Sunday, December 26, 2021
In the beginning ...
Thursday, December 23, 2021
The rise and the fall
Wednesday, October 27, 2021
Just remembering
Wednesday, October 6, 2021
Shallowness and superficiality are pervasive
Friday, September 24, 2021
Thoughts on the value of repetition in learning and instruction
Thursday, September 16, 2021
Yom Kippur – 16 September 2021
Saturday, August 28, 2021
A New Direction for a Troubled Nation: Head North … or escape to Bali
Friday, August 20, 2021
Life as Usual
Monday, August 9, 2021
Meanwhile …
Sunday, August 8, 2021
Faith or Fate?
Saturday, August 7, 2021
Just heard from a friend
Thursday, July 1, 2021
Random Thoughts on the Wisdom and Ethics of my Father
Sunday, June 27, 2021
Who is responsible?
Thursday, May 27, 2021
the views of Majorie Taylor Greene ... and too many others ...
Wednesday, May 5, 2021
HOW THE TRUE WORLD ENDED
HOW THE "TRUE WORLD" FINALLY BECAME A FABLE
The History of an Error By Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche
(1844-1900)
A chapter from his book, The Twilight
of the Idols, or How to Philosophize with a Hammer (1888). The
following single page is the whole chapter.
1. The true world — attainable for the sage, the pious, the
virtuous man; he lives in it, he is it. (The oldest form of the idea,
relatively sensible, simple, and persuasive. A circumlocution for the sentence,
"I, Plato, am the truth.")
2. The true world — unattainable for now, but promised for
the sage, the pious, the virtuous man ("for the sinner who repents").
(Progress of the idea: it becomes more subtle, insidious, incomprehensible — it
becomes female, it becomes Christian.)
3. The true world — unattainable, indemonstrable,
unpromisable; but the very thought of it — a consolation, an obligation, an
imperative. (At bottom, the old sun, but seen through mist and skepticism. The
idea has become elusive, pale, Nordic, Königsbergian.)
4. The true world — unattainable? At any rate, unattained.
And being unattained, also unknown. Consequently, not consoling, redeeming, or
obligating: how could something unknown obligate us? (Gray morning. The first
yawn of reason. The cockcrow of positivism.)
5. The "true" world — an idea which is no longer
good for anything, not even obligating — an idea which has become useless and
superfluous — consequently, a refuted idea: let us abolish it! (Bright day;
breakfast; return of bon sens and cheerfulness; Plato's embarrassed blush;
pandemonium of all free spirits.)
6. The true world — we have abolished. What world has
remained? The apparent one perhaps? But no! With the true world we have also
abolished the apparent one.
(Noon; moment of the briefest shadow; end of the longest
error; high point of humanity; INCIPIT ZARATHUSTRA.)
Here is the revised Trumpian version (2021) – follow the links
down the rabbit hole:
1. The true world — attainable for the sage, the pious, the
virtuous; they live in it, they are it. (The oldest form of the idea,
relatively sensible, simple, and persuasive. A circumlocution for the sentence,
"truth
crushed to earth shall rise again.”)
2. The true world — unattainable for now, but promised for
the sage, the pious, the virtuous (for those awaiting
a rebirth of wonder).
3. The true world — unattainable, indemonstrable,
unpromisable; but the very thought of it — a consolation, an obligation, an
imperative. (For those who live in the world of fear and trembling).
4. The true world — unattainable? At any rate, unattained.
And being unattained, also unknown. Consequently, not consoling, redeeming, or
obligating: how could something unknown obligate us? (The cat in the cradle
escapes into the canticle for Leibowitz).
5. The "true" world — an idea which is no longer
good for anything, not even obligating — an idea which has become useless and
superfluous — consequently, a refuted idea: let us abolish it! (Long
live the Big Lie!).
6. The true world — Trumplicans have abolished it. What world has
remained? The apparent one perhaps? But no! With the true world we have also
abolished the apparent one. (What remains? Deception
and duplicity … and fealty
to DJT).
(Noon; moment of the briefest shadow; the end of democracy; low
point of humanity; INCIPIT THE DONALD.)
