Knowledge-Based Education – We oppose the teaching of Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) (values clarification), critical thinking skills and similar programs that are simply a relabeling of Outcome-Based Education (OBE) (mastery learning) which focus on behavior modification and have the purpose of challenging the student’s fixed beliefs and undermining parental authority.
*(1)
This paragraph can be found in the Education Section of the 2012 Texas GOP Platform.
Really!!
For someone such as myself, this is pretty scary stuff.
But... what exactly is going on here.
Well, in my opinion, there are those people in the world who would feel far more comfortable if, the rest of the people in that same world, were less capable of questioning what the former wishes them to believe.
So... here goes!
I may be going way out on a limb here, but think I’ll start with the book of Genesis 2-3 . Having been warned by God to not eat the fruit from the tree of knowledge (it probably wasn’t an apple by the way), Eve, tempted by the serpent (evil), and then followed by Adam, disobeyed God, both eating the fruit and leading to “Mans fall from grace”.
From this point forward, the battle lines between faith and reason were being drawn.
To me, the primacy of “Free Will” began here. That every man has the ability to choose, many would argue, between good and evil, I would argue rather that the point is of choice only. This concept, “Free Will”, would provide fundamental principal to both Philosophy (reason) and Faith (theology).
Endless debate, historic and current, question not only the existence of “Free Will”, but also it’s role, if any, in the “Human Experience”.
This idea of choice is fundamental to my understanding of thought.
But... to make a choice, I must first think. And to think I must......
Here’s where it gets a bit complicated.
Choice requires knowledge. But... knowledge does not necessarily require thinking.
With little if any thought regarding the source or accuracy of the knowledge, a choice can still be made.
The authors of the paragraph preceding this paper, would doubtless, support this latter model for making a choice.
Now, I choose (pun intended) a different model, one a little surprising even to myself, owing it’s roots to my own Father. A deeply religious man, of a fundamentalist Baptist persuasion, he none-the-less instilled in me a deeply suspicious nature. He would caution me, the Bible not withstanding, that for any information, you should always consider it’s source. What is their agenda? Additionally, “follow the money”, meaning who stands to gain from this, was another often heard bit of advice.
His Anabaptist roots would burrow far deeper into my being than any of his more modern fundamentalist Baptist teachings. That and his desire that I should embrace reading and receive a strong education. His belief in “Free Will”, of informed and willing choice, would in his mind, eventually guide me to choose the faith at the proper moment.
While that moment never arrived, the concept of “Free Will”, of individual choice, of responsibility for choice, of thinking before making a choice. These lessons would pass to me and form the very foundation of my thinking.
However, these “roots of knowledge”, planted in my youth, would grow to eventually undercut the very choice I’m sure he would have wished for me.
This I understand all to well, is a primary driver for paragraph number one.
Now, a foundation is but a beginning, education must follow to provide the necessary tools for thinking and choice.
The “toolbox”, if you will, I’ll call “Critical Thinking”.
Highly subversive to some, threatening, heretical even, depending upon the era.
But, what is “Critical Thinking”?
Critical thinking is a way of deciding whether a claim is true, partially true, or false. Critical thinking is a process that leads to skills that can be learned, mastered and used. Critical thinking is a tool by which one can come about reasoned conclusions based on a reasoned process. This process incorporates passion and creativity, but guides it with discipline, practicality and common sense.
The list of core critical thinking skills includes observation, interpretation, analysis, inference, evaluation, explanation, and metacognition ( knowing about knowing).
The habits of mind that characterize a person strongly disposed toward critical thinking include a desire to follow reason and evidence wherever they may lead, a systematic approach to problem solving, inquisitiveness, even-handedness, and confidence in reasoning. *(2)
This reasoned approach to thinking, can only in part be taught. Some would argue, that it can’t be taught at all. I steadfastly believe these skills can largely be taught but, in addition to possessing these strong critical-thinking skills, one must be first be willing to engage problems and decisions using those skills.
Most of us posses some, and, perhaps some of us even, most of these skills.
