Hi! Hi! Hi! My name is Morri Lee. Welcome to this site, and a spot of Thinking. I will explain a little of my background in relation to Thinker’s Corner
“The unexamined life is not worth living.” Socrates
From 1995-2001 I worked at the University of Southern Queensland Guild in Australia as Advocate and Problem Solver to PhD, Masters and Undergrad students.
Whilst there I founded a philosophy group called Thinker’s Corner, and was Chairman of that group from 1996-2000. Thinker's met regularly at the University for two hours (3-5pm) every Friday for nearly five years. It was an amazing collection of about thirty people made up of; about twelve PhD’s and senior lecturers from Psychology, Psychiatry, Law, Literature, Economics (nearly the whole department attended) Senior Military Officers, the Clergy and civic leaders. Thinkers had three aims:
To think in logical ways
To consider ideas meaningful to humanity
To learn from each other.
Topics were taken from: History, Literature, Philosophy, Science, Theology. We studied things like: the Story of Philosophy, The Epic of Gilgamesh and the Genesis Flood, Three plays of Sophocles, Five Lives from Plutarch, the Last Days of Socrates, Aristotle’s Ethics, the Boyer Lectures, the Constitution, the Book of Job and many more.
The entertaining trick was to combine a topic with an appropriate leader and a meaningful text. For example we considered the topic of Leadership for a month. Lt Col (Later Brigadier) Peter Lambert was elected to lead it. The topics were four in number; Leadership in Society, Leadership and Morality, Leadership in Combat (W.O. 2 David Hunnam a Vietnam veteran led this topic) and Leadership in the Death Zone. (Above 8,000 meters in Alpine climbing. Peter was an Everest mountaineer and led this Friday himself.) The month was unforgettable.
My weekly routine was to contact and distribute that week’s text to all members. On the day I would chair the meeting and hand over to the leader. The leader would then speak for 30-50 minutes laying the background to the topic, after which each person explained their own point of view of the text until the end.
_________________________________________
It gave us clarity and hope. Those minds elevated our own above mere work to Life; it lifted us from the narrow sided rut of existence to a high, wide, sunny mountain-top alive to the discovery of new lands just over the horizon; a future of new ideas and startling possibilities
_________________________________________
The two hours sped by like a bullet. Much of the time we were laughing, which did not seem at all incompatible with Thinking. I suspect it was the joy and excitement of sharing the company of intellectual people; others who could clearly articulate ideas we all thought and felt, but had never heard so well expressed before. It gave us clarity and hope. Those minds elevated our own above mere work to Life; it lifted us from the narrow sided rut of existence to a high, wide, sunny mountain-top alive to the discovery of new lands just over the horizon, a new future of new ideas and startling possibilities.
_________________________________________
….a precious jewel of life’s meaning captured and clearly understood in beautiful words: apples of gold in pictures of silver
________________________________________
Every Friday afternoon we heard a hundred sparkling thoughts from a dozen brilliant minds working at white heat, trying to capture their own unique perspective in precisely weighted words, judiciously faceted to fit their exact idea. The flow of language had grace of eloquence and was embellished with the charm of courtesy. Just to listen to someone like the poet Bruce Dawe was completely absorbing. Bruce would begin his idea and build on it, and as he added meaning it was like watching the golden trail of a sky-rocket arcing upward against a black velvet sky, and each successful expression would explode in ones mind with striking and vivid colors in an expanding circle of a thousand tiny lights; a precious jewel of life’s meaning captured and clearly expressed in beautiful words: apples of gold in pictures of silver.
One of the keenest Thinkers was David Rappaport, a dignified Barrister at Law, measured, precise, meticulous; a man of exquisite taste, courtesy and intelligence - a craftsman in the English language. David was the greatest Gentlemen I've ever met, and the best of men. David’s professional fee was about half a thousand dollars an hour in 1996. He attended Thinkers' whenever his busy schedule would allow. One Friday he came for an hour but said nothing himself. I wondered at his self-control as I sat there watching him write notes. He was a man of sublime intelligence. His ability to converse was superb. 'Surely he must have many thoughts', I thought. A second hour passed and still he hadn't uttered a solitary word, not a single syllable. Later as we walked together back to his car I asked the reason for it. He smiled gently and confessed to me: “I just like to listen to the others speak their inner thoughts Morri. I discover so much about Life that way.” I stood and pondered as I watched his faithful Citroen wagon trek its way home. He had paid a thousand dollars to listen for two hours. How different from noisy people who speak always of themselves. Here is a second example of listening.
