s preacher. He has projected the power to turn good men bad and bad men worse still.
From the very start, we see the evil designs of Richard’s pretentious actions in Henry VI, “I can add colors to the chameleon, change shapes with Proteus for advantages.” (Part III, III, ii, 191) The audience witnesses his crooked twists and turns as he murders anyone in his path to the throne, but deceiving the rest. Before the people, Buckingham promotes Richard’s feigned appearance as he vocally observes Richard holding the Bible, “Two props of virtue for a Christian prince, to stay him from the fall of vanity; and see, a book of prayer in his hand—true ornaments to know a holy man.” (3.7.98) The Bible, a sign of religious instruction and inspiration and a hand, the sign of good action and leadership. The meaning, of which, never enlightens the limited intellect of the people. Maybe they are duped, but their cheers are forced and weak, but that without an alternative, they acquiesced. Meanwhile, Richard is elevated by his appearances.
Richard uses subtle, notorious and murderous schemes to destroy nations, whether completely or merely reduce the minds of whole nations to ignorance. Richard III is Shakespeare’s attempt to display the evil intrigue. As Machiavelli might say of him, he has “always led a wicked life at every stage,” (Prince, VIII, 51) and had a Machiavellian virtue of mind that he rose through the ranks and has been “determined to become prince and to hold with violence and without obligation to others,” (51) as he kills all in his way. Continuing to the end of the play, one witnesses how Richard III “maintains [his kingdom] with many spirited and dangerous decisions” (52) And yet, Machiavelli would say that Richard did not follow his advice. He did his treacherousness with “brutal cruelty and inhumanity and his infinite wickednesses do not allow that he be among the most excellent men.” (52)
Apparently, Richard ought to have studied more faithfully his master teacher, Machiavelli, for he did not surround himself with barons, rather, he killed everyone who surrounded himself…except for Buckingham. (IV, 25) Additionally and according to Machiavelli, Richard would have best attempted to do all the injuries together to appease his observers. What “taste[s] less…offend[s] less” (VIII, 55)
Tuesday, November 7, 2017
Quote: The Process of Understanding
"Sometimes when reading or studying or listening, I catch a glimpse of ideas and connections beyond my current understanding. At times these ideas are nascent and ephemeral--mists that have not yet solidified (if they ever will). It is as if figures are coming together on the periphery of my vision, and I fear that if I look at them directly, the forms will dissolve into vaporous ribbons and float away. Some passages of Scripture like that – for a moment I can grasp a spiritual truth or significance that swells beyond my comprehension. I'm encouraged by the fact that even apostle Peter said that Paul was hard to understand. "but sometimes even a convergence of thoughts, words, spirit, conversation, circumstances, and time solidifies those periphery shapes into concrete understanding – into wisdom that causes a change of heart, habit, or practice." ~ Greg Wilbur, Circe magazine 2017
Thursday, June 15, 2017
Why Learn Classical Writing?
I have been researching a curriculum called The Lost Tools of Writing (LTW) by Circe Institute. Ever since I have been mentoring writing, I have been feeling a greater need to fully understand how to help the student think on their own about Inventing and arranging their ideas and feeling good about their elocution of these ideas.
I think IEW does a good job teaching the use of vivid words and sentence structure, while Bravewriter uses many thinking exercises and writing activities, but neither has given me a simple foundational understanding of the bones of an essay like LTW does.
While researching LTW, I have compiled some thoughts, including some links below for additional information:
What is the Method?: LTW teaches three canons of writing: Invention, Arrangement, and Elocution. Invention (inventory) means thinking about all possible ideas, angles, and attitudes. Arrangement means to structure these in order or pattern and Elocution means the style in which to present these things.
Each week the lessons rotate between these canons. For the first essay, students will first learn to ask the question. Why should this character have done or not done this? They will then turn this into the issue at hand, and then produce a thesis from the issue, which is the Cannon of Invention. Next, the student will learn to use the Arrangement Canon to write an outline. Finally, the Elocution Canon teaches the student to move from the Outline to concise, but persuasive sentences and paragraphs. The curriculum takes the student through 9 lessons, spending 3 weeks per lesson.
