Dialogue ain’t for Sissies!

Human discourse seldom goes beyond adolescent styled discussion, debate, or argument. Intellectually, judging by our discourse, few Americans have the sophistication to undertake dialogue. I am 74 years old and have never experienced dialogue either as a participant or as a spectator. Our discourse seldom takes us beyond tacit (only a vague feeling) knowledge.

I am convinced that until we can dialogue we will never be safe from self destruction and perhaps even destruction of the planet for any life forms.

Few Americans are prepared to dialogue. Dialogue is much different from discussion and debate. To dialogue requires much preparation and our educational system have not prepared us for the practice of dialogue.

Our educational system is almost completely dedicated to rote teaching. Our system is almost totally a system of teaching by telling. Why is this so?

A didactic technique of educating young people is the most efficient way of inculcating facts into the memory of children. It seems to me that it is necessary to teach facts to children as quickly and as efficiently as possible during their early years.

It is vital that we have knowledge of many and varied types of algorithms. The more our lives are controlled by technology the more algorithms we must know.

However, there are no known algorithms for many problems that we face daily. Where we fail to have algorithms we must find ways to facilitate understanding.

How does the Socratic technique, or as it is more often called the dialogue method, enhance understanding by a student?

A classroom that is focusing on a dialogue technique of instruction would be one wherein there would be the usual teacher and a number of pupils. A question or a matter of interest would be introduced and pupils would be asked to give their opinion on the matter. Each student voicing a point of view would be subject to questions by members of the class and the instructor and each would be expect to defend the opinion as best they can. Such a class program would require, in many cases that the students come to class well prepared and ready to become an active participant.

The subject might be the American war in Iraq, for example. One can imagine in such a case that there would be many different points of view. Some students might be from homes wherein varying political affiliations might be held. Some students may be Muslims or Jews of Protestants. Such a question would elicit many and strongly held views. The views of all students would be subjected to questions focusing upon the quality of the argument supporting a view and perhaps questions that might focus upon the biases exposed by the view. Assumptions would be examined and questioned. The whole process is directed toward establishing a critical habit of thought in all students.

How does a young person who has finished their schooling develop their own value system?

How does a young person develop a sound intellectual foundation upon which to build a life?

What is a sound intellectual foundation?

How does a young person learn to ask the important questions?

I would argue that our educational system, which I assume uses the Classical Education Model, has failed us. We adults must become self-actualizing self-learners in order that we might begin to reset our educational system onto a more useful course.

For the most part the educational system in the US has turned 180 degrees away from the Classical Education Philosophy. This has happened over the last 40 years. Coberst, I’m confident that you came from a Classical Educational background.

Classical Education first teaches the pupil the foundation (rote knowledge) to then build the critical thinking the problem solving skills necessary to become self-learners.

The current philosophy in education is a progressive standards based method. As I’m sure you are aware the educational system in the US has been experimenting with different teaching methods of decades. Sadly we see that many of the methods fail so the prevailing belief that has evolved is that we are to be perpetual students.

Please don’t misunderstand, we should be continually learning but we should be better self-learners rather than continual reliance on educational institutions and courses. Continued reliance upon institutional learning does not show a dedication to learning, but instead that one has never really acquired the skills of learning.

In this age of academia it is appalling how often we see people traipse off to the local community college to learn some subject they could very easily acquire by spending a couple of evenings with the right books. If a teacher has not taught his students to learn for themselves, he can only be seen as a failure. Sadly, we tend to equate the level of someone’s education with the amount of time they have spent in the academic institutions, rather than by how quickly they come to be free of the need for those institutions. This was not as prevalent 40 - 50 years ago.

Great topic! Thanks coberst, I’m pleased to meet you.

Salt & Light