Fewer still, have the disposition to regularly apply these skills to their everyday lives.
Those who do are likely the product of an “enlightened” educational system, perhaps another time and place. Be grateful for both, for as I think you can see, there are those who are threatened by these skills and even seek to limit or eliminate them outright.
With the growing complexity of the world and times in which we live, there has never been a time which more demanded that we use these skills to their fullest. There has never been more information available, so many agendas to determine. True/false, real/imagined, fact/fiction, authentic/manipulated.
Never has it been easier to manufacture “illusion” and never has it been more difficult to ascertain the “truth”.
We should, therefore all find the words of paragraph one to be quite disturbing.
This thinking is not limited to Texas.
No, this is all around us.
Without these essential skills, subsequent generations will find themselves less and less equipped to filter true from false.
You know, there’s not even some evil conspiracy at work here. It’s the only logical outcome really.
If your market, your constituency, they lack the skills to make their own enlightened choices, then your task, whatever you might be “selling”, just got markedly easier.
Remember.... “just follow the money”.
Sources:
*(1)
Texas GOP rejects ‘critical thinking’ skills. Really. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/texas-gop-rejects-critical-thinking-skills-really/2012/07/08/gJQAHNpFXW_b
*(2)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_thinking
Additional Reading:
“New Law in North Carolina Bans Latest Scientific Predictions of Sea-Level Rise”
http://abcnews.go.com/US/north-carolina-bans-latest-science-rising-sea-level/story?id=16913782
"Evolution at Center of Debate over Science Textbooks and e-Books"
http://www.dallasnews.com/news/politics/headlines/20130915-evolution-at-center-of-debate-over-science-textbooks-and-e-books.ece?nclick_check=1
“The Skeptical Enquirer”,
http://www.csicop.org/si/archive
"The Skeptical Inquirer" is the official journal of the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry. Six times per year Skeptical Inquirer publishes critical scientific evaluations of all manner of controversial and extraordinary claims, including but not limited to paranormal and fringe-science matters, and informed discussion of all relevant issues.
Friday, January 31, 2014
Friday, January 24, 2014
"So Where Do You Go To Church?"
The third in a series of seven
“So where do you go to church?”
Or
“Have you found a church yet?”
It’s been a while, but if you, like me , are an emigree to these southern parts, then you’ve doubtless heard these words. Probably more than once.
I don’t particularly think of myself as being overly thin-skinned,
But... I have to say I was just a bit taken aback when first confronted by these words.
Yes, I know, the proper comment is likely, “they meant well”, “they were only trying to be friendly”.
Even so.
One could possibly take this another way, or two or...
Well, we know you’re a good Christian so...
Mine’s the best, so you should go there,
You do go to church, don’t you?
I would never consider asking such a question of someone I hardly knew, or knew well for that matter. I just wouldn’t. Now, I’m not really one to stomp all over people’s toes when it come to matters of faith.
In my mind it’s really a very private matter, not something you wear on your sleeve or something to make someone feel uncomfortable about.
I would never question another’s faith, or lack thereof.
It’s not my place to do so.
For me, life started in a very conservative Baptist home.
My “crisis of faith” came early on. At thirteen to be exact. The more I learned of the world around be , the more I wondered about all these otherwise decent people who were “going to hell”, their only “unpardonable sin” being that they had not accepted Jesus Christ as their savior.
One morning during Sunday school, I raised my question to my teacher. “How, how is it possible that all of these good people will end up in hell, just because they’re not a Christian?”
My father answered, “you must first accept Jesus as your savior and you will be saved”.
With all due respect, I found this answer to be wanting.
My mother and father were both very good people, the best, but this would result in a schism between us for the rest of their lives.
It saddens me to this day.
I have nothing but the greatest of admiration for my father’s unwavering faith and the strength it gave him through a long and wasting illness. That, I may have even envied.
I must admit, however, to a certain bitterness toward a belief system that would, throughout their entire adult lives, divide a son and his parents, all of whom I regard as good people.
So you must be thinking, you’re an Atheist, right?
An Agnostic?
No, not at all.
