DSM: And the right answer is. . . there's no paradigm er . . .I think

From: Alexander / Michiru Streater (uigui@oregano.ocn.ne.jp)
Date: Thu May 10 2001 - 13:58:23 EDT


Dear Bill,
Actually, I had trouble deciding how to answer your mail. The questions
you pose are truly exciting, and my mind has been on it all day.

However, I want to make sure I know that I know
that you know what I mean!

We must:

) use and understand the same terminology,
) avoid wooly generalisms or presumtions
) keep what we are looking at in clear focus
) not lose the plot!

I'll start ;-)

I intend to break this reply up into parts. This means people can
easily get a (sound) bite without having to trawl through an e-book!

> Pardon my flippance.

I do not see you as flippant in the slightest@: -)

> I just truly believe that you have it exactly so when
> you say it is a paradigm shift between "the 2d and the 3d".

That's not quite what I said, or what I mean.

A paradigm shift, I humbly contend, is a new understanding of how
the world/universe/our society can work, withstands the tests for
the conventional model, but has answers for some new problems
or produces a new view-point.

I wanted to describe the amount of frustration I have in bringing
another point of view to others.

So, it's the -predjudices- these people use to think about things, or
the "closing your eyes to simple truth" and "ignorance" of what lies
right under their noses that is the problem. These difficulties often
come hand in hand with paradigms but such a difficulty does not
mean a paradigm.

The reference to 2d and 3d is one in which I wished to show the
measure of frustration I was havingto get people to listen to
truth/nature/ even themselves.

Sorry to disappoint. I don't think we have a paradigm.

One of the greatest mistakes we could make is to believe we have
discovered something new. We haven't.

Children are great mimmics and love to copy e.g. mum or older kids.
We have two of -everything- in our house. Why? As soon as our 5
year old picks up, say, a mop, the 20 month wants to do it too. She
runs off to the place where the other mop is, and lo! every action the
older one makes, the younger one follows. Not only that, but attaching
a new cloth to the mop requires skill, and when the older child changes
a cloth, the younger one follows. But not perfectly, so the older child
helps. This is something kids love to do. Help each other.

Everybody knows this, and I contend we always have. It extends to
everything. singing, cooking, Driving!, reading, writing, shopping. . . .
You name it.

No, I think there is no paradigm here. Just our cultural baggage inherited
from the industrialised (Victorian) era.

In my immediate teaching environment, we have made this activity
(asking each other for help, and giving it willingly) a central school
policy.
But new kids coming into the school need training. They have been
conditioned for too long out side to fear mistakes, and the ridicule that
their inocent ignorence brings. Not only that, but they ridicule far to
quickly.
You need a critical mass of kids that not only behave properly but also
help police the cocoon to ensure that the poison from outside does not leak
in.

Alexander Streater

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Message to fellow teachers

Children learn inspite of us, not because of us!

PS

no-one commented on my bank manager post!

I'm a bit surprised.

a

===========

If you wish to be removed from this mailing list, please send an email TO
majordomo@sudval.org with the following phrase in the BODY (not the
subject) of the message:

unsubscribe discuss-sudbury-model [the-subscribed-email]

If you are interested in the subject, but the volume of mail sent is too much,
you may wish to consider unsubscribing from this list and subscribing to
"dsm-digest"

This mailing list is archived at http://www.sudval.org/~sdg/archives



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Mon Nov 05 2001 - 20:24:29 EST