Another time General Cliff Griffiths (retired) sat silent for two hours. Cliff was a craggy but affable serious-but-funny man who used to command the entire Australian Army Reserve, and was one of the most regular Thinkers. I had always thought Generals did all the talking. Not so. I asked Cliff the same question. “I just like to listen to the others,” he told me simply. Great Generals and great leaders value listening. Through it they can compare their own inner world with that of another.
I have introduced these anecdotes merely to suggest what the atmosphere is like around reflective people. Reflective people want to try and understand life's dynamism: their own inner world, the inner world of others, as well as the world outside of themselves. The question is: are all three matching at each moment?
What is the option to non-thinking, non-self reflection? To answer this I must first pose a question. How do you know if you are mad or not? Ever thought about that? What if you went mad and didn’t know it? How could you tell? What test would you use to determine your sanity?
I suggest that if you ask the question; “Am I mad?” You are not. Why? Because you asked the question. You see the question admits difference between the two states. The question presupposes you can think in two ways, and so ask the question. The insane do not ask the question because they lack the mirror of self-objectivity: they only have one state; themselves. The insane assert their behavior by prerogative, and therefore it is beyond question or analysis. The sane do not cling to this privilege. A person must never get used to privilege.
________________________________________
Non-reflection – the failure to examine oneself – means that there is no possibility to alter ones future circumstances.
________________________________________
Socrates truly said, “the unexamined life is not worth living.” It is a sad spectacle to observe an aged and stubborn criminal. He still commits the same errors as he did in his inexperienced youth. Did the aged not learn cause and effect from his crimes through the years? Did her not try to understand? Did he not learn that happiness is caused by observing justice, and unhappiness is the result of disobeying principle. Did he not stop and examine the incongruity between his thoughts and the results of his actions? How much sadness he could have saved himself. Non-reflection – the failure to examine oneself – means that there is no possibility to alter ones future circumstances. One cannot steer their ship to a safe harbor if the compass is ignored. Non-reflection means there is no one at the helm, and that the rudder is driven this way and that by life’s currents, which turn the vessel of our lives broadside-on to the restless waves of trouble, buffeted by the billows of grief and care.
The future cannot be foretold, but our future can be navigated by reference to the eternal wisdom; the fixed stars of timeless principle and true facts. The storms of life come to each as surely as the sun rises. The storms of life are unavoidable, but the storms do not last forever. The successful person is the one who possesses this knowledge and examines themselves to check their past actions with their present situation. This allows them to chart a course for the future. ________________________________________
Epictetus, the slave who taught Caesar Marcus Aurelius once said; “Although we cannot chose what happens to us, we can choose how we respond.”
_______________________________________
As the ocean is filled with the possibility of dangers to ships: reefs, shoals, currents, winds and waves, just so Life presents dangers to the ship of our soul: frustrated by futile hopes - clouds without rain - and driven to dangers by strong winds, deflected from our Life’s-course by the currents of passion and desire, beached on the shoal of unproductive actions, swamped and overcome by the wild waves of misfortune and grief, wrecked on the hidden reef of misjudgment and error. Misfortune is a fact, but we have Choice. Epictetus, the slave who taught Caesar Marcus Aurelius once said; “Although we cannot chose what happens to us, we can choose how we respond.”
________________________________________
Reading the literature of wisdom suggests the ideas that have led others to happy outcomes....adjust ourselves to what works
________________________________________
Examining our own lives allows us to respond in creative ways, and desist from unproductive patterns that repeat in our lives. It suggests we respond in ways other than past ways.
Reading the literature of wisdom suggests the ideas that have led others to happy outcomes, the means and routes of achievement and lasting success. But before this comes the necessity of reflection and honest self-examination. We must adjust ourselves to what works; follow the well-charted course of life's winners.
It was those wonderful people of Thinker’s Corner that showed me the connection between intelligent ideas and intelligent achievement; between reasonable ideas and the beneficent effects reasonable ideas bring.
