333d, Posted for: Whole Community
Episode 13 of “The Analysis of Reasoning” Podcast-Point of View
Posted by: Linda Tym
{"ops":[{"insert":"\tIn Episode 13 of “The Analysis of Reasoning” Podcast, Dr. Elder and Dr. Nosich examine Point of View as an Element of Thought. The Primary organizing ideas within the podcast are that the term “Point of View” (POV) is a “way of looking at things.” In other words, although we may use “point of view” when referring to our assumptions, conclusions, and other parts of our thinking, it is an Element of Thought that is unique because each person inhabits a distinctive position. For example, a group of likeminded individuals may share the same goal, but they each have a distinctive point of view because of their own lived experience and unique context. A second important idea is that we can practice using disciplinary POVs, such as a legal or ethical perspective, when we think. In other words, POVs can be multilayered, which is part of why they can be challenging to articulate. For example, an individual’s POV may be the literal POV from which something is viewed, their emotional or personal POV, a disciplinary POV, that is couched within a broader worldview. As Dr. Elder shares, a background “Logic of” ourselves would include “all of those thoughts that would be affecting how we are thinking about this moment for this given reality.”\n\nI gained the following insights from this podcast:\n- Because it is multi-layered POV is incredibly complex and requires careful attention to understand its complexity and how it functions in how we think.\n- There is an entire network of ideologies that are in the background of one’s worldview/POV. I’d find it fascinating to tease these networks out for myself!\n- When thinking things through, it’s helpful to remember that not everything "},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"has"},{"insert":" a “logic.” In other words, a “logic” implies something has been reasoned through and it’s important to know when things don’t conform to a logic. Dr. Nosich gave the examples of street names in different cities or of a favourite colour, which I found particularly helpful. \n \nAfter viewing this podcast, I have the following questions: \n- If I were to clearly and logically think through the network of ideologies that inform my POV, how would this enable me to communicate more effectively with others who hold different POVs?\n- How can I better recognize how my POV changes over time? I often assume that I have had certain perspectives for"},{"attributes":{"italic":true},"insert":"ever"},{"insert":", but that shows my bias. I’d like to better track my POV in particular contexts over time.\n- How can I better navigate between my personal POVs and those worldviews in which I was raised and may not fully recognize their influence on my personal POVs?\n \nAs a literature teacher, I have always found Point of View an incredibly interesting concept and this podcast has only inspired me to investigate its part in my thinking even more deeply. \n"}]}
Posted by: Gerald Nosich
{"ops":[{"insert":"Hi Linda,\nI like your explication of the organizing idea behind the podcast. I found it eminently clear and perceptive.\n\tLet me briefly address the first question you raise.\n\tI find that being able to articulate other points of view is incredibly helpful in communicating with others. When I can say what the other person believes, putting aside my own beliefs and disagreements, people will often feel heard. It's very different from just disagreeing or with making a judgment about it. One venue where I found it extremely meaningful has been where I was dealing with students who had received a lower grade than they wanted. (It was made more onerous if they had worked hard and still received a low grade.) In the past I would take the time to explain, as clearly as I could, where their response had gone wrong and how they might respond to such a question in the future. I thought I was being helpful!\n\tBut what I discovered (after a long time) is that they were almost unable to take in my explanation because they were so full of their emotions about the grade. It could be anger, or sadness, or fear about the future--but whatever it was, the strength of the feelings got in the way of hearing something that might otherwise be helpful.\n\tSo I changed. Instead of explaining, I spoke with them and tried to reason it out as they had. I'd also say something like, \"If I had put in all that work and still got a low grade, I'd be feeling a lot of anger\" (or whatever emotion I thought was coming to the fore. Student reactions were completely different from before. They felt heard. They could see that I had entered into their point of view. I found I didn't even have to say anything about how they went awry--they'd see it for themselves. (Or, I could ask them: \"Can you see any way your response went wrong?) I'd always interpreted the situation as showing how important grades were to students, but afterward I came to a different conclusion. That, for most students, what really mattered to them was being valued; that the grades they received were important because they saw them as an indication of how much they were valued.\n"}]}