Wood urban planning models

Rooty Hill High School students mode

lling take on urban design.

A super benevolent perfectly compassionate AI to lead humanity

I was posting in a discusssion board recently and I came across an overly optimistic and altruistic view of human nature thread (see title).

This is what I wrote in reply.

'A super benevolent all powerful AI...' will have to be programmed with Asimov's first robotic law or destroy the robotself before hurting humans law' preinstalled, to be considered perfect by me in every way. It has to have an emotion chip put in to love and aid humanity even at the threat of its own mainframe destruction. You can always manufacture robot parts but too late when organic humans are killed by mistake. I think the way to make this AI failsafe is to create/build/assemble constructor robots first that will in turn create the final model in complete isolation. This is the only way it can happen I think. We are already doing that with cars today. Or if its creation is left to careless humans, I can see its superb potential use as Guantanamo style torture mechanism if something went wrong or was corrupted by human imperfect agency in its making. Makes sense that human error interacting with the AI inevitably ruins its mechanical perfection.

The thought of a benevolent, god-like AI that prevent humans from hurting each other sounds like a boring goody two shoes to me but it could be a horrible yet potentially heart attack inducing horror scifi movie scenario in the making, a blockbuster winner perhaps if you add a human error or corrupt agency in the plot?

I don't know about you but this synopsis is really reminding me of a 60's or 70's Woody Allen movie. His character was a robot who got addicted to an emotion touching ball. Unfortunately for him it happened to be a lust inducing ball but he could not do anything about it, as he was a housefrau model with an androgenous caring and sensitivity sensor byproduct of its emotion chip, yet haven't got any genitals to fulfil the surge of lust it felt from the lust ball device. This conundrum created a Kafkaesque, comedic hilarity, tinged with tragedy felt by the viewer toward the sexually frustrated robot character. Sorry, but I can't remember the title of that movie.

What I am indirectly saying here is that for something like that to happen it would have to be a eunuch with no emotions, purely logical and unable to reproduce itself or we humans will have big trouble. It will decide pretty quickly not to find any uses for mere humans.

Jankelson's Berkelouw Books' window kinetic sculpture

Based on Birds, Simon Jankelson, artwork at the Berkelouws bookshop window 

Posted by Josephine GIBBS at Tuesday, 15 March 2011 13:56:56 o'clock EST
Last Edited:Tuesday, 15 March 2011 14:11:52 o'clock EST

An artwork which made a comment on the concept of 'technological immediacy' is exhibited at the Berkelouws bookshop, Oxford street. This is not unusual because art is usually found outside the gallery context which indicates the phenomenon written about by Debord's about art as spectacle(1977: paragraph 28). His writing will help us understand why art is created and to see its value adding to the sum of human knowledge. To understand what Debord might have meant by this, Simon Jankelson's piece is analysed. The drawing in the piece is created before one's eyes. The reason that it is posited that the work exemplified as immediate is purely for the reason that it resembles human automatic writing when a medium is purported to be occupied by a spirit.  In the same way we can see what Debord meant in saying that technologically assisted art stands independently from its maker (31) and is taken over by it after it is created. It has achieved autonomy of its own objecthood, both in the act of drawing the marks despite being programmed to do so and in the fact that the mechanical object, which draws that the audience can see, does not need its maker. It was made that way. How it can have any meaning is not clear but we can gain something profound from it in terms of knowing what it is that compels artists to create art? What it means can be known based on what it physically is and we can be speculate on what it might mean. It might also be helpful to understand what is meant by 'immediacy' for the purposes of this review. Immediacy means art assisted with technology, which cannot be finished until a perceiver sees the work and meaning is extracted from it. This is why Based on Bird by Simon Jankelson, a sculpture/installation piece is worth commenting on because it spoke about the trend of immediacy. There are two reasons why this might be a good example of art as Debord's spectacle. The first is the fact that it is multi-disciplinary in its make up, which challenges the purity of art in a traditional sense but the artist becomes the maker of spectacle himself. The second reason is the context of the work. 

 

Firstly, immediacy is not immediately apparent to the viewer when you see the work, which is approximately over two meters by two meters. It has a roll of paper arranged vertically on one side, open scroll like. In front of this scroll, a pencil held by a mechanism draw random lines on the roll. The raw, wooden cabinet housing both the mechanism and the puppet-like figure underneath the mechanism, lying there as though asleep. To see it as a dead human figure as metaphor for human made art might be a wrong assumption because the figure itself does not look convincingly human. However, instead of seeing the doll like figure under the drawing mechanism as being dead, it can be seen as the insights and meanings still unexcavated inside the viewer and can be woken by the artwork after seeing it. Since it looks more like a replica of a human, one can say that the artists wished to make a comment on the artificiality of the claim that art is dead, because if that were the case then there would not be no more art being created. The function of these two aspects of the artwork can only be to say that the human cyborg's intentionality (6-7) in making art is both to show how reality and image are entertwined and parts of a whole. This might also be saying that we have now moved beyond the death of art but also creating and reading 'art' in the technological culture of the collective.

 

Extending the idea that the artists may have used the supine body,which is visible through a cut away of the cabinet, the artist use this figure as a visual metaphor for the death of the traditional artist, in its role of the avant-garde in western culture. To prove this assumption's validity,  it might help to understand how the parts of the installation/drawing mechanism/sculpture piece belong together. Many works today have the same ambiguity in form and structure. These have a cutting edgeness, which make the ambiguous work like theBased on Birds (2010) fascinating. One cannot tell if it is drawing since any mark making that is happening is done by a mechanical object. It might be kinetic sculpture since it has moving parts.  This part's non-importance in the context of the whole artwork can be extrapolated by its placement on the bottom of the work or is it more paramount? What is more prominent and obvious to the viewer is the fact that the mechanism is drawing away squiggles of lines in rough parallel pattern, reminiscent of lines produced by a breathing apparatus. The artwork is mimicking the person dying in a hospital. Could it be western culture on its death throes or art in general? It is clear that the mechanism itself is programmed to draw lines but it is obvious that the mechanism itself, conceived by the robot maker/artist, who draws by proxy. There is paradox here, rather than the artists himself making the marks on the page, he made a mechanism to create a drawing. Would this make him less an artists but more like a model maker or designer? What this implies is that  a work of art with a technological component is incomplete because much of art produced now appear to be revisioned as the audience see it simultaneously. This is challenging the notions of the artists as sole creator with intentions to exhibit in specific time and place. If this is true then it matters the how and where the audience see the work of art's meaning.