To embrace these descriptions , in my opinion, requires an almost “religious zeal” in opposition to faith.
I have no such opposition.
If you are strong of faith and it guides you in such a way that you live a moral and fulfilled life, then I am nothing but happy for you.
I may not agree with your faith, but I’m not about to question your devotion, let alone “try to lead you astray”.
As I said earlier, I may, perhaps, even envy it.
All that I ask of you in return, please respect my choice of “faith”. You don’t have to agree with me, but, please , leave me in peace to pursue my choices in life. Don’t condemn me, you most probably don’t even know me. Don’t try and “save me”, it is not your place. It is a very private matter, one which does not concern you.
I was a child of and I am a man of Science. I believe in man as an agent of change. I believe not in “original sin”, but in the inherent goodness that lies within us all, although at times this belief is severely tested.
A Humanist you say? Secular Humanist perhaps?
Again with the labels.
Secular, maybe.
Humanist, somewhat. But... science, reason if you will, just as with faith, can never yield all of the answers.
Faith ask that you just believe.
Science ask that you test every belief.
Neither, in my opinion, can be absolute.
God works in mysterious ways. Well many can be explained through science.
Science can answer many unknowns. But... science cannot answer all questions. Push beyond a certain range of understanding, and... science is, for a time at least, unable to explain.
This is the realm of what I would describe as “unponderables”. That which is beyond the ability of science to explain, given our present level of understanding.
You could subscribe to faith to explain these “unponderables”, that would be perfectly acceptable with me. However, I may choose to believe that someday, our level of understanding will progress to the point where science will be able to explain them. Maybe... maybe not. They are to me, after all, “unponderables”.
Though I may not view it so, it quickly becomes clear to me how faith and reason came to be such enemies.
I am also forced to recount that of which my childhood mentor Margaret Patton warned me, “the more that you learn in life, the less happy you will be”.
Perhaps?
Earth Water Sun.
My grandpa, me, freshly turned earth. Even in my youth, the smell reached deep into my consciousness. The sense of deep contentment in being there. The smell permeates me, lingering long after I leave the field. Today, as then, I am easily overcome by the sense of the soil, of new-mown hay, lavender on the plains of Valansole, the maquis, all reminding me, I am of this.
I sit, resting by the shore. Fresh or salty. I smell the water. I see the sun as it reflects. I hear the incessant rhythm of the surf, Distant memories. Amniotic sea? The rhythm of her heartbeat?
Thirst quenching water . Ancient longings... reptilian brain? Floating in the embrace . Life.
Sol, thank’s be to you, from whom all life is possible.
If I have a prayer, perhaps this would be mine.
Warm embrace. I am enveloped. Vanquish the dark days of winter. I draw life from thee. Solstice, I celebrate. Oh joy the equinox. Long days, the light. I await you.
Wooded mountains, foggy morning. Damp mist against my body. So quiet. The soft outline of Pine trees before me. The babble of a creek beside me. The sweet-moldy smell of the leaves at my feet. A slight breeze brushes my cheek. Sol... unfocused, warmth diminished. Struggling to pierce the mist. Birds chirping. Cows bawling. Day reborn. Walking... arriving nowhere.
Water... seemingly endless in the “vignette” of the mist. “Spirits” rising off the surface, the scent of wildflowers opening. Sol, stronger now. My skin, ever warming. My body... ever stronger. One with one.
Celtic past. My forebearers, their “faith”, as mine.
Deep roots. Earth, Water and Sol.
I give thanks to thee, from whom all is possible.
“So where do you go to church?”
Or
“Have you found a church yet?”
It’s been a while, but if you, like me , are an emigree to these southern parts, then you’ve doubtless heard these words. Probably more than once.
I don’t particularly think of myself as being overly thin-skinned,
But... I have to say I was just a bit taken aback when first confronted by these words.
Yes, I know, the proper comment is likely, “they meant well”, “they were only trying to be friendly”.
Even so.
One could possibly take this another way, or two or...
Well, we know you’re a good Christian so...
Mine’s the best, so you should go there,
You do go to church, don’t you?