End of Semester Thoughts (EOST)
Given the delay between the spring semester and the start of the summer semester, I have been thinking about a number of things, such as how my students have progressed, the situation with regard to the pandemic, and things I thought I understood but had reason to doubt my thinking. A common thread runs through those things and it is encapsulated in what is known in the instructional design community as the ADDIE (analysis, design, development, implementation, and evaluation) model. ADDIE is a generic process thought to be useful in addressing challenging problems and it is used in a number of disciplines. Sometimes, ADDIE is applied in a rigorous manner that discourages innovation and can result in less than optimal solutions. I vaguely recall writing that one might better think of ADDIE as a guide, like a caddie in golf who can assist the golfer and help the golfer improve. The extra ‘c’ at the beginning of CADDIE might be thought to stand for ‘continuous’ or ‘comprehensive’. An effective problem-solving process is an ongoing enterprise that often revisits earlier stages and revises the plan as things evolve and the plan unfolds – whence ‘continuous’ for the initial ‘c’. Or, an effective problem-solving process is comprehensive in that the entire context surrounding the problem is taken into consideration. To be truthful, I cannot recall why I added the initial ‘c’ and dubbed instructional design processes as CADDIE. I grow old and my memory grows weak.
I think
about advice I often give my graduate students, which is a version of advice I
was given. Identify a central problem, examine what has been done to address
that problem, select an under-addressed small part of that problem, and try to
contribute something useful to make progress in that specific area – i.e.,
examine, understand, plan, and act – oh, a new acronym – EUPA … sounds almost
like yippee … as in finally something I can do. Or perhaps it is a
strange variant of eureka, which is Greek for “I found it” which is
allegedly what Archimedes said when he fell into a well and discovered a
solution for calculating the volume of an irregularly shaped body. Who knows if
any of that is true? Who still cares about truth these days? We should all care
about truth these days. Definitions only lead to other definitions – I think I
read this in one of Wittgenstein’s posthumous publications. Facts, on the other
hand can lead to other facts and eventually to a deeper understanding of
something puzzling. Truth … well, truth shows itself in what one does, as
Bouwsma wrote in an unpublished journal, “Surely your life will show what you
think of yourself,” and as Ruth’s words to Naomi reflect, truth shows itself in
Ruth following Naomi into an uncertain future. Truth is not something personal
…. It is something others can see and understand and judge, which is what I
have gathered from Wittgenstein, Bouwsma and Ruth. It seems to me that many are
off course with regard to truth, facts and definitions, but then I am off
course in these remarks about CADDIE.
The thought
I had involved my excursion into system dynamics when I was in Bergen, Norway,
which is home to the Wittgenstein archives, by the way. Anyway, I learned from
folks such as Pål Davidsen and Erling Moxnes that
when a system dynamicist goes about creating a system dynamics model of a
complex situation an initial step is to create a causal loop model or influence
diagram of the situation. This proceeds by asking key people involved with the
situation four questions: (a) what factors influence this situation, (b) how
would you describe each factor, (c) what relationships exist among these
factors, and (d) how would you describe those relationships? Should we create
an acronym for these questions, such as FDRD (try pronouncing that with a mouth
full of pebbles). Those four questions seem applicable to a wide variety of
problems and can help guide a problem solver to an effective solution approach,
which is how I thought about CADDIE. The name of this game is helping problem solvers
develop good solutions. What is a good solution? One that works … one that can
be replicated … one that can be sustained and applied to similar problems – a
good solution is scalable and sustainable – IMLTHO (in my less than humble
opinion, which is pronounceable … try it on for size).
Back to the
thought that drove me to make notes. I was thinking about how different people
think about the purpose of education, and then how those different conceptions
might be put into a system dynamics model. I am certainly not the first to have
such an idea; see for example, Jennifer Sterling Groff’s model). My thought has a twist, however,
which is how I like my gin and tonic, with twist of lemon or lime … and it is
okay to hold the gin as I am no longer drinking alcoholic beverages, unlike in my
misbegotten youth growing up in East Tennessee.
There is of
course an issue involving groups of people as opposed to working with
individuals, but there do seem to be patterns. Do you remember the four
questions – not the ones recited at the Passover Seder but the ones mentioned
earlier?
So, how
might a parent with children describe the purpose of education:
a) Key factors are include finding a
rewarding job, being qualified to pursue higher education, getting accepted
into a reputable university, looking to future job requirements, satisfying
inclinations and desires, having a liveable income, and so on. Keeping the list
to about ten or so key factors is important.
b) Factor descriptions – these vary from
parent to parent and also from child to child and teacher to teacher so I leave
this an exercise for those bored with this discussion (there goes my audience).
c) Key relationships – again this will
vary somewhat but looking for those relationships that seem to be most
influential is worthwhile and probably revealing.
d) Relationship descriptions – well,
what counts as a liveable income will vary a lot … for a despicable few, enough
is never enough … but again building this causal influence diagram is a
worthwhile activity for parents, educators, students, teachers, administrators,
and policy makers.
