h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Having been thinking about that...
I think your right. I've always had some sort of conviction anyway that the lines between subjects are blurred... especially with my double Science course at GCSE. But it never occured to me to lump them under life, although it's obvious, because the acts of living and learning are inextricably intertwined.
I don't know about general and specific views. I always have the specific, brought to a state of ridiculousness in my history course so that I still don't know when the wars of the roses were in relation to most of History, but can probably list the main causes of WW2, and reasons for the rise of Nazi Germany until whoevers listening goes to sleep. I suffer from a lack of a general view because I do find it very much easier to persue my specific interests rather than attempting to broaden my mind because that takes too much effort.
So then I go somewhere else and feel stupid because they know more than me, so then I learn as much as I can about that, without still catching a glimpse of the bigger picture.

Wonderful to have just dropped in on the conversation you've been having while I've been out racing over the snow-smattered moors today, falling into chest deep pools of ice-cold water! Great contrast. Lots of thoughts - but only time for a few because my kids want to kick me off the computer to play football.

First, "the acts of living and learning are inextricably intertwined". Joanna, trust me that you can use words well. That is so true, and so beautifully put.

Second, I wish that there was a way for education to work in a way which didn't force knowledge into separate subjects. Everything connects, and life is at the nucleus. What teaching most often lacks is a broader context. The need to get students through exams often necessitates concentrating on specifics. I was very good at that, and excelled academically, but it wasn't until much later that I realised how impoverished by education truly was.

Third, Joanna, I hope you have picked up another line of conversation I've been having with your good friend -1, because they appear to be converging. -1, I too have always been able to see alternative points of view and have been fascinated for a long time with how you can present conflicting ideas and theories in an open-handed way. The web offers many new opportunites here because it allows for alternative truths to co-exist in ways that are not possible with a medium like a book or a television program.

Fourth, I think the teachers you are lucky or unlucky enough to have are perhaps the foremost influence in your life. I had a truly wonderful maths teacher who nurtured my enthusiasm and infused me with his love for the subject. It could easily have been very different. I feel very lucky in that respect.

Its funny, being a teacher could be such and amazing thing to be, but examinations get in the way.
My Mother surprised my year 8 maths teacher by saying when she taught it, maths used to be fun. She was saddened to realise that he couldn't seem to get the concept of students taking maths and liking it, and not primarily working for exams.
I see that knowledge does need to be tested, but I think its a shame that society can be so demanding of results and measurements, blind to the fact that examinations are a very crude measure.
My music teacher last year knew that teaching wasn't just to pass exams, he taught beyond the syllabus, and uncoincidently in my opinion half the class got As, and the lowest grade was a C.
I wish they all knew that.

Joanna:

The general view is only obvious when you "stand well back" (E. Izzard mentioned elsewhere) or climb higher (see 'Mountains' @ Serendipity) or when you stop looking through a microscope. We all get lost in the intricacies and detail of life and it is only distance, often measured by time, that allows a truer perspective on the universal meaning.

We need details to understand the whole but we shouldn't become immersed in them to the extent that they become more important than the very thing they are a part of. Remember most teachers, lecturers, professors are all people who are no different from you, only separated by time. What they have is a skill. A skill, academic or practical, is something that is practiced, repeated and becomes second nature. ie They do it all the time; you do it for a week or so! It has been said that "everyone has a least one book in them" similarly if you listen carefully to most average lecturers you find that they have only one lecture in them which is just dressed differently. The 'Blue Moon' teacher aka R. Feynman (recommend 'Six easy pieces' the fundamentals of physics explained if you haven't read it) uses the appropriate tools for each different job which is what makes him outstanding. Also his interest in Life seemed to put his physics into perspective. To not be sexist about this if you get the chance to listen to Professor Susan Greenfield (A Neurologist I think) she has impressed me on several occasions with her clear sight and delivery of her subject. People like these are rare but when you find them drink from their fountain of knowledge.