I would never consider asking such a question of someone I hardly knew, or knew well for that matter. I just wouldn’t. Now, I’m not really one to stomp all over people’s toes when it come to matters of faith.
In my mind it’s really a very private matter, not something you wear on your sleeve or something to make someone feel uncomfortable about.
I would never question another’s faith, or lack thereof.
It’s not my place to do so.
For me, life started in a very conservative Baptist home.
My “crisis of faith” came early on. At thirteen to be exact. The more I learned of the world around be , the more I wondered about all these otherwise decent people who were “going to hell”, their only “unpardonable sin” being that they had not accepted Jesus Christ as their savior.
One morning during Sunday school, I raised my question to my teacher. “How, how is it possible that all of these good people will end up in hell, just because they’re not a Christian?”
My father answered, “you must first accept Jesus as your savior and you will be saved”.
With all due respect, I found this answer to be wanting.
My mother and father were both very good people, the best, but this would result in a schism between us for the rest of their lives.
It saddens me to this day.
I have nothing but the greatest of admiration for my father’s unwavering faith and the strength it gave him through a long and wasting illness. That, I may have even envied.
I must admit, however, to a certain bitterness toward a belief system that would, throughout their entire adult lives, divide a son and his parents, all of whom I regard as good people.
So you must be thinking, you’re an Atheist, right?
An Agnostic?
No, not at all.
To embrace these descriptions , in my opinion, requires an almost “religious zeal” in opposition to faith.
I have no such opposition.
If you are strong of faith and it guides you in such a way that you live a moral and fulfilled life, then I am nothing but happy for you.
I may not agree with your faith, but I’m not about to question your devotion, let alone “try to lead you astray”.
As I said earlier, I may, perhaps, even envy it.
All that I ask of you in return, please respect my choice of “faith”. You don’t have to agree with me, but, please , leave me in peace to pursue my choices in life. Don’t condemn me, you most probably don’t even know me. Don’t try and “save me”, it is not your place. It is a very private matter, one which does not concern you.
I was a child of and I am a man of Science. I believe in man as an agent of change. I believe not in “original sin”, but in the inherent goodness that lies within us all, although at times this belief is severely tested.
A Humanist you say? Secular Humanist perhaps?
Again with the labels.
Secular, maybe.
Humanist, somewhat. But... science, reason if you will, just as with faith, can never yield all of the answers.
Faith ask that you just believe.
Science ask that you test every belief.
Neither, in my opinion, can be absolute.
God works in mysterious ways. Well many can be explained through science.
Science can answer many unknowns. But... science cannot answer all questions. Push beyond a certain range of understanding, and... science is, for a time at least, unable to explain.
This is the realm of what I would describe as “unponderables”. That which is beyond the ability of science to explain, given our present level of understanding.
You could subscribe to faith to explain these “unponderables”, that would be perfectly acceptable with me. However, I may choose to believe that someday, our level of understanding will progress to the point where science will be able to explain them. Maybe... maybe not. They are to me, after all, “unponderables”.
Though I may not view it so, it quickly becomes clear to me how faith and reason came to be such enemies.
I am also forced to recount that of which my childhood mentor Margaret Patton warned me, “the more that you learn in life, the less happy you will be”.
Perhaps?
Earth Water Sun.
My grandpa, me, freshly turned earth. Even in my youth, the smell reached deep into my consciousness. The sense of deep contentment in being there. The smell permeates me, lingering long after I leave the field. Today, as then, I am easily overcome by the sense of the soil, of new-mown hay, lavender on the plains of Valansole, the maquis, all reminding me, I am of this.
I sit, resting by the shore. Fresh or salty. I smell the water. I see the sun as it reflects. I hear the incessant rhythm of the surf, Distant memories. Amniotic sea? The rhythm of her heartbeat?
Thirst quenching water . Ancient longings... reptilian brain? Floating in the embrace . Life.
Sol, thank’s be to you, from whom all life is possible.
If I have a prayer, perhaps this would be mine.
