Dare to be abnormal

[coberst]

Dare to be abnormal

"When a story enchants us, we lose the sense of where we are; we are drawn into the story so thoroughly that we forget it is a story being told. This is, in Aristotle's phrase, "the suspension of disbelief."==Nigel Spivey, “How Art Made the World”

To understand is to grasp meaning; it is a suspension of disbelief. Understanding is a confluence of emotion and reason wherein I create that which is meaningful to me.

Know is see. Understand is grasp. These are rather common metaphors. Such metaphors help us comprehend.

Empathy is a technique for understanding. We can try to understand another person by creating a means whereby we can ‘walk a mile in her shoes’. We can create analogies of what the other person experiences as a means for us to ‘put on their shoes’.

An artist may paint in the manner of Picasso, or perhaps in the manner of a Rembrandt, or perhaps in the manner of a Monet. These different forms of painting represent different ways of seeing. They represent a personal understanding which provides us with a prism for seeing.

Mathematics is a way of seeing. Mathematics is the science of pattern. Imagine a very elaborate Persian rug. Imagine that you have only a small fragment of that rug. Mathematics offers a means whereby you might be able to construct the rest of that rug to look exactly like the original. Math can perhaps create a formula for the pattern in the rug such that you can, by following that math formula, exactly duplicate the pattern from which that rug was created.

Understanding is a stage of comprehension whereby a person can interject them self into the pattern through imagination. ‘Understanding is math’ because it helps the individual to ‘walk in the shoes’ of some other entity.

Understanding might correctly, in my opinion, be considered to be a personal paradigm. Knowledge is about truth but understanding is about meaning. Understanding is a means for placing the individual within the picture including the entity about which the individual wishes to become very familiar.

Understanding is a creative process that extends knowing. Understanding may or may not enhance the truth quality of comprehension. Picasso and Monet may paint the same object but have they captured the truth of that object?

Is truth anything beyond what humans have normalized (standardized)?

Does understanding aid or deter normalization?

Are you normal? Would you rather be normal than right?

Dare to be abnormal, but not foolish!

[YourSelf]

I think nothing is normal in this world.
There are only temporary stages of standards, but standards shift all the time.
Actually, we might be the people who will set these standards and what will be called "normal".

Sometimes normality is useful, other times not.

Sticking to it too much is compulsive indeed.

[coberst]

We comprehend a statement as being true in a given situation when our comprehension of the statement fits our comprehension of the situation closely enough for our purposes.

I think that comprehension is a hierarchy and can be usefully thought of as like a pyramid. At the base of the comprehension pyramid is awareness, which is followed by consciousness (awareness plus attention). Knowledge follows consciousness and understanding is at the pinnacle of the comprehension pyramid. We are aware of many more things than we are conscious of and that sort of ratio follows all the way up to understanding at the pinnacle.

Understanding is a far step beyond knowing and is significantly different from knowing. Knowledge seeks truth whereas understanding seeks meaning.

I think that we are slowly making intellectual normalcy lower and lower. We have filled our life with gadgets and have made it normal to waste away our time on trivial pursuits. We have dumbed down normalcy and seldom strive for understanding.

[Brutha]

I certainly wouldn't attach the normal label to myself.
There were time were I would have considered an insult if someone would have called me normal.

My math teacher once said, it is okay to be normal as long as you aren't normed.

There is no point in being abnormal for the sake of being abnormal.
Often it is important to first "understand" the normal before you move beyond it.
Being a Heretic is Hard Work

[YourSelf]

Originally Posted by Link posted by Brutha

But finding the precise way to make progress, to pinpoint the subtle shift of perspective that will illuminate a new way of looking at the world, will require an intimate familiarity with our current ideas, and a respectful appreciation of the evidence supporting them.
Being a heretic can be fun; but being a successful heretic is mostly hard work.

Words of wisdom

[coberst]

Normalcy = Conformity w/o CT (Critical Thinking)

Abnormalcy = Conformity Modulated by CT

[YourSelf]

Not always true.