Serendipity:

I agree that the web and forums such as this are invaluable in clarifying one's own thoughts and exchanging ideas especially as pre-conceptions and influences such age, sex, race, uniforms, position etc, can be dispensed with. Perhaps this is the future for unbiased personality free education or is this too bland an idea? Would we lose the Feynmen and Greenfields of the world or would they become accessible to a wider audience? Perhaps the Summerfield school has the right approach to education; voluntary attendance at lessons and a commitment to encouraging learning from within rather than imposing it from without.
It's not that I sit on fences, I can see both sides and like you the difficulty of expressing them both without compromising the other may well be resolved through this medium.
-1

Re-reading the above in the clearer light of today there appears to be several non-sequiturial sentences! But i'm sure they refer to something in one or other of our postings..... no excuses but an example of literating many different thoughts to avoid losing them! I may pick up a thread when it becomes clearer.
-1

We need a balance between an understanding of the details and an understanding of the 'bigger picture'. This subject is very close to my heart. It's my One and the Many. Rather crudely, our reason deals with the One (the details), while our intuition deals with the Many (the bigger picture). We fulfil our greatest human potential when the two are working together. To quote Colin Wilson from Beyond the Outsider,

"Man is in the position of a painter painting a gigantic canvas. If he is close enough to be able to work, he is too close to see it as a whole. If he stands back to see it as a whole, he is too far away to use his paintbrush."

I guess I believe that there is this fine point where we can both be close enough to use our paintbrush and far enough away to see the overall effect - but it is hard, almost impossibly hard, to keep oneself balanced there. Perhaps these great teachers/writers such as Richard Feynmann (undeniably a genius) and Susan Greenfield are examples of those rare souls who are able to live their lives at this special point. Of course, the structure of our academic institutions is such that specialisation is insisted upon. At the leading edge of research in theoretical physics, papers are published which only a handful of similar specialists are likely to be able to understand. However, there is a cross-disciplinary counter culture developing. The highly original work of Stuart Kauffman is an example. Take a look at http://www.edge.org.

Joanna, you are so right. There are great problems associated with our examination-centred education system. I too recognise the need for some kind of assessment, but there has to be a more appropriate balance. Another quote for you, a favourite of mine, from a truly original and brilliant little book, Finite and Infinite Games by James Carse,

"Education leads toward a continuing self-discovery; training leads toward a final self-definition."

I think we will all probably agree with each other that we need more education, and less training in our schools. If I was cynical, I might perhaps argue that schools and colleges function largely to prevent young people from getting too much exposure to education.

You said:
"We need a balance between an understanding of the details and an understanding of the bigger picture?"
In a way this is a very Quantum statement. Its one thing when you are in one position (specific/particle) and something else (general/wave) from another. Similarly with Thought (specific) and Intuition (general). Maybe this is the basis of everything that Quantum physics is leading us towards? It would certainly help with the understanding of your Universe idea, now known as 'The Serendipity Solution'!

Schools main purpose, as it seems to have turned out and you point out, is to instruct rather than educate, because education gives freedom of mind and those that have this are a threat to the existing society and also tend to be people 'on the edge' (thanks for the URL I'd read of it but never found it!)
-1

I had a good maths tutorial today
but I don't have the words again
I just tried typing it, but it sounded daft to me... I can't convey my sense of wonder in the maths problem, which suddenly fitted into real life, with boundary conditions which could so easily be understood, with a normal distribution term, and a term which cooled the system down... I wish I could construct equations to do things that I wanted, to have terms to model the world around me... I think for the first time I actually saw beauty in maths.
This sounds trite, and very silly, re-reading it. Also as if I'm now in desparate search of beauty to prove myself to this forum. But I'm not... well perhaps I'm trying to open my eyes rather than take a stereotypical student view of Ugh. Maths. When can I go to the bar?

Your talking Intuition here it seems. Although I'm no mathematician the only true way to express the beauty you see in an equation,must be through the language of maths rather than spoken language. Beauty, although in the eye of the beholder, is probably an intuitive function rather like a hologram. A combination of all knowledge of each specific aspect of a problem; which only comes with knowing!
-1

Glad the tutorial went well. These insights into the power and beauty of maths are inherently intuitive. I wouldn't try to rationalise them, just enjoy the epiphany of the moment - for my experience would suggest they may be quite rare. The real world of physics isn't too easily modelled by maths. I was really rather disappointed at university to discover that as soon as a problem got interesting the purity of the maths got diluted by the need to approximate and make assumptions. The maths gets horrendously complicated very quickly. The three-body problem is the obvious example.

There can be no better way to approach education than with one's eyes open to wonder. Good on you.

But mostly I don't see it. The numbers are there, and there they remain. I'd rather use words, because more people have a chance of understanding them, and me too.
BTW, Feynman seems to be out to get me: my physics tutor said I should read his lectures, and you have him listed as a demi-god!
I think the world is trying to tell me something here
Joanna

We seem to be on a similar wavelength. The difficulties we have in trying to understand the meaning of quantum theory seem to reside in a recursivity that our intellectual rationality cannot comprehend.

The whole is made of parts, but every part is informed by the whole - in a way which we have yet to even begin to understand. It represents an unbroken, unbreakable epistemic circuit. The original paradox of existence.