Warm embrace. I am enveloped. Vanquish the dark days of winter. I draw life from thee. Solstice, I celebrate. Oh joy the equinox. Long days, the light. I await you.
Wooded mountains, foggy morning. Damp mist against my body. So quiet. The soft outline of Pine trees before me. The babble of a creek beside me. The sweet-moldy smell of the leaves at my feet. A slight breeze brushes my cheek. Sol... unfocused, warmth diminished. Struggling to pierce the mist. Birds chirping. Cows bawling. Day reborn. Walking... arriving nowhere.
Water... seemingly endless in the “vignette” of the mist. “Spirits” rising off the surface, the scent of wildflowers opening. Sol, stronger now. My skin, ever warming. My body... ever stronger. One with one.
Celtic past. My forebearers, their “faith”, as mine.
Deep roots. Earth, Water and Sol.
I give thanks to thee, from whom all is possible.
Saturday, December 28, 2013
"The Myth Of Self"
The second in a series of seven
Fifty-odd years.
It’s not even a wink in the “eye of time”.
But, perhaps, enough time to observe some small, subtle changes.
Now, I’m not going to pretend to be naive about it. There has never been an acceptance of individuality in our culture, or most cultures for that matter.
Yes, we have paid lip service to “the myth of self”. To those rugged individualists, who, stood up for what they believed in. Fought the good fight, regardless the consequences. And, we lionize the “outsider”, the slightly dangerous, the bad boys in our popular culture.
But... in the realm of our individual lives, our concern becomes more of our immediate circle, our place in that circle and how best to maintain it. Individuals, outsiders and the bad boys do not factor well into the orderly shape of a circle.
It’s true. We’re all subject to the pressures of our peers. With our “myth of self”, most of us are uncomfortable with that “truth”, but none-the-less, it is what it is. It’s necessary for the orderly operation of a society.
Isn’t it?
Is our social fabric so fragile? Does it’s very survival really depend on an ordered conformity? The subtle and not so subtle repression of that which is different?
Being a student of the “human experience”, I like to imagine I’m keenly aware of what’s going on here.
Evolution, the social just as with the biological, is always in a constant state of flux.
Sudden and often radical alterations of the environment can result in the appearance of mutations. Now, most mutations don’t survive for long. Some are of little consequence. Some even threaten the survival of the organism. However, occasionally, a mutation will come along that is positive, an improvement in some way. If the organism is able to incorporate the change, it becomes stronger because of it.
I think you can see where I’m going with this.
“Social evolution” follows a similar track. Environmental changes... conflict/peace, poverty/prosperity, geographic/cultural differences, disease and natural disasters. All can result in “mutations”, those individuals who are just a little different from the rest of us. They may have a slightly different take on things than you do. They see problems and answers where you may not. They may provoke or inspire you to thoughts you may have overlooked. Sometimes, they can posit an idea that is truly exceptional, unique , an “ah-ha” moment if you will.
Conversely, they may present ideas that represent a clear and present danger to all of us.
Or... they may just fizzle and disappear, ignored by the “normal” squeezed aside by the pressures to conform.
More recently, these “mutations”, these agents of change have come to be known as the “creative class”. The truth of course is that, whatever they’ve been called’, they have always been a part of the “human experience”, beginning with day one.
Civilization as we know it is largely a product of their efforts.
I submit that it is only normal that a society will inevitably attempt to resist the “threat” posed by the influences of such individuals. Furthermore, I submit that this resistance in itself, in all likelihood, is as equally essential to it’s continued survival.
May I humbly suggest, however, that we offer, if nothing else, a bit of tolerance for those who are different. For all you know they may just be that rare and wonderful “mutation” that will make us all stronger.
I leave you with two of my favorite quotations on this subject:
“To be one’s self, and unafraid whether right or wrong, is more admirable than the easy cowardice of surrender to authority”.
Irving Wallace
And, from Margaret C. Patton, my teacher, mentor and my life-long inspiration,
read from her card to me congratulating me upon graduating from high school:
“May you never belong to that strange race of people spending their lives doing work they detest, to make money they don’t want, to buy things they don’t need in order to impress people they dislike”. “A Frenchman said it, but it packs a world of wisdom in a few words”.