From these leaders I gained two priceless habits of mind; critical thinking, and language that expresses itself in carefully selected words. I owe them more than words can tell, and thank them for their deep friendship, kindly instruction and inspirational example of examining oneself.
“The unexamined life is not worth living.”
Socrates
-ooOOoo-
Morrithinkingman.blogspot.com
Seoul,
South Korea.
Monday, November 27, 2006
Saturday, November 25, 2006
WHO TEACHES US TO THINK?
Hi Hi Hi. I'm morri.thinkingman :-) Welcome to an opportunity to think about; who teaches us to think?
Did you ever wonder, who actually teaches us to Think reasonably in our scientific age? You know, our age is enormously complex, and becoming more confusing all the time. (Just reading the owner's manual on my new CD player gave me a headache).
Each day we are driven to make a multitude of cause-effect decisions; required to come to correct conclusions from a long chain of details, forced to infer how new laws affect our lives, how to understand our own emotional knots, or determine on what basis one product is better than another. Yet among all of society's institutions, which one teaches us to Think critically for ourselves?
Education does not teach us to Think. In kindergarten we are taught to play. At elementary school and high school they teach us what to think about. At vocational colleges they teach us the skills of work. At university they teach us the contents and rites of specialisations as: Art, Business, Commerce, Education, Engineering or Science. These professions are narrow ways of thinking peculiar to each and independent of others. An Artist cannot do the job of an Engineer, and an Accountant may not make the best Scientist. University training is a kind of thinking that is not common to all professions nor to our personal selves.
We have all heard of an Artists, Marketeers, Accountants, Teachers, Engineers and Scientists, but where in the education system are the Thinkers? Have you ever seen one? Education does not teaching Thinking as a subject.
Who teaches us to Think? Churches show little evidence of this.
Christian churches are uninterested in teaching people to Think reasonably. In fact I would put it more strongly; Churches are interested in people not Thinking independently. Why? Christian churches want people to believe their teachings. Belief is acceptance and commitment to a set of standard beliefs and practices like regular attendance and commitment of resources.
People then rely on the church to direct their their lives. Christians - ideally - are advised to believe what their church leaders tell them is correct, rather than critically question what is to be believed. Churches do not teach us to Think.
Who teaches us to Think? Not the Law.
The law arrests non-reasonable people on the basis of rule-breaking, and punishes them according to evidence and argument. But what lawyer ever offered to explain how he thinks? When do law makers or law enforcers ever teach law breakers how to Think about the Law? Could you imagine a penal system where prisoners are taught formal principles of critical thought? And are not criminals victims of their own uncritical over-generalizations? eg. "Banks have money so we will take it and spend it." This is too simple because it is too general. And is it possible law-breakers turn to crime because they cannot turn their own minds to productive ends? How is a law breaker's irrational mind improved by five years in jail? I suspect law is not helping us to Think.
Who teaches us to Think? Not the media.
Newspapers, TV and radio make advertising money by reporting hourly all the results of non-thinking: the daily crimes, follies, iniquities and calamities of humanity. The media argue their role is only to reflect society's values. Could you imagine a newspaper reporting acts of Thinking? They declare it is not their job to teach virtue. Instead they diligently inform our daily lives with the latest disasters, the atrocious effects of war, abominable crimes of unrestrained passions and other inhumanities caused by non-thinking. The media do not teach us to Think.
Who teaches us to Think? Not science.
A check of the bookstores will offer many titles on science, but only very rarely a title about how scientists actually Think. The great preponderance of modern scientific titles are about the what - content - of science rather than the thinking of scientists. Scientists rarely explain how they think or demonstrate their proofs.
The word 'Science' comes from the Latin scientia which means to know. Knowledge is 'that which is known, and may be demonstrated to be known'. Too often we accept a thing merely because Einstein or Hawking said it.
Can we truly say; "I know such and such is true" without seeing a demonstration of that truth? The answer - scientifically speaking - is no.