This wave/particle, general/specific, One/Many, whole/part duality is so pervasive that one cannot help but feel it must point toward some deep fundamental truth. I'm beginning to realise that my terminology is confusing for One/Many can easily be interpreted as Many/One (and I think I have already used it this way somewhere along the line), but perhaps this is further indication of the natural recursion that is always involved. Need to find some better words.

So, my big idea has a name. Thanks. I'm going to have to elucidate a little.

By the way, anyone see Gormenghast tonight?

Gormenghast tonight? What a spectacular production, what I could see and hear of it through the process of making marmalade! Rather too rich if there is any criticism to level, for my endearing memory of the books was of a grey, bleakness, although I may have been influenced by my age, when I read it. Made me want to get in the loft and find the books to read again. Very similar to the Peter Greenaway's production of 'The Cook the Thief his Wife and her Lover' of a title very similar. And in some way to 'Prospero's Books' if memory serves me correctly. Gormenghast certainly ahd a cast of stars.
-1

Glad you saw it. It has been many years since I read the books and, for me too, the abiding memory is of this intense doom-laden darkness. I was half expecting it to be in black and white. So I think I was inevitably a little disappointed, but not too much. I'm not sure, though, of what to make of my 8-year old son thoroughly enjoying it, and being upset that he's got to wait a whole week for the next episode!

By the way, I've just posted something on 'Mountains' that might hopefully explain the 'Serendipity Solution' just a little more clearly. I've also posted a guide entry entitled 'Superrationality'.

By way of goodnight, I feel the need to point out that I'm not nearly as intense as this forum suggests. Honest!

I also found the book depressing, and really enjoyed the programme. I almost didn't watch it because I wasn't in the mood for anything dark. I find quite often I return to a book I didn't like after seeing a programme or film made by people who loved it, and I usually find new things to enjoy.

As someone who has never studied Physics or Maths I hesitate to add my bit, but I really enjoy reading Richard Feynman.

I can see the appeal to an 8 year old as there's a flavour of Jonathan Miller's 'Alice through the Looking Glass' to the production, with Siamese Queens or Tweedledum/dees, (Groan's sisters) and Mad Hatters all over the place. Steerpike is a rather more active malicious Alice. The production verged on the cartoonish in some places but was very enjoyable none the less.

I took 'Superrationality' to bed with me and slept on it! See my response this a.m. in the 'correct' place.

Intense, is not something that applies to you in my mind. I assumed that you have other interests (running, family), it's only that if you're on a football field you tend to play football. This electronic field can be anything you want and if I remember correctly you wanted a wall to bounce ideas off ......... We are that wall!

Good to see that Bernadette has entered the fray. You and me too with regard to the studying bit but that doesn't stop you contributing!

I've read your update re the 'Serendipity Solution' but am sitting on it until I feel there's something to say or comment beyond repeating what I and other's have already said. it all sounds so plausible but remember what J. Bronowski said (In Independent today, Tues):

"The world can only be grasped by action, not by contemplation. The hand is the cutting edge of the mind."

The next question is, 'How do we implement Superrationality?'
-1

Hi Bernadette, and welcome to the conversation. I just love this medium of communication. Never before has serendipity been granted such license to work its magic. As you may have summised, I have big questions in my head, and big ideas. I'm really keen to bounce them around, first to develop them and find ways to communicate them better, and, second, to reassure myself that I'm not completely off my trolley. Any help would be very welcome.

-1, thanks for you reassurance, and for assuming this wonderful role as a brick in my wall. It is a two-way process, of course, so I'm hoping that you're getting some bounce back from me too.

I hadn't made the connection to Alice, but you're right, there are many parallels. I haven't yet met someone who saw the show having not read the book. I'm curious for a reaction.

I've always been very aware that action speaks far louder than words, and this has sat rather uncomfortably with me for far too long. The words are much easier than the action. As to how we implement Superrationality, I fear that I've yet to come up with the answer to that. I could well guess, though, that any movement towards a more superrational culture is likely to mediated via the Web. We do live at an amazingly pivotal time.

You have some intersting comments, so I'll pick up with those later @Superrationality, although perhaps not now. Too many late nights are beginning to catch up with me. Thanks again.

You linked to me, Serendipity
Thanks. But I do not write "pretty good poetry".

Wow!, do you have some fiendishly clever way of detecting these things? Or do you have a team of surrogate 'joannas' trawling around the site for you?

Re poetry: are you picking hairs with my bad English, or what? I read your poems and was moved by them. That's actually VERY good. I can change 'pretty' to 'very' if you like.