It did, and it does. This little card still rests on a shelf in my library by my chair to this day!
Fifty-odd years.
It’s not even a wink in the “eye of time”.
But, perhaps, enough time to observe some small, subtle changes.
Now, I’m not going to pretend to be naive about it. There has never been an acceptance of individuality in our culture, or most cultures for that matter.
Yes, we have paid lip service to “the myth of self”. To those rugged individualists, who, stood up for what they believed in. Fought the good fight, regardless the consequences. And, we lionize the “outsider”, the slightly dangerous, the bad boys in our popular culture.
But... in the realm of our individual lives, our concern becomes more of our immediate circle, our place in that circle and how best to maintain it. Individuals, outsiders and the bad boys do not factor well into the orderly shape of a circle.
It’s true. We’re all subject to the pressures of our peers. With our “myth of self”, most of us are uncomfortable with that “truth”, but none-the-less, it is what it is. It’s necessary for the orderly operation of a society.
Isn’t it?
Is our social fabric so fragile? Does it’s very survival really depend on an ordered conformity? The subtle and not so subtle repression of that which is different?
Being a student of the “human experience”, I like to imagine I’m keenly aware of what’s going on here.
Evolution, the social just as with the biological, is always in a constant state of flux.
Sudden and often radical alterations of the environment can result in the appearance of mutations. Now, most mutations don’t survive for long. Some are of little consequence. Some even threaten the survival of the organism. However, occasionally, a mutation will come along that is positive, an improvement in some way. If the organism is able to incorporate the change, it becomes stronger because of it.
I think you can see where I’m going with this.
“Social evolution” follows a similar track. Environmental changes... conflict/peace, poverty/prosperity, geographic/cultural differences, disease and natural disasters. All can result in “mutations”, those individuals who are just a little different from the rest of us. They may have a slightly different take on things than you do. They see problems and answers where you may not. They may provoke or inspire you to thoughts you may have overlooked. Sometimes, they can posit an idea that is truly exceptional, unique , an “ah-ha” moment if you will.
Conversely, they may present ideas that represent a clear and present danger to all of us.
Or... they may just fizzle and disappear, ignored by the “normal” squeezed aside by the pressures to conform.
More recently, these “mutations”, these agents of change have come to be known as the “creative class”. The truth of course is that, whatever they’ve been called’, they have always been a part of the “human experience”, beginning with day one.
Civilization as we know it is largely a product of their efforts.
I submit that it is only normal that a society will inevitably attempt to resist the “threat” posed by the influences of such individuals. Furthermore, I submit that this resistance in itself, in all likelihood, is as equally essential to it’s continued survival.
May I humbly suggest, however, that we offer, if nothing else, a bit of tolerance for those who are different. For all you know they may just be that rare and wonderful “mutation” that will make us all stronger.
I leave you with two of my favorite quotations on this subject:
“To be one’s self, and unafraid whether right or wrong, is more admirable than the easy cowardice of surrender to authority”.
Irving Wallace
And, from Margaret C. Patton, my teacher, mentor and my life-long inspiration,
read from her card to me congratulating me upon graduating from high school:
“May you never belong to that strange race of people spending their lives doing work they detest, to make money they don’t want, to buy things they don’t need in order to impress people they dislike”. “A Frenchman said it, but it packs a world of wisdom in a few words”.
It did, and it does. This little card still rests on a shelf in my library by my chair to this day!
"He Keeps Himself To Himself"
The first in a series of seven.
The English... they have such a lovely way with English.
But... I mean... they would now, wouldn’t they?
They have such beautifully colourful ways to describe the oft arcane attributes of human behaviour.
A choice example, might be the word, eccentric.
If you’re middle class and “odd-turned” as my ole granny would have said, you’re “just a bit eccentric”. Now, add money and/or title and it’s “ delightfully eccentric” or “terribly eccentric”
And here’s the thing. It is a condition if you will, to be generally admired. A uniquely English quality to be treasured.