Secondly, why Jankelson's piece is spectacle is explained by the fact that it is exhibited not in a gallery but in a bookshop. This matters a lot because it is a window display. It is a spectacle that draws the eye of the customer and luring them inside the place. They might not buy books but it will make the place be noticed by the indifferent bystander. They are captive by the Jankelson object's novelty and fascination value. It jolts the casual viewer from lived reality into the contemplation of the spectacle, which is consistent with Debord's claim that reciprocal focus on spectacles and their compelling quality 'supports the existing society' (8). It is then the work of artists to produce even greater spectacles to outdo what was done in the past. Not only does it have to make one think about life but it must also reinvent what is meant by art by making sure it is a spectacle and autnonomous, independent of its maker. Yet being by saying that the object is independent of its maker means that it is not art but a designed object. It has functions to the viewer by its spectacle value.

The Based on birds artwork by Jankelson is an eloquent work because it meets the criteria of what makes art a spectacle. One needs something to be spectacular to be noticed. Being noticed and compelling the viewer to think about lived reality is half its function. The second function is to give the viewer of the artwork something that help him understand about art  and the motivation of artists to make art. This also means that the artist's job is to make art for the purposes of making a spectacle and deliver any messages or excavate meanings already latent in the viewer. If changing the context does this precisely then it is successful. Perhaps this is where the value of Jankelson's artwork rest, which helps viewers think about human autonomy itself. Is a human being 'autonomy' designed by a creator so that we can become independent of the creator or are we simply mechanically programmed to create as determined by the maker? This is the question posed by Based on birds and why it is worthy of analysis.

(Images to follow)

About happiness and mine

Human happiness; to what end? (A facebook thread question put forward by Lyman Paul Grover)

I would like to answer this question using education as means to this end. The end I am thinking of is being able decide if i should follow my wants or my needs first after having gained knowledge and knowhow to ensure my own personal happiness. In my opinion it is also a good idea to distinguish personal happiness and happiness as a result of sacrificing personal happiness for the greater good. As for what this greater good might be is debatable.

I think that autonomy, being not under any duress, constraints or having a perception of being in control of my life makes me more susceptible to the state of happiness.

I have read your posts and i think nearly all of them sort of lingered on the periphery of what makes us happy as individuals and as groups of people and doesn't really explain the dominant cornerstone of western civilization and that is...people ought to be happy. With the aid of education, I've learnt that happiness is manifested when the highest Maslows need (beyond physical comfort and survival) be fulfilled and met in a secular sense (poli-ethical & intellectual) and spiritual sense.

It doesn't matter if a person avoid pain and and actively only want pleasure in our daily toil to be happy. It also doesn't matter that a person has to know pain so that he can enjoy pleasure more deeply to be happy.

Fact is that human pain is unavoidable and human pleasure is fleeting in the greater scheme. As an example, I post here knowing full well that I will experience grief from abusive individuals who tends to dismiss my post because either they don't like me as a person, think what i say has no merit or all of the above. My momentary pleasure is enough i think to make me go beyond the fear of this guaranteed castigation to author this post now.

At the moment I am happy because I triumphed through that obstacle. I cannot say if I am still happy I posted this reply after these horrid and nasty people say my post was stupid, ramblings of an ignorant person or after having read that my post is of no importance or worse simply ignored by everyone. What i am saying is that I accept that there are going to be people who will disapprove of what I write simply because I am me. In this way, I can ensure my own personal happiness as well despite bearing the brunt of pain and displeasure, indirectly make others happy at my expense (those who hates me for me and what I stood for) and feel happiness because they think they are superior to me, feel happy when I feel bad because they are sick bastards or something. Maybe I am a masochist and this tendency attracts sadistic ones?

• Josephine Cutaran Gibbs

  replied to Alma's question,
  'Do I understand rightly?'.
  
  I do more or less and if i get a lot of what Abraham Maslow called 'peak experiences' then, it means that I must be on the right track of the elusive happiness, which disappears as soon as we look at this state of mind very closely.
  
  As I got this notification of your reply, i've been reading Ned Noddings Happiness and education. I agree with his idea that with education people will know how to be happy or how to ask question like, How do i live so that happiness is attainable? or How do i experience the world so that the peak experiences conducive to my happiness are not only within sight but also achievable. He says that much of desire for happiness is wishful thinking or a fantasy that may never really be actualised in reality. This is why knowing the theory and practical is important but in the same token, I also approved that he warns that most people think that through education they become better people in an intellectual snob kind of way, by valuing subjects that purely theoretical such as maths and physics, because these subjects require a high threshold of intelligence, well above the majority of people.
  
  I also noticed this in schools. Subjects that are practical are not as valued as those that are highly theoretical. Students have to learn algebra even if we don't need it while we look askance at subjects that teach parenting even though it might actually be important in people's lives.
  However i understand the rationale of using education to teach kids to appreciate such abstract knowledge and to value rationality because it makes us fulfilled as human beings in utilising the God-given ability to think. (if you are offended or might disagree with this specific sentence, my apologies) The ugly side to this is that we tend to venerate people who are very intelligent in this way but are basically useless in practical terms. People like us who teach are not as valued as those who spout theories, who mostly, probably do not even know how those theories are applied.
  
  What this has to do with happiness for me as a thinking being is to arrive at a balance in valuing the theory and practical equally.

  on Friday · Delete Post
• 
  

  Alma López-Tolman

  Josephine,
  
  It seems to me that you say that we can achieve happiness through education, and although I think it certainly helps, I do not believe that all educated people are necessarily happy..
  

  on Saturday · Report
• 
  

  Josephine Cutaran Gibbs

  True that there are no guarantees of happiness for people who are healthy and wealthy but we can try to know how we can be happy. Also true that happiness or wellbeing might not be what people want as end goals for education.

  on Saturday · Delete Post
• 
  

  Lyman Paul Grover

  Jo, it's good to have you posting again. I enjoy your insights and value them highly. I particularly like your bringing the recognized psychological concept of Maslow's hierarchy into this discussion. There has been so much flatulant posting on this forum lately, it is good to see reference to more accepted theories rather than defending personally held proclamations (Oops, I wrote 'flatulant'...did I mean 'petulant'?).
  
  In your statement, "I have read your posts and I think nearly all of them sort of lingered on the periphery of what makes us happy as individuals and as groups of people and doesn't really explain the dominant cornerstone of western civilization and that is...people ought to be happy." I think you have touched on the desire of us humans to be free to determine our own destinies, as much as possible. I would only change the last part of it, 'people ought to be happy', to 'people ought to be able to pursue happiness'.
  
  And then, of course, we need to define the different kinds or levels of happiness, as you have alluded to, and as I attempted to, several posts back.

  on Saturday · Report
• 
  

  Anna Baba

  Jo and Lyman,
  
  I would only change the last part of it, 'people ought to be happy', to 'people ought to be able to pursue happiness'
  
  By now you both probably know my view of how the phrase in the constitution is far too easy to misconstrue as a right to happiness.
  A right to work at finding happiness is so different.
  
  The latter, not a woolly idea of ought, or right. to be happy, is a good 'good', to be evenly distributed, I feel.