Sometimes people are also Anti-Conformists just for the sake of it, and never think critically.

[coberst]

Originally Posted by YourSelf

Not always true.

Sometimes people are also Anti-Conformists just for the sake of it, and never think critically.

I think you are correct. It appears to me that many young people think that to be negative is to be cool.

[Brutha]

Normalcy = Conformity w/o CT (Critical Thinking)

Abnormalcy = Conformity Modulated by CT

Why do you think so? That is a pretty big claim.

In general a lot of the ideas that we consider as normal were once thought up by critical thinking persons, since persons who aren't critical thinking usually don't come up with new ideas.
Why should critical thinking lead always to other ideas than what other critical thinkers before us have thought?

[coberst]

Brutha

Critical Thinking: Art and science of good judgment

CT is an acronym for Critical Thinking. Everybody considers themselves to be a critical thinker. That is why we need to differentiate among different levels of critical thinking.

Most people fall in the category that I call Reagan thinkers—trust but verify. Then there are those who have taken the basic college course taught by the philosophy dept that I call Logic 101. This is a credit course that teaches the basic principles of reasoning. Of course, a person need not take the college course and can learn the matter on their own effort, but I suspect few do that.

The third level I call CT (Critical Thinking). CT includes the knowledge of Logic 101 and also the knowledge that focuses upon the intellectual character and attitude of critical thinking. It includes knowledge regarding the ego and social centric forces that impede rational thinking.

Most decisions we have to make are judgment calls. A judgment call is made when we must make a decision when there is no “true” or “false” answers. When we make a judgment call our decision is bad, good, or better.

Many factors are involved: there are the available facts, assumptions, skills, knowledge, and especially personal experience and attitude. I think that the two most important elements in the mix are personal experience and attitude.

When we study math we learn how to use various algorithms to facilitate our skill in dealing with quantities. If we never studied math we could deal with quantity on a primary level but our quantifying ability would be minimal. Likewise with making judgments; if we study the art and science of good judgment we can make better decisions and if we never study the art and science of judgment our decision ability will remain minimal.

I am convinced that a fundamental problem we have in this country (USA) is that our citizens have never learned the art and science of good judgment. Before the recent introduction of CT into our schools and colleges our young people have been taught primarily what to think and not how to think. All of us graduated with insufficient comprehension of the knowledge, skills, and attitude necessary for the formulation of good judgment. The result of this inability to make good judgment is evident and is dangerous.

I am primarily interested in the judgment that adults exercise in regard to public issues. Of course, any improvement in judgment generally will affect both personal and community matters.

To put the matter into a nut shell:
1. Normal men and women can significantly improve their ability to make judgments.
2. CT is the domain of knowledge that delineates the knowledge, skills, and intellectual character demanded for good judgment.
3. CT has been introduced into our schools and colleges slowly in the last two or three decades.
4. Few of today’s adults were ever taught CT.
5. I suspect that at least another two generations will pass before our society reaps significant rewards resulting from teaching CT to our children.
6. Can our democracy survive that long?
7. I think that every effort must be made to convince today’s adults that they need to study and learn CT on their own. I am not suggesting that adults find a teacher but I am suggesting that adults become self-actualizing learners.
8. I am convinced that learning the art and science of Critical Thinking is an important step toward becoming a better citizen in today’s democratic society.

Perhaps you are not familiar with CT. I first encountered the concept about five years ago. The following are a few Internet sites that will familiarize you with the matter.

Critical Thinking and Its Relation to Science and Humanism

cache:mkodBBrpMg0J:www.criticalthinking.org/TGS_files/SAM-CT_competencies_2005.pdf critical thinking multi-logical - Google Search

Critical Thinking: Expanding the Paradigm

Glossary - The Critical Thinking Community

http://www.doit.gmu.edu/inventio/pas...g03&sID=eslava

[Brutha]

You claim that most people don't think critically which is probably true.
But you can't deduct the statement: "If you aren't like most people you think critically." from it. I'm sorry if that's more or less Logic 101.

[coberst]

Well said!