Now obviously this does not translate well into our American experience.
You’re odd, kooky, weird or just plain nuts. To be regarded at best with suspicion, at worst derided or made fun of. But not, not likely to be admired or treasured.
My favourite “Anglicism” of all has got to be “He keeps himself to himself”, perhaps in no small part due to a personal introspection.
Once again, we have this expression that doesn’t “translate well”.
It’s not just that the words don’t translate easily. I guess that if I were to say that “He keeps to himself”, in American English, the literal meaning is similar and understood.
But.. the statement somehow implies a certain, unsocial quality to the person’s behavior.
A quality implying at best an introvertedness, social awkwardness, or worse, he doesn’t like people..
With a person who “keeps to himself”, there is an almost unconscious suspicion, something's wrong.
If, however, I were to consider the expression “He keeps himself to himself” in English original, and in situ (in it’s place), there is no implied negative context.
The English are as likely to regard this person as not bothering anybody, minding his own business. He keeps out of trouble and he makes no trouble for anyone else.
This person is viewed in an entirely different light.
It is an expression of conduct, most surely, but it implies an approval of his character.
What might appear at first to be a slightly back-handed compliment, is just a compliment, nothing more.
Funny thing, perception. And, context
Once again, the words become lost to their “cultural meanings”.
I suppose it’s always been a little perplexing to me. As Americans, we celebrate “the myth of the individual”, yet we tend to shun and discourage individual behavior at every turn.
I understand that “He keeps to himself” could yes, describe someone who is somehow unsocial.
But... how is it then that “He keeps himself to himself” can be viewed by some so positively?
Seriously though, doesn’t individual behavior span a broad spectrum?
There are those who thrive on, even crave the “bright lights of the social stage”.
Others are content to just “flit onto and off of the stage”.
Some are terrified and suffer terrible “stage fright”.
And even those who loathe the “stage” entirely.
What we obviously face here, is how differently cultures regard this element of human behavior.
Surely, “He keeps himself to himself” merits a warm regard in both Englishes.
Do we really desire that everybody be “just like me”? How sad would be a truly crowded or a truly empty “stage”.
And... in reality, don’t we need that “full spectrum” of behaviors to be at our best?
The English... they have such a lovely way with English.
But... I mean... they would now, wouldn’t they?
They have such beautifully colourful ways to describe the oft arcane attributes of human behaviour.
A choice example, might be the word, eccentric.
If you’re middle class and “odd-turned” as my ole granny would have said, you’re “just a bit eccentric”. Now, add money and/or title and it’s “ delightfully eccentric” or “terribly eccentric”
And here’s the thing. It is a condition if you will, to be generally admired. A uniquely English quality to be treasured.
Now obviously this does not translate well into our American experience.
You’re odd, kooky, weird or just plain nuts. To be regarded at best with suspicion, at worst derided or made fun of. But not, not likely to be admired or treasured.
My favourite “Anglicism” of all has got to be “He keeps himself to himself”, perhaps in no small part due to a personal introspection.
Once again, we have this expression that doesn’t “translate well”.
It’s not just that the words don’t translate easily. I guess that if I were to say that “He keeps to himself”, in American English, the literal meaning is similar and understood.
But.. the statement somehow implies a certain, unsocial quality to the person’s behavior.
A quality implying at best an introvertedness, social awkwardness, or worse, he doesn’t like people..
With a person who “keeps to himself”, there is an almost unconscious suspicion, something's wrong.
If, however, I were to consider the expression “He keeps himself to himself” in English original, and in situ (in it’s place), there is no implied negative context.
The English are as likely to regard this person as not bothering anybody, minding his own business. He keeps out of trouble and he makes no trouble for anyone else.
This person is viewed in an entirely different light.
It is an expression of conduct, most surely, but it implies an approval of his character.
What might appear at first to be a slightly back-handed compliment, is just a compliment, nothing more.
Funny thing, perception. And, context
Once again, the words become lost to their “cultural meanings”.