Check your memory. Ever seen a scientist demonstrate the roundness of the earth, demonstrate that the sun is the center of the solar system, demonstrate that gravitational force is M2 x M2 divided by D2, demonstrate relativity, demonstrate quantum, demonstrate that evolution is a fact, demonstrate a missing link between species, demonstrate any common scientifically accepted conclusion held to be true? This duty is very rarely performed.
This neglect does not appeal to the intelligence of thoughtful people. Science is not helping by merely asserting its conclusions independent of evidence and demonstration.
In summary, the institutions of modern society are not teaching us to Think in a scientific age filled with enormous complexity. Today it takes twelve years (thirteen years in Germany) to prepare children to enter society and become reasonable citizens, yet who teaches children these vital principles of right reason? Can reasonable citizens be made without teaching principles of reason? And is perhaps, the absence of education in right reason the reason why our society has so much unreasonable behavior?
The rationale is this; if a reasonable society is to more to be desired than an unreasonable one, then a reasonable suggestion is that we begin to teach principles of right reason to all society. This seems reasonable to me.
This is no more than saying we need to learn principles of Thought to Think, a cause equal to the effect, a spark to start a fire, the right-sized spanner to fit the nut, enough water to satisfy the thirst, sufficient money to pay the bill, an identity to match the description, a mind to match a body, a higher order of Thinking to match a higher order of Practice, a content to match the curriculum, and a means commensurate with the desired outcome. A reasonable society must begin with educating its members in the principles of right reason. This seems too simple a premise to deny and too important an issue to simply ignore.
The absence of a Global Thinking Program is to leave its citizens without a rational guide, public pilot, social map, community compass or personal plan.
To my mind General courses of formal thought should be promoted by every public institution in the society. If I was a politician I would propose to begin a political Thinking Party, a party committed to no single ideology, but committed to solutions supported by the best reasoning from documented facts producing the greatest benefit .
We need reasonable leaders, reasonable business people, reasonable waiters, reasonable lawyers, reasonable clergy, reasonable doctors, reasonable nurses, reasonable cooks, reasonable mechanics, reasonable teachers, reasonable bus drivers, reasonable train drivers, reasonable police officers, reasonable dentists, reasonable citizens, reasonable parents, reasonable children; people who Think and who know how and why they Think. Why does no definite public institution teach principles of reason?
The time has come to talk about Thinking. The purpose of this modest blogspot is to do precisely that; to Advocate the need to teach Thinking, the reasons for teaching it, the content of it, the application of it to all areas of human activity, and to document all the happy results that attend its perfect execution.
-ooOOoo-
morri.thinkingman
Did you ever wonder, who actually teaches us to Think reasonably in our scientific age? You know, our age is enormously complex, and becoming more confusing all the time. (Just reading the owner's manual on my new CD player gave me a headache).
Each day we are driven to make a multitude of cause-effect decisions; required to come to correct conclusions from a long chain of details, forced to infer how new laws affect our lives, how to understand our own emotional knots, or determine on what basis one product is better than another. Yet among all of society's institutions, which one teaches us to Think critically for ourselves?
Education does not teach us to Think. In kindergarten we are taught to play. At elementary school and high school they teach us what to think about. At vocational colleges they teach us the skills of work. At university they teach us the contents and rites of specialisations as: Art, Business, Commerce, Education, Engineering or Science. These professions are narrow ways of thinking peculiar to each and independent of others. An Artist cannot do the job of an Engineer, and an Accountant may not make the best Scientist. University training is a kind of thinking that is not common to all professions nor to our personal selves.
We have all heard of an Artists, Marketeers, Accountants, Teachers, Engineers and Scientists, but where in the education system are the Thinkers? Have you ever seen one? Education does not teaching Thinking as a subject.
Who teaches us to Think? Churches show little evidence of this.
Christian churches are uninterested in teaching people to Think reasonably. In fact I would put it more strongly; Churches are interested in people not Thinking independently. Why? Christian churches want people to believe their teachings. Belief is acceptance and commitment to a set of standard beliefs and practices like regular attendance and commitment of resources.
People then rely on the church to direct their their lives. Christians - ideally - are advised to believe what their church leaders tell them is correct, rather than critically question what is to be believed. Churches do not teach us to Think.
Who teaches us to Think? Not the Law.