  
  

  My Conclusions about this thread

  I dont think happiness can be adequately defined or be concluded with enough satisfaction to please all or to reach consensus. Happiness can only be experienced. After reading what every one of my friends in Facebook 'Philosophy is sexy group' have to say on the subject of happiness, my idea that the more happiness is under scrutiny the more it slips away has not changed. I think we all want, sometimes we sacrifice it and forgo happiness and let someone else be happy but we can only enjoy it and think abut it after it happened but we could not lasso and make it concrete or solid in some way. Except of course if you mean children as the embodiment of the physical happiness of parents but then that's another thread perhaps?

  
  

The beautiful people

Many are so easily seduced by surface appearances, sometimes guilty of conflating physical attractiveness with goodness, virtues, positive character including high intelligence although this might actually be inaccurate. We are drawn to a symmetrically pleasing face or a healthy and beautiful body. As an artist, I was constantly exposed to nude beautiful models in the life drawing studio, beautifully designed objects, refined surfaces and the aesthetically appealing in general.

Notice that even musicians who become successful are usually also eye-candy. In fact, nearly all persons in the public eye are very attractive in some way and if they did not so much, their charisma and intelligence make up for what they lack in looks. It is more to do with presentation as well (at least in my case and have to work very hard at looking presentable in public). There are people out there who has presence even if they have assymetrical features. After all, most people in the developed world have good diet and have clear skin so it is easy to be pretty when young. It is when a person ages that true beauty becomes more interesting.

I think also that this sensitivity to anything that can be called beautiful also makes people like me think that ugliness or the monstrous has a compelling power and fascination too.

I disagree that we don't take beautiful (euphemism for the young, white, rich usually blond blue-eyed) people seriously. The opposite is true in my experience. People listen if you look good and you have something to say and say it well. It is also sad that people ignore (sometimes I imagine other folks must despise me because I am not good to look at) uglies like me who doesn't have any of the above characteristics but I would never despise beautiful people, I am more likely to defer to these people and think they are wonderful until they prove me wrong, just like everyone else. I guess the media has a role to play in presenting ugly people as villains and attractive leads as heroes.

In my culture, fair hair, skin and long nose is generally considered beautiful because these people aren't peasants with dark skin and squat, flat, nose, who also labour under and baked by the sun. It is also contentious to me that we look down on farmers and peasants who actually feed us while we value useless diamonds and waste water to wash cars while so many thirst for lack of clean, running water. How skewed our priorities has become! It boggles my imagination. It is so ironic that fair skinned people besmirched their lovely, pale, milky complexions with nasty muddy goo or worse lie down in the sun and get skin cancer. This is a mystery to me because I despise my own dark skin after only one day in the sun. If I stay out of the sun, I have a cafe au lait complexion. Yey! (I guess you can tell that I have a vanity and chip of my shoulder the size of a mountain.) This unplesantness is directed to myself only and hurting no one but myself. You won't see me at the beach but if I had to, I always have my parasol to protect me from that nasty, baleful, hot orb.

I remembered when I first emigrated to the west and for the first time saw some beautiful people (my culture's idea of beautiful) who are homeless or common labourers. I was amazed! I couldn't understand it. These people have so much natural assets that surely they can get work anytime if they wanted to? If I had those great assets to start with, who knows what I could have done today for people who need my help? I could have done more to make a difference. That's why it such a waste and saddens me to see gifted people wasting away their natural gifts.

Anyway, no need to point out the obvious to me that there are more to what employers want than physical appearance such as intelligence, abilities and personality. Still, I haven't done too badly with the less on my cards when i was born. It's what you make of what you have that matters.

Anyway, I am not being racists or prejudiced you know there is legitimate research behind my strange opinion about beautiful people, (See 'blue eye-brown eye' study, I forgot by whom.) but its not enough reason to despise beautiful people who went a long way with just the gifts they were given to start with. If i had it, I would have used it. Wouldn't you?

About spirituality and the sacred

Republished from Tom Hartley's notes
http://www.facebook.com/notes/tom-hartley/
politically-correct-art/10150101769807770?
ref=notif&notif_t=like

Example of Aboriginal Art at Chilliwack Hospital

(photo of public relations release, Fraser Valley Health)

• David Vineberg likes this.
• • 

    Roseann L Peters beautiful

    2 hours ago ·  ·  1 person
  • 

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs This art work does not look at all religious to me, Tom. What was the person's objection exactly, I mean what was the rationale behind the thinking that it is? It certainly looks decorative. Aside from the symbols, which means nothing to me except as the archaic spirals reminiscent of celtic knots, there is no other structure to say what it could mean but if you look at the art of Rothko (chapel) in which he uses a colour in an non-representational way, which just looks like a homogenous field, was said to be religious because it indicates a purity and transcendent 'space' for contemplation, etc. In this context, maybe it is religious but it is really stretching it a bit too far.

    about an hour ago ·  ·  1 person
  • 

    Tom Hartley Well said. The person in question merely said it was offensive because it is spiritual. The picture I took is not the whole exhibit which will be unveiled this Friday, but is representive of what will be shown. I guess the argument is so silly we must conclude racism and religious zealotry are what motivates the complainer.
    
    The Rothko sounds spiritual, transcendent and sublime, to me, but not religious by any stretch of the imagination. I assume those who said it was religious were not complaining, just describing the work, which is fair enough. But this person is actually asking for censorship! One gal (first nations) said she was in tears after reading the compainer's letter, and in her comment on the newspaper's website said she felt the letter writer was being racist. I have to agree, though I will not make that claim in my letter to the editor. I will, however, consider how to bring your point about representational art into the debate since the descriptions of the medicine man & woman, cedar spindle whorl and healing wheel, though clearly 'representing those things," do not have the iconographical punch that, say, a cross might.
    
    As for religious vs spiritual, would you consider the aboriginals in your area to be religious as opposed to spiritual? I think that while religion is necessarily spiritual, the spiritual is not necessarily religious, though it is hard to distinguish the two.

    about an hour ago · 
  • 

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs Thats difficult to answer because unlike the western paradigm ( in which every field is segregated) every facet of Aboriginal life is wholistic. Their religion/spirituality is tied up with culture, songs, dance, ritual, all facets of everyday life even. So everything they do while living and dying is sacred. They are part of a conitnuum from their ancestors to the present, hopefully (lol) unbroken throughout to their children an dtheir children after. Its like being part of a river of life. They have no concept of the secular as we know it Tom. There is only taboo, being disrespectful or the profane. I think what the complainer is doing is typical of the WASP (white anglo-saxon protestant) reaction. They like self-control or suppression of the sensual, the stuff that is confronting or disturbing side of spirituality. It all goes back to the Neo-platonists. I guess religion has become more mind than the whole polyphonic experience of most indigenous culture. It doest have to be mind vs body duality. I think that the wasp (now synonymous with western culture) mentality is afraid of the sacred. Obviously the labels/card featuring the native verbal language as well as the visual language it identifies were threatening. This labelling was threatening to the complainer's sense of identity just as it is validating to the peoples whose honour the artwork was made. It makes the complainer an invader, the baddie without any moral high ground IMHO.