I suppose it’s always been a little perplexing to me. As Americans, we celebrate “the myth of the individual”, yet we tend to shun and discourage individual behavior at every turn.
I understand that “He keeps to himself” could yes, describe someone who is somehow unsocial.
But... how is it then that “He keeps himself to himself” can be viewed by some so positively?
Seriously though, doesn’t individual behavior span a broad spectrum?
There are those who thrive on, even crave the “bright lights of the social stage”.
Others are content to just “flit onto and off of the stage”.
Some are terrified and suffer terrible “stage fright”.
And even those who loathe the “stage” entirely.
What we obviously face here, is how differently cultures regard this element of human behavior.
Surely, “He keeps himself to himself” merits a warm regard in both Englishes.
Do we really desire that everybody be “just like me”? How sad would be a truly crowded or a truly empty “stage”.
And... in reality, don’t we need that “full spectrum” of behaviors to be at our best?
The Rants and Raves of a "Crazy Old Man"
I have a friend, also named Kevin, who has been known to refer to me as such.
Huumm? Maybe he's right.
OK. Now for something completely different!
Welcome to a slightly re-tooled and re-focused "new" blog .
This is where I get to have some real fun. I get to say what I want about what I want and if you don't particularly care for it, you may exit at any time.
I'm un-apologetically "Liberal" and unafraid to admit it in today's "tea soaked" environment.
Somebody has to, we gotta get back to that “agree to disagree” moment, and somehow manage to coexist.
Now. If you are of a like mind, you'll probably read, maybe even enjoy some of my my diatribes.
If not, “prepare for the worst”, or click off of this blog immediately for it could be hazardous to your closely-held preconceptions.
So, do I just spew out an endless stream of pure liberal claptrap, or do I actually try and compose my thoughts and attempt to deal with a coherent subject or two?
I rather think the latter less I try the patience of even my "fellow travelers".
In my politically incorrect manner I will take on politics, religion, popular culture, idiots, aesthetics and the arts, maybe even the meaning of life, all to my varying abilities. Suggestions and comments will be welcome.
Soon to be released!!
I have my whole life been a self-proclaimed “student of the human condition”.
No matter my locale, I find I am absolutely fascinated by people, their “similar but different” take on our “common human experience”.
The following posts are my humble attempt to share some of my “observations” with you:
“He Keeps Himself To Himself”
“The Myth Of Self”
“What Church Do You Go To?”
“Critical Thinking And The Scientific Method”
“In Defense Of Pragmatism”
“Would You Like To Trade Places With Them?”
“An Accidental Life”
Huumm? Maybe he's right.
OK. Now for something completely different!
Welcome to a slightly re-tooled and re-focused "new" blog .
This is where I get to have some real fun. I get to say what I want about what I want and if you don't particularly care for it, you may exit at any time.
I'm un-apologetically "Liberal" and unafraid to admit it in today's "tea soaked" environment.
Somebody has to, we gotta get back to that “agree to disagree” moment, and somehow manage to coexist.
Now. If you are of a like mind, you'll probably read, maybe even enjoy some of my my diatribes.
If not, “prepare for the worst”, or click off of this blog immediately for it could be hazardous to your closely-held preconceptions.
So, do I just spew out an endless stream of pure liberal claptrap, or do I actually try and compose my thoughts and attempt to deal with a coherent subject or two?
I rather think the latter less I try the patience of even my "fellow travelers".
In my politically incorrect manner I will take on politics, religion, popular culture, idiots, aesthetics and the arts, maybe even the meaning of life, all to my varying abilities. Suggestions and comments will be welcome.
Soon to be released!!
I have my whole life been a self-proclaimed “student of the human condition”.
No matter my locale, I find I am absolutely fascinated by people, their “similar but different” take on our “common human experience”.
The following posts are my humble attempt to share some of my “observations” with you:
“He Keeps Himself To Himself”
“The Myth Of Self”
“What Church Do You Go To?”
“Critical Thinking And The Scientific Method”
“In Defense Of Pragmatism”
“Would You Like To Trade Places With Them?”
“An Accidental Life”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)