1y, Posted for: Whole Community

Information: Episode 7 of the "Going Deeper" Podcast

Posted by: Linda Tym

{"ops":[{"insert":"The primary organizing idea about “Information in Relationship with Intellectual Standards” (Ep. 7) is that although information is essential to reasoning, our best reasoning requires us to use the intellectual standards to "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"assess"},{"insert":" the information within a specific context. In other words, information is neutral: we can use it effectively or poorly in our reasoning. It is only when we apply the intellectual standards, such as accuracy, relevance, and significance, that we can then evaluate the best ways to use or to disregard information. \n\nWhile listening to this podcast, I gained insight from the following points of discussion:\n            - Information can be inert. In other words, information does not tell me what to do with it             or how to use it. Unlike a Conclusion, for example, which would prompt me into a particular action or intellectual move, information can just “sit” there. My mind may store it, but ultimately I must also evaluate it and include it in my reasoning to achieve full understanding.\n\n            - The Question at Issue helps to determine what information is relevant and significant. \n\n            - Too often, we use our own experiences too often generalize what is accurate and to decide what is applicable to everyone and to all circumstances.\n\n            - Balancing our own POV with other evaluated information is necessary if we are going to be fairminded critical thinkers. \n\n            - Egocentricity can cause us to give away too much time/energy to others and prevent us from doing things that are beneficial for ourselves. It is important to avoid distorting information that puts us in a positive light.\n\nMy questions about Information are:\n            - Why does education focus so heavily (and almost exclusively) on Information, rather                 than teaching students how to reason through the various fields of study? Has that been a recent development or has that been a problem throughout the history of education? \n\n            - Likewise, our society places a significant emphasis on the collection of data and the       purposes of its use are not always clear. What are the best ways to help institutions or companies see that data collection is only "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"one part"},{"insert":" of a much bigger problem of how to analyze and assess what is needed in a situation?\n\n            - Dr. Elder discussed the ways that people hide information for selfish purposes. If we do our best reasoning and decide the certain information in a context is relevant and significant, what are the best ways to help other people to see why the information matters? In other words, if someone claims that certain data or experiences are irrelevant to a situation, how do you help them to better understand your thinking and, potentially, to see the significance of the information/data/experiences? \n\nAs with each Episode, this podcast prompted me to think much more deeply about the ways that I use information and to assess my own use (or lack thereof!) of the Intellectual Standards. \n"}]}


Comments

Posted by: Gerald Nosich

{"ops":[{"insert":"Hi Linda once again,\nI enjoyed reading your comment. I don't know if you did it intentionally , but you gave a very apt contrasting example when you said \"Unlike a conclusion.\" I often include Contrasting examples as part of an SEE-I. SEE-I makes things "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"clearer"},{"insert":"; a contrasting example makes them more "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"precise"},{"insert":". Very nice.\nAt the end you ask some difficult and profound questions. You ask whether an over-emphasis on sheer information is a recent development. I believe it's quite the opposite. For thousand of years, formal education has almost entirely been devoted to didactic learning. The \"master\" paces around, spewing pieces of wisdom; the students take it all down. If the students do it well enough, they can later become spewers themselves. For a thousand years, Galen, Aristotle & Ptolemy were rehashed (and memorized) by legion of students.\n\tIn your next set of questions you make an assumption that I think I disagree with. You may be right that institutions in our society do often engage in random data gathering. But I don't think that's true for companies. My impression is that profit making companies tend to gather data only when it's likely to be useful in making a profit. I doubt that they gather much information about eye-color, or about whether you put your left shoe on before your right shoe (you can easily think of facts about people that no company is especially interested in). But when you click on something that you're contemplating buying, companies tabulate it and then act on it. \n\tThat's true even long ago. Vendors in marketplaces observe where potential buyers look and how wide their eyes are when they bargain. That's data collection with a purpose.\n\tIt's a pleasure reading your thoughtful comments.\n"}]}



Posted by: Gerald Nosich

{"ops":[{"insert":"Hi Linda once again,\nI enjoyed reading your comment. I don't know if you did it intentionally , but you gave a very apt contrasting example when you said \"Unlike a conclusion.\" I often include Contrasting examples as part of an SEE-I. SEE-I makes things "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"clearer"},{"insert":"; a contrasting example makes them more "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"precise"},{"insert":". Very nice.\nAt the end you ask some difficult and profound questions. You ask whether an over-emphasis on sheer information is a recent development. I believe it's quite the opposite. For thousand of years, formal education has almost entirely been devoted to didactic learning. The \"master\" paces around, spewing pieces of wisdom; the students take it all down. If the students do it well enough, they can later become spewers themselves. For a thousand years, Galen, Aristotle & Ptolemy were rehashed (and memorized) by legion of students.\n\tIn your next set of questions you make an assumption that I think I disagree with. You may be right that institutions in our society do often engage in random data gathering. But I don't think that's true for companies. My impression is that profit making companies tend to gather data only when it's likely to be useful in making a profit. I doubt that they gather much information about eye-color, or about whether you put your left shoe on before your right shoe (you can easily think of facts about people that no company is especially interested in). But when you click on something that you're contemplating buying, companies tabulate it and then act on it. \n\tThat's true even long ago. Vendors in marketplaces observe where potential buyers look and how wide their eyes are when they bargain. That's data collection with a purpose.\n\tIt's a pleasure reading your thoughtful comments.\n"}]}



Top ▲