If one has multiple
such causal influence diagrams for different constituencies, the twist I wish
to add is to see what commonalities might exist across different
constituencies. I do not consider my own case to be at all representative. I wanted
to pursue a career as a philosopher professor so I would have summers off to go
hiking and camping in the mountains, but there were no jobs and those that did
exist certainly did not lead to job security or the accumulation of wealth. So
I gave software engineering and programming a try having been through IBM’s
programming school in Kansas City. That did lead to jobs but they were not exactly
satisfying. So I tried teaching computer science for a number of year with
limited success and discovered expert systems and artificial intelligence which
led to a position at the Air Force Human Resources Laboratory and long-term and
well-funded projects involving efforts to automate parts of instructional
design and development, again with some success until labs were consolidated;
then I escaped to the University of Bergen, initially on a Fulbright research
fellowship. The point of this short sketch of my own case is that education is
an ongoing process and an individual’s educational and life goals can and do
change.
SO … so, the
real question is how best to educate youth for a changing future. That is not
how folks generally think about education. Let’s develop an educational system
that helps improve a child’s chance for a good job, or helps improve the
nation’s likely productivity in years to come, or helps improve our children’s
ability to lead happy and satisfying lives. So what is it going to be? Build
wealth or live happily? Of course it is not that simple. It is what Bouwsma
wrote: “Surely your life will show what you think of yourself” and “the world
may gladden your heart, but it will surely make you cry.” Or as Wittensteint
wrote: “the world of the happy is not the
same as the world of the unhappy.”
Here is another
quotation from T. S. Eliot’s “The Love Song of J. Alfred Profrock:”
And indeed there will be time
For the yellow smoke that slides along the street,
Rubbing its back upon the window-panes;
There will be time, there will be time
To prepare a face to meet the faces that you meet;
There will be time to murder and create,
And time for all the works and days of hands
That lift and drop a question on your plate;
Time for you and time for me,
And time yet for a hundred indecisions,
And for a hundred visions and revisions,
Before the taking of a toast and tea.
The truth,
however, is there is not time … one must choose, one must live, and one ought
to live a life in pursuit of truth, according to verifiable and widely accepted
facts, and aligned with a definition of a person as an individual with a mind
capable of rational thought and a body capable of caring for others.
Mike Spector
May 5, 2021
Monday, May 3, 2021
election reminders
Bush vs. Gore - 2000
Bush won 271 electoral votes (270 required to win) but lost
the popular vote by 543,895 votes AND after a recount Bush won Florida, the
deciding state, by only 537 votes after a recount, and Gore accepted the split decision of the Supreme
Court a little more than a month after that historically close election.
Trump vs. Clinton – 2010
Trump won 304 electoral votes but lost the popular vote by 2,868,686
votes and Clinton accepted the loss the day after the election.
Biden vs. Trump – 2020
Biden won 306 electoral votes and won the popular vote by 7,052,770
votes and yet months after the election and after an insurrection aimed at disrupting
the final approval of the votes and after the inauguration of Biden, Trump still
maintains that he really won.
In this century, thousands of Americans have voted twice for
a person who won the popular vote but was not elected. Only once has a
Presidential candidate in this century challenged the final vote count and
decision, and that candidate persists in doing so a half year after the
election. The example set by Al Gore who lost only by 537 votes in a contested
election is lost in misinformation, bias and hubris.
Is this the land of the free and home of the brave or the
land of greed and the home of hatred? Lost are the words of that lady of
liberty standing proudly in Upper New York Bay: "Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses
yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send
these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden
door!" How
long must we wait “for
the American Eagle to really spread its wings and straighten up and fly right?”
Friday, March 19, 2021
A Confession
A
Confession
Sometimes I
recall things I have said or done which I regret … which make me feel ashamed.
This usually happens when I am avoiding work. What came to mind was a bad habit
I developed in my formative years (before and after my bar mitzvah) … a
practice I devised to gain favor in the eyes of my father, Rabbi Spector. I
observed that he was especially pleased when being asked questions about the
Torah … the Jewish Bible. So I often tried to please him by asking question …
most often questions that meant nothing to me.