For those who have taken previous writing classes, the first essay may seem rudimentary and simplistic. However, it is necessary that every student scale back to the very foundation of writing to build upon these canons and eventually create excellent essays.
Just as a building requires both a sound foundation and precise measurements of the subsequent levels, writing also requires a basic foundation and precise components of grammar, logic, and rhetoric. Often, the writer may pale at the constant pruning, critiquing, and editing of their paper and wonder if they will ever write a perfect paper without these necessary disciplines.
I love to refer to an essay by one of C.S. Lewis's good friends, Dorothy Sayers. In her Lost Tools of Learning, she wrote, “Our Reading will proceed from narrative and lyric to essays, argument and criticism, and the pupil will learn to try his own hand at writing this kind of thing…Wherever the matter for Dialectic is found, it is, of course, highly important that attention should be focused upon the beauty and economy of a fine demonstration or a well-turned argument, lest veneration should wholly die. Criticism must not be merely destructive; though at the same time both teacher and pupils must be ready to detect fallacy, slipshod reasoning, ambiguity, irrelevance, and redundancy, and to pounce upon them like rats. This is the moment when precise-writing may be usefully undertaken; together with such exercises as the writing of an essay, and the reduction of it, when written, by 25 or 50 percent.”
The last few lines emphasize the idea of precise, reduced writing, or pruning, one might say. According to Sayers, the Dialectic is a pruning stage, and pruning is rarely beautiful, but just as pruning produces a healthy, beautiful, and fruitful tree, pruning produces the best writing.
The first persuasive essays your student will learn to write in The Lost Tools of Writing will not be untidy, nor will they be eloquent, nor flowery masterpieces, but they will be precise, reduced writing with the right structure allowing for beautiful, high-quality, productive growth in the years to come.
LTW teaches the student to play with ideas instead of words. Students learn the art of gathering and processing words through a moral journey of acquiring wisdom through inquiry and discovery. They select a character from a classic book they are reading (Lucy or Edmund Pevensie, Beowulf, Caesar, Bilbo Baggins, Jean Valjean, etc.) and they ask a “should” question about the character or an event surrounding the character. Should Edmund have followed the White Witch? Should Beowulf have listened to Hrothgar’s advice? Should Caesar have crossed the Rubicon? Should Bilbo Baggins have given up the One Ring? Should Jean Valjean have not testified in court to save the other man?
These questions matter because they are pivotal to understanding our relationship with the Good, the True and the Beautiful. These questions help students understand what is right or wrong, true or false, and good or bad. They focus on the virtuous attributes that all humans ought to develop within.
David Hicks writes in the preface of Norms and Nobility:
“Although in my curriculum proposal I use history as the paradigm for contextual learning, the ethical question ‘What should one do?’ might provide an even richer context for acquiring general knowledge. This question elicits not only knowledge, but wisdom, and it draws the interest of the student into any subject, no matter how obscure or far removed from his day-to-day concerns. It challenges the imagination and makes life the laboratory it ought to be for testing the hypotheses and lessons of the classroom. As this implies, the end of education is not thinking; it is acting.”
Have we thought enough in regards to the ends of education? Is the goal to use elaborate language? Or is the goal to learn, understand, and express wisdom? Knowledge, vivid words, and eloquent syntax are essential in our education, but they cannot compare to the excellent use of wisdom in creating a good and beautiful mind and heart. The end of education, then, is not merely gaining knowledge about people, places, and things, nor is it simply to learn and use elaborate language, but the ultimate goal of education is to learn right thinking and right action.