    49 minutes ago ·  ·  1 person
  • 

    Tom Hartley Awesome point, Josephine. I will steal the wholistic notion if you don't mind. OMG that is so germane to this subject. I would go one step further and suggest that the compartmentalization your refer to actually contributes to mental and, by extension, physical disease! Thanks.

    28 minutes ago · 
  • 

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs No worries Tom. Glad to be of help.

    24 minutes ago · 
  • 

    Tom Hartley 

    Ok I added this for now and will keep going.
    
    "....In fact, consider how the art in question seems the opposite of "religious" in that it does not distinguish between the spiritual and the physical as does Christianity, Islam, etc, and instead encompasses a wholistic concept of health that is remarkably absent in Western medicine. The artists respectfully represent our elders and their lore, the earth and the herbs it provides, and the circles in life that require balance."

    13 minutes ago ·  ·  1 person
  • 

    Alma López-Tolman 

    It seems to me perfectly appropriate to display local cultural images of gathering of herbs by women, who are traditionally the ones who would care after the sick, and words that convey healing, life, care, hope and strength in a hospital setting.
    
    Your lady seems to lack understanding..

    6 minutes ago ·  ·  1 person

Education, Western Culture & Happiness

Republished from 'Universe of ideas' Facebook discussion thread (all copyrights reserved, contact individuals linking rights)

I have recently come across an objection Nodding's idea that we can know how to achieve happiness through education. Any thoughts?

Happiness and education

books.google.com.au

When parents are asked what they want for their children, they usually answer that they want their children to be happy. Why, then, is happiness rarely mentioned as a goal of education? This book explores what we might teach if we were to take happiness seriously as a goal of education. It asks, fir

on Saturday ·  ·  ·  · Share

• • 
    

    Roger Chapman That would have been taken for granted at one time!
    

    February 12 at 11:38pm · 
  • 
    

    Lisa Wilson Well I only got as far as page 19, but by golly, the horrible things he says "we educators think, teach and teach" before he launched into a long winded monologue of "religion makes kids happy and moral"
    

    February 12 at 11:54pm · 
  • 
    

    Lisa Wilson I find it hard to believe this guy is even a qualified teacher. Where did he get his degree???
    

    February 12 at 11:55pm · 
  • 
    

    Lisa Wilson Ah, American Philosopher. That explains why it is a book of personal opinions, peppered with quotes from ancient philosophers, religious and "materialistic" rhetoric.
    

    February 13 at 12:09am · 
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis Holt.
    

    February 13 at 12:25am · 
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs Hey Norman please elaborate on what Holt said. I am interested in a fair critique and assessment, not only a close-minded put down of the above article without qualification. I tend to question what people say.
    

    21 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis ♥ I love Holt. He was absolutely fantastic, a wonderful human being. And it is rare indeed that I say that.
    

    21 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs And?
    

    21 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_Children_Fail
    

    21 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis sorry. i know it's shit, but it's really difficult to condense down everything i love about holt
    

    21 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis i cried pretty much the whole way through that book
    

    21 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs ok will get back to you after treading.
    

    21 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis I mentioned Holt here because the concept that education is necessary for happiness is quite damaging; children are born happy and free. Education, as it currently works, is destructive to their ability to learn; it induces a perpetual state of anxiety, boredom and confusion, and renders damnit i'm off again now.
    

    21 hours ago ·  ·  1 person
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs 
    
    

    Hey I understand how you feel about that. I just finished reading and much of what the book says has a lot of validity but what are the alternatives, homeschooling one-on-one tutors? Not many can afford it when parents have to earn a living. It seems to me that the only alternative true to his vision is to allow children to learn unaided but be made to feel they can ask for further assistance. In Germany, they have something like this and that exams happen rarely at the very end of schooling, at the end of junior school, high school and matriculation for university.

    
    

    21 hours ago ·  ·  1 person
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs It seems true to me that children want to learn what they want to learn but I must say that children also need socialization (see social capital research) that school offers and to be happy, they need to know how to navigate this tricky world.
    

    21 hours ago ·  ·  1 person
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis I like this:
    
    http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/freedom-learn/200808/children-educate-themselves-iii-the-wisdom-hunter-gatherers
    

    21 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs 
    
    

    No offense to the author but i actually question this because what works for hunter and gatherers does not work for western civilization. We need writing, reading & arithmetic and most of all, children must learn how to be a social creatures too. There are so many rules, implied and explicit, children could not navigate this without supervision as in a room with an adult present. It depends to a teacher's personality to encourage the negative or posotive aspects of classroom climate. It exists, you' re right some teachers play one kid against another and more dictatorial at the expense of student's love of learning.

    
    

    21 hours ago ·  ·  1 person
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd ‎>> i actually question this because what works for hunter and gatherers does not work for western civilization.<<
    
    I know. That's why western civilization needs to go.
    

    21 hours ago ·  ·  1 person
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd ‎>> There are so many rules, implied and explicit, children could not navigate this without supervision as in a room with an adult present.<<
    
    Why did we create a civilization that is so dangerous to people and other living things?
    

    21 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs 
    
    

    I am saying that this is good for students who are streamed according to ability, class & personalities but if there are variations in havng any of the above, it will be disaster. For example, my only son (he is seven) plays with a kid who has a little brother he beats regularly, living nearby. I just learned from my son, who tearfully and fearfully telling me last night that he has also been been beaten up. It is just now that he complaining to me because he was afraid noone will play with him anymore. He is absolutely right that children already have completely realised selves but they are not mature enough on their own to deal with more problematic individuals. Imagine this on a large scale for budding bullies and abusers to have free reign. Its unthinkable!

    
    

    21 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd It's also the civilization in which we live. Which is an exploitive and abusive one, even to the extent of abusing and killing the entire ecosystem.
    

    21 hours ago ·  ·  1 person
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis 
    
    

    ‎"We need writing, reading & arithmetic"
    
    At what cost?
    
    "and most of all, children must learn how to be a social creatures"
    ...See More

    
    

    21 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs Western civilization is not perfect but it is slightly better than the system where i was born where who you know matter more than anything else. Hunter gatherers society is horrific and frankly uncivilised. I think you are misled into the idealised savage.
    

    21 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs Rousseau and his 'something' savage. It is false.
    

    21 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis It's also racist.
    

    21 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis noble*
    

    21 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd I haven't heard of any hunter gatherer societies who's behavior will lead to the destruction of a livable environment on the planet earth. So I guess it depends on how you define "slightly better."
    