That is
perhaps why much later in life I made a distinction being asking questions and
having questions. Asking questions is all too easy and all too often not in the
search of understanding. Having questions is hard and begins with admitting one’s
ignorance and is followed by committing time and effort in search of understanding,
being open to alternative explanations, questioning one's assumptions, and
revisiting the question and alternative explanations. So I eventually came to
believe that the job of a teacher was to get others to have
questions.
Anyway, I would
ask my father many questions to gain favor in his eyes. That is something I now
regret … pretending to be interested in the things I knew interested him. But
sometimes there is a small positive bit that emerges from one’s shame.
Occasionally, I asked a question about something I did not understand, for
example why it is written in the book of Exodus that the sins of the father
will be visited upon the children. That passage struck me as unfair and not at
all becoming of G-d. My father’s answer was my first lesson in psychology. As I
recall, he said the passage was merely describing what typically happens … children
can learn bad things from their parents and bad things often lead to some kind
of punishment. My father claimed the passage was not describing G-d … it was describing
people.
Another one
of my rare genuine questions to my father concerned the Al Chet prayer asking
for forgiveness repeated many time during the high holy days – the Jewish New Year
(Rosh Hashanah) and Yom Kippur (the Day of Atonement) – see https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/6577/jewish/Text-of-Al-Chet.htm.
This prayer is the Jewish confessional. My question to my father was why was the
prayer said in the plural using ‘we’ rather than ‘I’ – asking forgiveness for
each of the sins WE have committed. My father’s response was my first lesson in
sociology. He said that if anyone in the community had committed that sin, that
everyone in the community was responsible for not having taught that person
better. Or something along those lines. My aging memory is not all that reliable.
And I can
add one more confession to these notes about my past. I memorized the speech I
was to give following the Torah reading at my Bar Mitzvah. My haftarah – a reading
from the Prophets – paired with a reading from the Torah. The Torah portion the
week of my Bar Mitzvah was from Devarim (the sayings of Moses or Deuteronomy) –
the early chapters that contain two remarkable things repeated elsewhere in the
Torah: (1) the Shema (Hear O Israel, the Lord our G-d is one), and (2) the ten
commandments. The haftarah paired with that passage from the Torah is from the
Book of Isiaih beginning with Chapter 40 – comfort ye, comfort ye, my people,
saith the Lord.
The haftarah
reading did not seem at all connected with the Torah passage, so I asked my father
why they were paired together. I could not find any obvious connection.
Then, skipping
ahead a bit, it was my bar mitzvah day and I read the haftarah portion in
Hebrew and also the passage from the Torah in Hebrew (without vowels – mostly committed to memory from so much practice), and then it was time for me to deliver the
Shabbat sermon based on what I had learned during my bar mitzvah training. Just
before I started to deliver my memorized speech, I looked at my little sister
sitting in the front row of the synagogue and she made a funny face at me that
erased my memory … my speech was gone. I coughed hoping it would return to
memory but it was really taking a long distance vacation. What to do? I coughed
again and then decided to pretend to be my father. I recalled as best I could
his answer to my question about the connection of the two passages. It went
something like this as best I can recall just now. Imagine Moses having led the
Jewish people out of bondage under Pharaoh in Egypt and having wandered in the
desert for 40 years before reaching the promised land … imagine all of that and
then imagine Moses being told by G-d that he would not be allowed to go into
the promised land apparently for having broken the tablet containing the gift
given to him by G-d atop Mount Sinai containing the ten commandments in his
anger at the people for apparently worshipping the golden calf. For losing his
temper and patience with the people and for breaking the tablet, he was denied
entry to the promised land. So, how did Moses react to such severe punishment?
He sings the praise of the Lord with the words of the Shema – “Hear O Israel,
the Lord our G-d the Lord is one” - see https://bibleproject.com/learn/deuteronomy/
. Moses is not angry hearing his punishment. Rather, he urges his people on to
the promised land. He comforts and consoles. Is that the connection? I asked at the end of my impromptu speech.
When I
recall that explanation of the connection of the two passages, it brings to
mind something else I do not understand – the closing words of Albert Camus’ The
Myth of Sisyphus – namely, “one must imagine Sisyphus happy” – see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Myth_of_Sisyphus#:~:text=The%20Myth%20of%20Sisyphus%20(French,his%20philosophy%20of%20the%20absurd.
The older I get the less I understand.