Students build character when they ask why the character did what he did or whether or not the character should have done something differently. Andrew Kern wrote, “If I want to see into the meaning of this event, learning the content is necessary. But it is not enough. You have to ask why he did it, what were the outcomes, what he overcame, whether he was wise to do so, what his courage purchased for us, and other big-picture questions.”*
The “why” matters. Writing about the “why” causes it to go deep down into the soul of the writer.
* The Holy Grail of Classical Education by Andrew Kern, CiRCE Institute.
I think IEW does a good job teaching the use of vivid words and sentence structure, while Bravewriter uses many thinking exercises and writing activities, but neither has given me a simple foundational understanding of the bones of an essay like LTW does.
While researching LTW, I have compiled some thoughts, including some links below for additional information:
What is the Method?: LTW teaches three canons of writing: Invention, Arrangement, and Elocution. Invention (inventory) means thinking about all possible ideas, angles, and attitudes. Arrangement means to structure these in order or pattern and Elocution means the style in which to present these things.
Each week the lessons rotate between these canons. For the first essay, students will first learn to ask the question. Why should this character have done or not done this? They will then turn this into the issue at hand, and then produce a thesis from the issue, which is the Cannon of Invention. Next, the student will learn to use the Arrangement Canon to write an outline. Finally, the Elocution Canon teaches the student to move from the Outline to concise, but persuasive sentences and paragraphs. The curriculum takes the student through 9 lessons, spending 3 weeks per lesson.
For those who have taken previous writing classes, the first essay may seem rudimentary and simplistic. However, it is necessary that every student scale back to the very foundation of writing to build upon these canons and eventually create excellent essays.
Just as a building requires both a sound foundation and precise measurements of the subsequent levels, writing also requires a basic foundation and precise components of grammar, logic, and rhetoric. Often, the writer may pale at the constant pruning, critiquing, and editing of their paper and wonder if they will ever write a perfect paper without these necessary disciplines.
I love to refer to an essay by one of C.S. Lewis's good friends, Dorothy Sayers. In her Lost Tools of Learning, she wrote, “Our Reading will proceed from narrative and lyric to essays, argument and criticism, and the pupil will learn to try his own hand at writing this kind of thing…Wherever the matter for Dialectic is found, it is, of course, highly important that attention should be focused upon the beauty and economy of a fine demonstration or a well-turned argument, lest veneration should wholly die. Criticism must not be merely destructive; though at the same time both teacher and pupils must be ready to detect fallacy, slipshod reasoning, ambiguity, irrelevance, and redundancy, and to pounce upon them like rats. This is the moment when precise-writing may be usefully undertaken; together with such exercises as the writing of an essay, and the reduction of it, when written, by 25 or 50 percent.”
The last few lines emphasize the idea of precise, reduced writing, or pruning, one might say. According to Sayers, the Dialectic is a pruning stage, and pruning is rarely beautiful, but just as pruning produces a healthy, beautiful, and fruitful tree, pruning produces the best writing.
The first persuasive essays your student will learn to write in The Lost Tools of Writing will not be untidy, nor will they be eloquent, nor flowery masterpieces, but they will be precise, reduced writing with the right structure allowing for beautiful, high-quality, productive growth in the years to come.
LTW teaches the student to play with ideas instead of words. Students learn the art of gathering and processing words through a moral journey of acquiring wisdom through inquiry and discovery. They select a character from a classic book they are reading (Lucy or Edmund Pevensie, Beowulf, Caesar, Bilbo Baggins, Jean Valjean, etc.) and they ask a “should” question about the character or an event surrounding the character. Should Edmund have followed the White Witch? Should Beowulf have listened to Hrothgar’s advice? Should Caesar have crossed the Rubicon? Should Bilbo Baggins have given up the One Ring? Should Jean Valjean have not testified in court to save the other man?
These questions matter because they are pivotal to understanding our relationship with the Good, the True and the Beautiful. These questions help students understand what is right or wrong, true or false, and good or bad. They focus on the virtuous attributes that all humans ought to develop within.