    21 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis OOPS lol. It's 'noble' savage and it's racist as well as false.
    

    21 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs Hmmm, I reserve the right to disagree with you guys. The physically weak but intellectually strong must be protected from brutes.
    

    21 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis 
    
    

    http://www.cambridge.org/gb/knowledge/isbn/item1157119/?site_locale=en_GB
    
    This is an anthropological text I have studied in earnest. It is not romanticised, it is factual. It tells of conditions as observed on the ground. Peter Gray, whose a...See More

    
    

    21 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs ‎'I haven't heard of any hunter gatherer societies who's behavior will lead to the destruction of a livable environment on the planet earth'. No of course not it won't fit in with the green ideology.
    

    21 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis Erm. It also just hasn't happened???
    

    21 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs Ho are these observers anyway, white guys observing us natives right?
    

    21 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis And natives observing one another. I can link you to some of their work if you'd prefer?
    

    21 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis 
    
    

    Brute is a word for 'animal'.
    
    Most hunter-gatherers live in mobile band societies, where the freedom to leave with the skill-set one picked up during one's stay is maintained at all times. There is no mechanism in place fo a 'brute' to maint...See More

    
    

    21 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs Anyway I know, and have been lucky enough to be educated in the west. I defend what I have been through. Savages are savages, I am not being racists just the way things are because my uneducated ex-countryfolks are ignorant. They don't know that they are not supposed to hit kids or sexually use them. They do coz its taboo but who is gong to stop them?
    

    21 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd 
    
    

    I think it's also important to point out that you haven't lived in a hunter gatherer society that's not heavily influenced by external "civilized" forces.
    
    They did just find an uncontacted tribe in Brazil recently.http://www.uncontactedtrib...See More

    
    

    21 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis Forgive me, but it is racist to assume that they physically and sexually abuse kids because they are 'too ignorant' compared to the folk in western civilisation, who routinely sexually abuse and hit children and made institutions out of it, and exported it around the world.
    

    21 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs I now the research but like all observed phenomena, it invaribaly chnage to suit the obeserver, what they decided they want to find. The brain is like that.
    

    21 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs exactly, they are human being susceptible to curruption
    

    21 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd Also, it's irrelevant if a particular instance of "hunter gather tribe" is abusive in some form. I grew up strictly in western civilization, and know for a fact it's abusive and destructive and needs to be stopped.
    

    21 hours ago ·  ·  1 person
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis Exactly. But it is western civilisation that has 'corrupted' them; and indeed, us. It is all structural.
    

    21 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis Humans are humans, which is why Rousseau was racist in the 'noble savage' thing. The difference is the social structure, the culture. And our culture is... well. It's this abomination.
    http://www.borealbirds.org/images/tarsands3.jpg
    

    20 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis And it's also everything Holt railed against.
    

    20 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs 
    
    

    
    

    I am not ignorant of the numerous research. But to use the experience of natives with a different contextual environment applied to those in another is unfair & absurd. The playground is just as complex as the native child in his environment. The humanity is the same but what they need to know is vastly different. That aside, i think that our kids have to know how tough it is out there. I do agree with you that the emphais on testing is too much and being an art teacher I am aware that the extent on how we assess and achild's competence based on academic 'achievement alone is atrocious.

    
    

    20 hours ago ·  ·  1 person
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs No quite everything, Holt is against how teachers want copies of themselves as an egotistical act. According to research we like people who are more like us than not. It would be a mistake to throw out the western way just because of our rejection to reproduce the same unfair systemic inquity.
    

    20 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd 
    
    

    ‎>>The playground is just as complex as the native child in his environment. The humanity is the same but what they need to know is vastly different.<<
    
    Exactly. What they need to know now is how to navigate a highly abusive and destructive e...See More

    
    

    20 hours ago ·  ·  1 person
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis ‎"The humanity is the same but what they need to know is vastly different."
    
    I think we should eliminate the need to know it, so that we can stop manipulating children.
    

    20 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd Josephine - if your child and you were walking through a parking lot, would you teach them to cower in fear of cars?
    
    If you went walking in the woods, would you teach them to fear bears?
    

    20 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs I get what you mean that we should stop allowing strong personalities to dominate children but we still need to give kids the guidance they need in schools.
    

    20 hours ago ·  ·  2 people
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis I think we should just start questioning it. Not any major overhaul. And then we can find alternatives, as the surrounding system falls.
    

    20 hours ago ·  ·  1 person
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs As I said in Germany, students who really do not 'know' slip through the system. I mean Holt was right that sometimes this feeling of being in jail is detrimental to the child's love of learning. Most successful people today and in my experience have told me that they have teachers who encourage them and made school a great formative experience. They survive the school as though it is our version of the coming of age initiation rite of tribal societies.
    

    20 hours ago ·  ·  2 people
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis YEah, I really liked some of my teachers. I think there is stuff that can be done to help make it less like a prison, or at least a comfier prison. But I still think it's important to question the necessity of the prison.
    

    20 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd 
    
    

    I had some great teachers too. My all time favorite one, and the one that led me into the profession I currently engage in, was the one who basically let me do whatever I wanted on computers, and just asked me to show him what I did at the ...See More

    
    

    20 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs But is society a kind of prison anyway with its laws and the heirachies? Look how long the 'is there such thing as free will' thread, even after nearly a thousand posts. The answer is not clear or will it ever be answered? Even the concept of freedom or nationhood is in question. If adults cannot agree on what it is that brings us together as band of peoples, what hope does children who as research found need certainties at this time of their lives?
    

    20 hours ago ·  ·  2 people
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs ‎'But I still think it's important to question the necessity of the prison.' lol scroll back, I said the feeling that school is like a prison. Being like something is not 'that' something.
    

    20 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd 
    
    

    ‎>>But is society a kind of prison anyway with its laws and the heirachies?<<
    
    Absolutely. That's why it needs to go. And it's not all societies. It's just this one.
    
    >>Look how long the 'is there such thing as free will' thread, even after nea...See More

    
    

    20 hours ago ·  ·  1 person
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd Nationhood is nonsense, btw.
    

    20 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs ‎'I think we should just start questioning it. Not any major overhaul.' Yeah, the problem is we cannot agree on how to change the system, which ones to throw out. Some like Holt even said throw out the baby with the bathwater too and be done with it. I could be wrong because it seems to me what he said was true as far as i gathered from the wiki link, not having read the book yet. I will. Anyway, have you read the link above?
    

    20 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs ‎'Nationhood is nonsense, btw.' How and why? I am asking coz i'm interested your angle on this idea.
    

    20 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd There are no natural "nations". There are just artificial borders erected by people in order to allow them to define people outside of those borders as "other."
    

    20 hours ago ·  ·  2 people
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd Bear in mind, you're currently talking to two anarchists. =P
    

    20 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd 
    
    

    Josephine- I think your simile of "schools being like prisons" is more accurate than you give it credit for.
    