The law arrests non-reasonable people on the basis of rule-breaking, and punishes them according to evidence and argument. But what lawyer ever offered to explain how he thinks? When do law makers or law enforcers ever teach law breakers how to Think about the Law? Could you imagine a penal system where prisoners are taught formal principles of critical thought? And are not criminals victims of their own uncritical over-generalizations? eg. "Banks have money so we will take it and spend it." This is too simple because it is too general. And is it possible law-breakers turn to crime because they cannot turn their own minds to productive ends? How is a law breaker's irrational mind improved by five years in jail? I suspect law is not helping us to Think.
Who teaches us to Think? Not the media.
Newspapers, TV and radio make advertising money by reporting hourly all the results of non-thinking: the daily crimes, follies, iniquities and calamities of humanity. The media argue their role is only to reflect society's values. Could you imagine a newspaper reporting acts of Thinking? They declare it is not their job to teach virtue. Instead they diligently inform our daily lives with the latest disasters, the atrocious effects of war, abominable crimes of unrestrained passions and other inhumanities caused by non-thinking. The media do not teach us to Think.
Who teaches us to Think? Not science.
A check of the bookstores will offer many titles on science, but only very rarely a title about how scientists actually Think. The great preponderance of modern scientific titles are about the what - content - of science rather than the thinking of scientists. Scientists rarely explain how they think or demonstrate their proofs.
The word 'Science' comes from the Latin scientia which means to know. Knowledge is 'that which is known, and may be demonstrated to be known'. Too often we accept a thing merely because Einstein or Hawking said it.
Can we truly say; "I know such and such is true" without seeing a demonstration of that truth? The answer - scientifically speaking - is no.
Check your memory. Ever seen a scientist demonstrate the roundness of the earth, demonstrate that the sun is the center of the solar system, demonstrate that gravitational force is M2 x M2 divided by D2, demonstrate relativity, demonstrate quantum, demonstrate that evolution is a fact, demonstrate a missing link between species, demonstrate any common scientifically accepted conclusion held to be true? This duty is very rarely performed.
This neglect does not appeal to the intelligence of thoughtful people. Science is not helping by merely asserting its conclusions independent of evidence and demonstration.
In summary, the institutions of modern society are not teaching us to Think in a scientific age filled with enormous complexity. Today it takes twelve years (thirteen years in Germany) to prepare children to enter society and become reasonable citizens, yet who teaches children these vital principles of right reason? Can reasonable citizens be made without teaching principles of reason? And is perhaps, the absence of education in right reason the reason why our society has so much unreasonable behavior?
The rationale is this; if a reasonable society is to more to be desired than an unreasonable one, then a reasonable suggestion is that we begin to teach principles of right reason to all society. This seems reasonable to me.
This is no more than saying we need to learn principles of Thought to Think, a cause equal to the effect, a spark to start a fire, the right-sized spanner to fit the nut, enough water to satisfy the thirst, sufficient money to pay the bill, an identity to match the description, a mind to match a body, a higher order of Thinking to match a higher order of Practice, a content to match the curriculum, and a means commensurate with the desired outcome. A reasonable society must begin with educating its members in the principles of right reason. This seems too simple a premise to deny and too important an issue to simply ignore.
The absence of a Global Thinking Program is to leave its citizens without a rational guide, public pilot, social map, community compass or personal plan.
To my mind General courses of formal thought should be promoted by every public institution in the society. If I was a politician I would propose to begin a political Thinking Party, a party committed to no single ideology, but committed to solutions supported by the best reasoning from documented facts producing the greatest benefit .
We need reasonable leaders, reasonable business people, reasonable waiters, reasonable lawyers, reasonable clergy, reasonable doctors, reasonable nurses, reasonable cooks, reasonable mechanics, reasonable teachers, reasonable bus drivers, reasonable train drivers, reasonable police officers, reasonable dentists, reasonable citizens, reasonable parents, reasonable children; people who Think and who know how and why they Think. Why does no definite public institution teach principles of reason?
The time has come to talk about Thinking. The purpose of this modest blogspot is to do precisely that; to Advocate the need to teach Thinking, the reasons for teaching it, the content of it, the application of it to all areas of human activity, and to document all the happy results that attend its perfect execution.
-ooOOoo-
morri.thinkingman
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)