David Hicks writes in the preface of Norms and Nobility:
“Although in my curriculum proposal I use history as the paradigm for contextual learning, the ethical question ‘What should one do?’ might provide an even richer context for acquiring general knowledge. This question elicits not only knowledge, but wisdom, and it draws the interest of the student into any subject, no matter how obscure or far removed from his day-to-day concerns. It challenges the imagination and makes life the laboratory it ought to be for testing the hypotheses and lessons of the classroom. As this implies, the end of education is not thinking; it is acting.”
Have we thought enough in regards to the ends of education? Is the goal to use elaborate language? Or is the goal to learn, understand, and express wisdom? Knowledge, vivid words, and eloquent syntax are essential in our education, but they cannot compare to the excellent use of wisdom in creating a good and beautiful mind and heart. The end of education, then, is not merely gaining knowledge about people, places, and things, nor is it simply to learn and use elaborate language, but the ultimate goal of education is to learn right thinking and right action.
Students build character when they ask why the character did what he did or whether or not the character should have done something differently. Andrew Kern wrote, “If I want to see into the meaning of this event, learning the content is necessary. But it is not enough. You have to ask why he did it, what were the outcomes, what he overcame, whether he was wise to do so, what his courage purchased for us, and other big-picture questions.”*
The “why” matters. Writing about the “why” causes it to go deep down into the soul of the writer.
* The Holy Grail of Classical Education by Andrew Kern, CiRCE Institute.
Thursday, December 15, 2016
Don't Judge an Unread Book
My daughter attended a youth discussion with a mentor and she told me she had a good time. I wanted to know more, but it appeared she had nothing consequential to share with me and as a result, we changed our discussion to other matters such as Christmas plans, etc. However, the next day, as I was working on some studies, she came to me with a funny smile, “Mom, do you believe in what Plato said?” I said yes, but in my mind, I was thinking that my real answer would be loaded and deep. I kept my head turned toward my studies but began to think of what I really wanted to say to her. I turned and asked her about her query and she opened up her heart and mind to me in a genuine investigation. She recounted her experience the day before and apparently, the mentor had said that Plato’s works were bad, but that Aristotle’s were good. My daughter had read both Plato’s Republic and Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics in a class I taught and over the course of two months, we gleaned many great things from both of the authors. Notwithstanding, we did discuss some of Plato’s strange ideas about educating children and the family unit, which is pretty much non-existent according to Plato. I would venture to say that those ideas and maybe one other would not be congruent with the Proclamation of the Family or the commandments of God. However, Plato’s discussion on Justice, his treatise on educating the philosopher king, his scolding of Glaucon’s promiscuity, his allegory of the Cave, and his ending testimonial lead the reader to believe in his goodness. Why would a mentor undertake to turn youth away from one of the greatest sages of all time? I think this is the case where one throws out the baby with the bath water.
I listened to my daughter try to figure out what to do with herself in a future situation like the one she experienced. She kept asking me what she could do when she knows that what the mentor is saying is not all truth and is using rhetoric that persuades youth to not even touch a certain author that my daughter has learned to love. I listened and listened and listened. As she spoke, I remembered Ralph Waldo Emerson in The American Scholar who talked of the idiocy of being a “parrot of other men’s thinking.” Many of us are caught up in the pretense of scholarship and feel so good about ourselves when we repeat the “knowledge” we get from hearing others. Unfortunately, I am not exempt from being a parrot at times. Ugh. It is one of my goals to improve.
My mind started wandering to Plato. At the end of the Republic, Socrates presents a choice for the individual to decide if he will be Just or Unjust. A person “will then look at the nature of the soul, and from the consideration of all these qualities he will be able to determine which is the better and which is the worse; and so he will choose, giving the name of evil to the life which will make his soul more unjust, and good to the life which will make his soul more just; all else he will disregard.” In other words, after examining each quality or vice, we need to discern whether they will lead us to a just life or an unjust life. For me, this is an excellent discussion to have with youth. Again, why would I want to discount Plato to youth?