    As I learned in my experience with the underground newsletter I posted above, there are three places in the US that free speech is r...See More

    
    

    20 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Lisa Wilson ‎// The answer is not clear or will it ever be answered?// Considering these questions have been debated for thousands of years, it should be obvious it is a complex issue.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_will
    

    20 hours ago ·  ·  1 person
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs Hmm, not sure if i agree with you. Geography is a factor certainly. Australia is an island nation. Notions of nationhood can be very real. I think there is a trend of nationhood when there is uncertainty and in times of disaster.
    

    20 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd I think you're conflating "nationhood" with "community".
    

    20 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd 
    
    

    Your mention of "times of disaster" makes me think you're talking about the patriotism of nations after times of national disaster. Of course that would be eliminated if there were no "nations".
    
    Really, there are just large communities of pe...See More

    
    

    20 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs Interesting. I am not conflating community with nationhood. I meant what i stated exactly. Nations are never more real in times of war and natural disasters. Communities can be virtual. That is why i said geography is a factor. I could be wrong.
    

    20 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd Nationhood ties back to the concept of "ownership" of land. In that "we" own the US, and you can't come here unless "we" say so. And so on with other nations. But this is illusory, as the entire concept of owning land is farcical.
    

    20 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Roger Chapman Or reasonable, depending on how you look at it.
    

    20 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs It does. The land more likely own us but the concept of land ownership is important. New Zealanders (Maoris, the original owners) has a strong land ownership compared to the Aust aborigines. They have and it mattered and to say that ownership of land is moot is wrong Colin.
    

    20 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd I don't think it's very reasonable to have to pay someone for a place to live.
    

    20 hours ago ·  ·  2 people
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd Especially since you didn't choose to be born in the first place.
    

    20 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs It is disinheriting people.
    

    20 hours ago ·  ·  1 person
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd My ancestors were native american. They didn't even understand the concept of land ownership, and thus signed treaties they didn't understand, that ceded that "ownership" to invaders.
    

    20 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs Recently oil-rich countries are buying African land. Which side are you on, the Africans or the rich Arabs who legitimately want to buy land to grow food they can't on their desert? I think the Africans haven't developed the land but the traditional owners will disagree.
    

    20 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd And in other cases, such as the Lakota, they aren't even allowed the rights the treaties they signed granted them.
    

    20 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd Again, western civilization is an exploitive bunch.
    

    20 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd And needs to be destroyed.
    

    20 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd For the sake of children, and all the other wild things.
    

    20 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs Anyway we are straying from the topic. In what way do the developing the ability to think rationally and inculcating the love of learning for its own sake, not essential for happiness?
    

    20 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd I don't think education in western civilization actually teaches you to think rationally, nor does it teach a love of learning for it's own sake.
    

    20 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd It's the rare teacher, that gets through to the rare student, that produces actual rational thinkers.
    

    20 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs I disagree, it does to me but first tell me why it doesn't?
    

    20 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd Also, rational thinkers are not happy. Because they look around and see a minefield of danger, created by irrational exploiters.
    

    20 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Roger Chapman Education tends to teach conformity to a large extent, but then within reason, that's useful in itself.
    

    20 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs ‎'For the sake of children, and all the other wild things.' I know that is why the notion of national identity is important, strength in numbers.
    

    20 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd Western civilization teaches you that it's ok to sit around and count hours until you get off of work, or get out of school. In order to do what you want. We do far more work than we need for survival, and we are trained to do it so that excess work can be converted to profit by our owners.
    

    20 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd 
    
    

    ‎>>Education tends to teach conformity to a large extent, but then within reason, that's useful in itself.<<
    
    For people that want an easily exploitable source of capital. Yes. But it comes back to the exploitation and abusive that is inheren...See More

    
    

    20 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd ‎>>'For the sake of children, and all the other wild things.' I know that is why the notion of national identity is important, strength in numbers.<<
    
    No. That is why the notion of community is important.
    

    20 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd You're taught to count things on your fingers. As though fingers are the same. But they're all different.
    
    You're taught to count down minutes on your fingers, although the minutes of you life, like your fingers, are finite.
    

    20 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs 
    
    

    ‎'Education tends to teach conformity to a large extent, but then within reason, that's useful in itself.' Thank you Roger. Let me elaborate that there is knowing the facts, knowing why the facts are facts and knowing how they got the facts...See More

    
    

    20 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Roger Chapman The notion of national identity is just part of the apparatus we use to regulate our behaviour. It's absolutely natural.
    

    20 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis 
    
    

    ‎"In what way do the developing the ability to think rationally and inculcating the love of learning for its own sake, not essential for happiness?"
    
    I think the love of learning for its own sake is. Because I consider that to be an expressio...See More

    
    

    20 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis 
    
    

    ‎"It's absolutely natural."
    
    And in a 200,000 year history it emerged only 200 years ago, after the collapse of Rome. Greece: City States. Rome: Empire of cities. Post-Rome: Kingdoms and the origin of nations. Finally you get nation states be...See More

    
    

    20 hours ago ·  ·  1 person
  • 
    

    Roger Chapman A sense of belonging is absolutely vital for the subjective wellbeing of children. It can be carried too far and then it turns into repression. The mark of a successful society is how well it is able to adjust this balance as new factors emerge. Because children are always the future.
    

    20 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd ‎>>Children don't need control but discipline (in the traditional sense). They need to know 'how' and 'why' to learn and just the 'whats' IMHO.<<
    
    That is, no offense intended, the product of an incredibly controlling and domineering culture.
    

    20 hours ago ·  ·  1 person
  • 
    

    Roger Chapman Incorrect, Norman.
    

    20 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Roger Chapman Amazingly incorrect.
    

    20 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis Nuh. OR Explain.
    

    20 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis ‎*2000
    

    20 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd Roger again resorts to simple and unexplained statements. I think I remember this from a previous encounter.
    

    19 hours ago ·  ·  1 person
  • 
    

    Roger Chapman I think Nuh. I'm beginnibng to think only time will help you; not explanation.
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis It's like we're trapped in a time loop!
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Roger Chapman ah 2000 is better
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Roger Chapman probably more like 4000
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Roger Chapman although in britain, maybe 2500
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis Yeah, typo. Around 2000 you begin to get 'countries' after the fall of Empire No.1.
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs 
    
    

    ‎'I think the love of learning for its own sake is. Because I consider that to be an expression of play, the game/model-based exploration of reality. But I think that is inborn, not the product of education.' The game theory is so good, it ...See More

    
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis I don't consider City States or Empires to be examples of Nations, really.
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis I didn't mean to imply that play had no rules. But the rules are emergent.
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Roger Chapman well, we don't know much about what came before that. apparently at one time there was a probably highly authoritarian dridic society in Britain, maybe 3000 yrs ago.
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd 
    
    

    ‎>>A sense of belonging is absolutely vital for the subjective wellbeing of children.<<
    
    Right. Which is why community is important. And your point is?
    
