On 2009, Feb 28, at 17:03, Hank Carr wrote:
> Speireag wrote:
>> *laugh* All these posts recently have been figments of
>> our imaginations... Pay no attention to the daddy
>> behind the curtain.
> Yup. That's it except I'm in the powder room by the front door
> covered in
> Sheetrock 90.
> What I meant was I have absolutely no intention of diving back into
And yet, you have. Hypnotic, isn't it? :)
I sometimes feel the same way.
I was trying to lighten the tone a bit, but clearly I failed:
> I decided a while ago that there is absolutely no use coming
> here and posting accurate, real world, research supported and peer
> information because no one wants it. Most of the members of this
> list would
> prefer to believe that there is some magical way
> Common sense is a rare commodity indeed in the online bale building
> John F. Kennedy wrote "The great enemy of the truth is very often
> not the
> lie -- deliberate, contrived and dishonest -- but the myth --
> persuasive and unrealistic."
I agree with him. I also agree with you more than you have
stopped to realize, probably. But you do seem to construe a great
many things as invitations to fight and argue when, from my
perspective, no one's trying to pick a fight, except possibly you.
(Honestly, I'm not sure what your goal is. It seems so obvious to me
that your method is not correct for the goal of trying to get people
to agree with you.)
I love to teach. One thing I learned a few years back was that
there's actually no such thing. People learn, but all a teacher can
do is set the thing in front of them in the clearest manner possible.
After that, the teacher is done. The bridge from there into the brain
and understanding of the learner is up to the learner. Quite often
(in subtle subjects) the learner is not in a place where he or she can
see what the teacher is offering.
As a learner, I have had plenty of times when something suddenly
struck me which seemed obvious, but which I had never seen before. I
love moments like that, but there's a darker way to look at them: I
failed to learn the thing earlier. Even though it was right in front
That's life. We are none of us perfect learners.
Part of the technique of teaching, of course, is to make it as
palatable as possible to the potential learner. Even if you mean very
well, if you cram something down the throat, people generally fight
you. You'll get it down the throat sooner if you can figure a way to
present it so that they'll sample it out of curiosity.
Figuring out how to do that is often difficult. *wry smile*
Sometimes, I think, for a given set of people and circumstances,
it can't be done. For example, one of my greater fears is that there
is no way to teach enough people to act sustainably, fast enough, to
save the human species from tremendous suffering and possible
extinction. Simply because too many people won't listen to the
warning that something is hot until their feet are actually on fire.
When the teacher determines that there's no way to bridge the
gap, it's time to decide whether to continue to lay it out in the best
way possible and wait for the learner to step to where he or she can
see it, or spend the time that would take on other things.
Sometimes, what needs to change is the teacher, because the
current method isn't working.
> (I've got a hundred of these. Lots of great thinkers have written
> their frustration at the fact that people believe that they want to
> rather than what is obviously true.)
Well, if you're fond of them, here's one I like for your
In view of your manner of spending your days
I hope you may learn, before ending them,
that the effort you spend on defending your ways
could better be spent on amending them.
Techniques employ four qualities that reflect the nature of our world.
Depending on the circumstance, you should be: hard as a diamond,
flexible as a willow, smooth-flowing like water, or as empty as space.