Socrates’ final counsel in the Republic might be one of the greatest discussions, “Wherefore, my counsel is that we hold fast ever to the heavenly way and follow after justice and virtue always, considering that the soul is immortal and able to endure every sort of good and every sort of evil. Thus shall we live dear to one another and to the gods, both while remaining here and when, like conquerors in the games who go round to gather gifts, we receive our reward. And it shall be well with us both in this life and in the pilgrimage of a thousand years which we have been describing.”
Ah! What beautiful things Socrates had to say (Plato wrote them down and now he gets the credit). My advice to my daughter was to keep reading, annotating, writing and speaking up. My advice to you, dear reader, is to do the same, but to never discount an author unless you have read him and learned what he was really saying.
I listened to my daughter try to figure out what to do with herself in a future situation like the one she experienced. She kept asking me what she could do when she knows that what the mentor is saying is not all truth and is using rhetoric that persuades youth to not even touch a certain author that my daughter has learned to love. I listened and listened and listened. As she spoke, I remembered Ralph Waldo Emerson in The American Scholar who talked of the idiocy of being a “parrot of other men’s thinking.” Many of us are caught up in the pretense of scholarship and feel so good about ourselves when we repeat the “knowledge” we get from hearing others. Unfortunately, I am not exempt from being a parrot at times. Ugh. It is one of my goals to improve.
My mind started wandering to Plato. At the end of the Republic, Socrates presents a choice for the individual to decide if he will be Just or Unjust. A person “will then look at the nature of the soul, and from the consideration of all these qualities he will be able to determine which is the better and which is the worse; and so he will choose, giving the name of evil to the life which will make his soul more unjust, and good to the life which will make his soul more just; all else he will disregard.” In other words, after examining each quality or vice, we need to discern whether they will lead us to a just life or an unjust life. For me, this is an excellent discussion to have with youth. Again, why would I want to discount Plato to youth?
Socrates’ final counsel in the Republic might be one of the greatest discussions, “Wherefore, my counsel is that we hold fast ever to the heavenly way and follow after justice and virtue always, considering that the soul is immortal and able to endure every sort of good and every sort of evil. Thus shall we live dear to one another and to the gods, both while remaining here and when, like conquerors in the games who go round to gather gifts, we receive our reward. And it shall be well with us both in this life and in the pilgrimage of a thousand years which we have been describing.”
Ah! What beautiful things Socrates had to say (Plato wrote them down and now he gets the credit). My advice to my daughter was to keep reading, annotating, writing and speaking up. My advice to you, dear reader, is to do the same, but to never discount an author unless you have read him and learned what he was really saying.
Thursday, December 8, 2016
Who Says Science isn't part of the study of Humanities?
In recent days, I have been learning about the Universal Model, a new millennial science that inspires the questioning of current theories. Presently, the theories of the Big Bang, the origin of species (the idea that humans came from apes), the earthly Magna core, and many other theories which have existed over a hundred years and which are taught as fact in educational institutions have been unproven. UM presents a new way of thinking. Rather than trying to make the natural world fit within the limits of the accepted theories as does modern science, UM expends their energy researching, experimenting and looking for natural laws with an open and inquisitive mind. For instance, instead of assuming that the earth’s core is made of Magna, they are finding oceans of water below the earth’s crust; enough water to have covered the earth at the time of the flood during Noah’s time. This and many more discoveries have they made that make sense for the Creationist’s view.
My daughter and I will be attending a presentation tomorrow night to learn more. If any of this interests you, research their website or listen to a podcast (not a great recording, but very informative).
Now, about the title of this blog post: Why would I blog about science, you ask? Well, if we lived in the time of the ancient Greek sages, you wouldn’t dare ask that question because you would know that questions about the natural world were “naturally” integrated into philosophical conversations (pun intended). Like Aristotle, I too believe that the natural world should be part of the Great Conversation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)