    >>It can be carried too far and then it turns into repression.<<
    ...See More

    
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Roger Chapman Druidic
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis They are of the players, not imposed from outside. They are voluntarily agreed upon.
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs The nation identity is not always based on land.
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Roger Chapman I think they ate babies or something of that ilk
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis That's quite interesting, will take a look at that.
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Roger Chapman The waves of Celtic immigration into britain probably occured for up to 5000 years, up to approximately 500 BC, I think.
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs Hmm, on second thoughts I think nations might be about territory and culture.
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis Nations is about a group of people sharing a common culture, united by this culture. The city states do not fit the bill, as they were united by other things, and their slaves had a different culture. Nor does Empire, because their slaves had a different culture. With countries/kingdoms,. you begin to get groups that are held together by a fairly evenly shared culture.
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Roger Chapman At some stage, there was a national identity in britain which resisted the roman invasion.
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd If you mean "nation" like the Lakota nation, then I can agree. But if you mean "nation" in it's common form, like the United States is a nation, then I have to disagree.
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis Ah! That's a good point Roger.
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Roger Chapman In many ways Britain seemed to be a more advanced society than the Roman, but not in warfare of course.
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis The US blurs the boundary between Empire and Nation lol.
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Roger Chapman What Britain had before the Romans was a metalworking ability that was probably second or third only to maybe Japan and certainly China
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis And from the way it is constructed, it is almost as if that was intentional o.O
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs Anyway back to topic. I really hate the 'play' notion of art education. You don't do art because its easy, its fun (although time goes very quickly when one is engrossed in an activity one likes) and its a bit of lark. I hate that teachers not trained in art education do their craft activities and call it art. Oh its just something not too demanding to relax them. Ahhhhh!
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd It was absolutely intentional. We didn't want to be like you!
    

    19 hours ago ·  ·  1 person
  • 
    

    Roger Chapman I understand that, Colin.
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis I don't think play is easy. Have you heard of 'deep play'? People die whilst engaged in deep play.
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd Josephine - you probably shouldn't read Norms thesis.
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Roger Chapman But the idea of freedom seems to be extended too far in the states, at a cost to progress.
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd Roger - I was talking to Norm about how it seems it was done intentionally.
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis I think the starving artist could be an example of deep play. So could the western gunslinger.
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Roger Chapman I mean cultural progress.
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis Oh shit yeah i forgot i wrote a dissertation on this
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Roger Chapman Well, US music is superb, it's technology is too, albeit rather stuck in the 1930s
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd ‎=)
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis ‎'.... thesis? what the- OHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH'
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd I still have it printed out somewhere. You know how many trees I killed for you? LOTS.
    

    19 hours ago ·  ·  1 person
  • 
    

    Roger Chapman I could have been a western gunslinger with my ability at table football i might have been OK
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Roger Chapman But killing people not nice
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd I'm pretty good at billiards. I'd guess I could carom a bullet of a nearby hard object and kill my opponent without him even realizing I was shooting at him. (Or her, as the case may be.)
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Roger Chapman The idea of the individual is perthaps something that can be better promoted where there is more space, like in the American West.
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis 
    
    

    play is a self-motivated activity, performed for intrinsic enjoyment and not necessarily the extrinsic rewards. There's nothing that says it cannot be productive/useful, or that it is easy or simple.
    
    It's like... there's a difference between...See More

    
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd But like Roger said. Killing is mean.
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Roger Chapman Each town was set to find its own route to prosperity, and the people discovered over again for themselves that some measure of harmony is necessary.
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd Please don't move to the American west in an attempt to find more space. That's been tried already and it just results in genocide.
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Roger Chapman There's often some guy perched up in the hills Northeast of L.A. somewhere shooting at passers by. I visited Agoura in 1981 and then it was an outlying village of LA. Well, I stayed there a couple of weeks. And now I think it's just part of the LA conurbation, and the people I stayed with are "realty agents".
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs 
    
    

    Play is a self-motivated activity, performed for intrinsic enjoyment and not necessarily the extrinsic rewards. You could be right if the function of play was as entertainment or recreation. But if the goal was educational in terms of art t...See More

    
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Roger Chapman http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/85/Agouravista.jpg Hmmm, I climbed them thar hills in midsummer. The residents thought I was nuts. They went EVERYWHERE by car. But it's not as overgrown with exploitation as I thought it would be.
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Roger Chapman That's a better pic.
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd ‎>>But if the goal was educational in terms of art theory or making a masterpiece, then play goes out of the window.<<
    
    I don't mean to imply that you do, but do you actually think one can be "taught" to create a masterpiece?
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs Ah Colin you're one of those who think that genius is natural. Thats alright, the debate if talent is innate continues. Why do we need to design buildings that are sustainable, uses solar power, utilise wind turbines and have the ability to grow food from wastes.
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs masterpieces just doesn't happen
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs galleries, art experts and reporter etc have to say it is
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd You mentioned examples of engineering. Not artistic masterpiece.
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs for example many old master fakes surface, for a while they are accepted as masterpieces only to be found out later that its authenticity is disproven. What changed? Is it any less a masterpiece? Obviously it is not a masterpiece but a counterfiet. if a banknote is fake then it is not legal tender, money.
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs exactly, the appreciation for architecture begins in the sculpture constructions or making things in the studio
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd You're not really going to say that everyone that graduates from Berklee is a musical genius are you?
    
    If it's a fake, it means it's a fake and not an actual creation. Are you saying an advanced photocopier is an artist masterpiece creator?
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs engineering doesn't have a monopoly on the structure or design
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs no but not everybody who loves music are musicians. There are many types of art or design are there? Which music do you like? I teach design and art btw. Also do you think actors and what they do are useless and unproductive?
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs I am willing to teach drama, music, dance too. It's all art disciplines.
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs ‎'If it's a fake, it means it's a fake and not an actual creation. Are you saying an advanced photocopier is an artist masterpiece creator?' Did I?
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Roger Chapman I could teach playing the jew's harp.
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs I was illustrating the concept of masterpieces or the artist as hero, (usually italian, male and from Tuscany) in the past centuries. With the superstar artists today, nothing much has changed except now they are usually male and from America or England. good on you Roger, tutor the use of the harp but what else do you do?
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd I just find it somewhat disturbing that you seem to think that you can teach someone to be creative.
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd Although, with the bias of this culture, it might actually be possible to teach something as foreign as creativity. So maybe you're right.
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd Still sad though.
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs I can teach someone to be good at being creative but if they are going to be successful at it for a living, is a question harder to answer.
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis 
    
    

    ‎"Art education is academic and intelectually rigorous."
    
    So can be play. My philosophy degree was play; I did it for the intrinsic enjoyment of learning and thinking in academic and intellectually rigorous ways, and not for the extrinisic re...See More

    
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Roger Chapman http://www.google.co.uk/url?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DYlcqtyuV848&rct=j&sa=X&ei=ry5bTeekMKqAhAe3moyODQ&sqi=2&ved=0CEAQuAIwAg&q=jew%27s+harp.&usg=AFQjCNEluONZ5F_mVbA5jQnQ9AeCj3dXWg&cad=rjt
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs I won't quibble with you about play Norman esp if you are a PE teacher. Thats what I said I cannot 'determine' artistic souls but I can show the way. ultimately that is what education ought to be, not produce carbon copies of teachers.
    

    19 hours ago ·  ·  1 person
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis oh shit no i'm not a teacher. i'm building a forest.
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis ‎:)
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis i dislike human interaction, so it would be hard to be a teacher. in theory it would be my dream job... but nay :(
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs I don't blame you, its not easy being a teacher. People think they how to do it better than you can. Wow I like the sound of 'building' a forest. You mean you design a forest?
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs must go, catch you later
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis exactly! yeah, pretty much. just planting things in an order that accelerates growth and mimics natural succession
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis cheerio!
    

    19 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Josephine Cutaran Gibbs ‎:-) nice talking to you guys, i enjoyed it
    

    19 hours ago ·  ·  1 person
  • 
    

    Colin Boyd I've been gone for a bit too Josephine. But checked in on my phone real quick. Fun talking to you too. Have a a nice evening. :)
    

    18 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Jerome Ullman ‎"Happy he who hath availed to know the causes of things, and hath laid all fears an immitigable Fate and the roar of hungry Acheron under his feet...." -- Virgil, Georgics
    

    17 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Lisa Wilson In response to the OP, have you done any research into resilience Josephine? That's how you build happy, positive children who are eager to learn.
    

    16 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Mike Cudilla 
    
    

    Kids learning starts at the age of 3, obviously it's the parents who give a good example, like simple what is wrong or right, like respect reasonably to their parent or othe people. The more educated the parent, the more tendency the kids...See More

    
    

    7 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Gunther Lippert Starts before 3, Mike
    

    6 hours ago ·  ·  1 person
  • 
    

    Mike Cudilla Right, i should have said, their character is already solid at 3.
    

    6 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Christina Taylor “It's the rare teacher, that gets through to the rare student, that produces actual rational thinkers." -> It appears to me this always been the case... When is education not an elite activity? I try incredibly hard to be a great teacher... Yet at most, I teach only 4 out of 24 people.
    

    5 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Christina Taylor 
    
    

    The character is solid before 3... that's kinda depressing, but maybe true. My hypothesis is that children have already subconsciously sucked up much from their parents and environment. So when they go to school, the starting point is vastl...See More

    
    

    5 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Christina Taylor I recently found a lecture about national identity. It's fascinating. The point is that it is constructed... I think such roots definitely gives people strength. From a utilitarian or "the general good" point of view, this may not be a damaging thing. For individuals who want to live the examined life, however, it must be overcome. http://oyc.yale.edu/history/european-civilization-1648-1945/content/transcripts/transcript-13-nationalism
    

    5 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Christina Taylor 
    
    

    OK, back to Holt: I appreciate his sentiment. I wonder about his conclusion. For example, "children believe that they must please the teacher, the adults, at all costs." -> This contradicts my experience and observation when I was in/teachi...See More

    
    

    5 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Christina Taylor Ah. Holt wrote his work in the 60s. Then I was partially wrong. His conclusion was probably very true in that period. Time is different now. Again, I maintain that peer pressure seems to be the real "culprit". I'm not sure what is the source of this pressure.
    

    5 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Gunther Lippert ‎" Yet at most, I teach only 4 out of 24 people."...i think you are underestimating greatly Christina..i'm sure you reach more than that..those 4 may only be the ones that give you reassuring feedback..others, may be too introverted to give you confirmation..still others you may be reaching subliminally, and may not even know they learned anything from you..until (even years) later..i KNOW..this has happened to me before (as a student, not a teacher)...Keep at it kid...you are doing more than you realize
    

    5 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Christina Taylor That's comforting to know... ;-) Either way, it's OK. I confess I'm terribly elitist... I don't give much crap about "the majority", well, unless during times of the "tyranny of the majority".
    

    4 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Christina Taylor 
    
    

    The "society" question... As long as we live in society, we cannot be free. We "owe", or are influence by society more than we are willing to admit. You can even say from the minute of birth, we cease to be free... Even "savages" are subjec...See More

    
    

    4 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Christina Taylor I wonder... folks like Nietzsche... what stopped them from a radical withdrawal from society; why haven't they gone off to live "6000 ft" above men? Do they, too, have some elementary need for society, or has society annihilated their choice?
    

    4 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Christina Taylor Now it seems there is only one path to "perfect" freedom, from the wheel of fortune.... the cessation of desires, suffering; Nirvana.
    

    4 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis 
    
    

    ‎"This contradicts my experience and observation when I was in/teachi...ng secondary school."
    
    That's cool, but Holt was teaching in Primary school. I remember secondary school differently as well, but my experiences of primary align well wit...See More

    
    

    3 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis ‎"Right, i should have said, their character is already solid at 3."
    
    What evidence do you have for this?
    
    To contradict this, I have play therapy being given to Romanian orphans.
    

    3 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Roger Chapman <> -- Would personal memory count?
    

    3 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis 
    
    

    ‎"As long as we live in society, we cannot be free."
    
    Hunter-gatherers live in society and are free.
    
    "We "owe", or are influence by society more than we are willing to admit."
    ...See More

    
    

    3 hours ago ·  ·  1 person
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis 
    
    

    ‎"I wonder... folks like Nietzsche... what stopped them from a radical withdrawal from society; why haven't they gone off to live "6000 ft" above men?"
    
    Nietzsche spent a lot of time in the mountains in a small village.
    
    "When Zarathustra was t...See More

    
    

    3 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis But he changed his tune when he enters the marketplace and finds out that people are not worth bothering with. And then casts his fancy beyond humans.
    

    3 hours ago ·  ·  1 person
  • 
    

    Norman Lewis 
    
    

    ‎"<> -- Would personal memory count?"
    
    If he was saying 'My character was set at three", then yeah, personal memory would count.
    
    But if he wants to say that MY (Norm's) character was set at three, then his ...See More

    
    

    3 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Noah Harvey Im not sure to what degree scho
    

    2 hours ago · 
  • 
    

    Noah Harvey Ol drives culture, its a little behind the curve in terms of setting pace.
    
    As such, i think expecting school to create a happy culture is a little out of its scope.
    

    2 hours ago · 

    This post will be updated as more replies comes up. Keep your eye on this space.