Thread: Be all that you can be

Be all that you can be

No, I am not suggesting that you join the Marines!

“The religious believer assigns dignity to whatever his religion holds sacred—a set of moral laws, a way of life, or particular objects of worship. He grows angry when the dignity of what he holds sacred is violated.” Quote from “The End of History and the Last Man”.

To what does the non believer assign dignity? If the non believer does not assign dignity to rationality and self-actualization, upon what foundation does s/he stand? If the non believer does depend upon rationality and self-actualization for dignity how is it possible that so few know anything about such matters?

Abraham Maslow tells us that there are two processes necessary for self-actualization: self exploration and action. Self exploration is very important, the deeper the self exploration, the closer one comes to self-actualization. Self-actualization results from our desire to actualize our potential. As the Marines might say “Be all that you can be”.

I think that the area in which Western society fails most egregiously is in the matter of an intellectual life after schooling. We have a marvelous brain that goes into the attic after schooling is complete and is brought out only occasionally on the job or when we try to play bridge or chess.

It appears to me that the fundamental problem faced by most Western democracies is a lack of intellectual sophistication of the total population. Our colleges and universities have prepared young people to become good producers and consumers. The college graduate has a large specialized database that allows that individual to quickly enter the corporate world as a useful cog in the machine. The results display themselves in our thriving high standard of living, high technology corporate driven life styles.

Our schools and colleges are beginning to introduce our young people to the domain of knowledge called Critical Thinking. CT is taught because our educators have begun to recognize that teaching a young person what to think is not sufficient for the citizens of a democracy in an age of high technology. CT is an attempt to teach young people how to think. Like the adage about giving a man a fish versus teaching him how to fish, a youngster who knows how to think is prepared for a lifetime rather than for a day.

What about today’s adult? Today’s adult was educated in a time when schools and colleges never gave universal instruction in the art and science of thinking—rationality.

If today’s adult wishes to learn CT s/he must learn it on their own nickel. I think a good read to begin with is this one
http://www.bu.edu/wcp/Papers/Educ/EducHare.htm

I was just about to severely mock you for promoting the marines.

[quote=coberst;336073]

“The religious believer assigns dignity to whatever his religion holds sacred—a set of moral laws, a way of life, or particular objects of worship. He grows angry when the dignity of what he holds sacred is violated.” Quote from “The End of History and the Last Man”.

Yet I would argue that God and the sacred does not need defending by us. People may still want to do it but it is not neccessary. instead we should be defending the innocent and weak.

To what does the non believer assign dignity? If the non believer does not assign dignity to rationality and self-actualization, upon what foundation does s/he stand? If the non believer does depend upon rationality and self-actualization for dignity how is it possible that so few know anything about such matters?

They may just stand for themselves and the persuit of pleasure or they may have defined their beliefs more formally as in secular humanism. Certainly self actualization could be one thing to asign dignity to.

Abraham Maslow tells us that there are two processes necessary for self-actualization: self exploration and action. Self exploration is very important, the deeper the self exploration, the closer one comes to self-actualization. Self-actualization results from our desire to actualize our potential. As the Marines might say “Be all that you can be”.

If one doesn't know his purpose or defines his purpose incorrectly then what good is it to find self-potential and actualize that potential? Why have you been created?

I think that the area in which Western society fails most egregiously is in the matter of an intellectual life after schooling. We have a marvelous brain that goes into the attic after schooling is complete and is brought out only occasionally on the job or when we try to play bridge or chess.

Just a suggestion, but you could try reading the Bible to exercise your intellect, find purpose, and become self-actualized. Even if you don't believe it, it is challenging and can make you think.

It appears to me that the fundamental problem faced by most Western democracies is a lack of intellectual sophistication of the total population. Our colleges and universities have prepared young people to become good producers and consumers. The college graduate has a large specialized database that allows that individual to quickly enter the corporate world as a useful cog in the machine. The results display themselves in our thriving high standard of living, high technology corporate driven life styles.

That is the purpose of college. Of course you get to choose what courses and field of study to take, and what to do in your free time. With a high standard of living the lower needs are complete on Maslow's heierarchy freeing one to pursue the higher needs. According to maslow when the lower needs are taken care of the creature will naturally pursue the higher needs.

Our schools and colleges are beginning to introduce our young people to the domain of knowledge called Critical Thinking. CT is taught because our educators have begun to recognize that teaching a young person what to think is not sufficient for the citizens of a democracy in an age of high technology. CT is an attempt to teach young people how to think. Like the adage about giving a man a fish versus teaching him how to fish, a youngster who knows how to think is prepared for a lifetime rather than for a day.

Many have lofty goals in teaching critical thinking, but others see it as a tool to indoctrinate people into their own thinking instead.

What about today’s adult? Today’s adult was educated in a time when schools and colleges never gave universal instruction in the art and science of thinking—rationality.

But in a time when the church did. Sadly the church too has abandoned rational thought in favor of feel good theology.

If today’s adult wishes to learn CT s/he must learn it on their own nickel. I think a good read to begin with is this one
http://www.bu.edu/wcp/Papers/Educ/EducHare.htm

I've got a nickel. let's see.

I thought it was be all you can be, join your future (or is it get ahead in life) in the Army

OK I've spent my nickel.

Is there something in the article you would like to discuss?

Lakeman

I agree that self-actualization is something to assign dignity to.

If one does not know her purpose they can seek it. If they make a mistake they can seek it further.

Education has both an intrinsic and extrinsic value. I think our colleges and universities have lost sight of education’s intrinsic value and we must find it for our self when our school daze is over.

I have never encountered anyone who comprehended the nature of Critical Thinking who thought that CT is a form of indoctrination.

Originally Posted by coberst

I have never encountered anyone who comprehended the nature of Critical Thinking who thought that CT is a form of indoctrination.

Not exactly what I said.

People who understand CT can apply it in their intellectual pursuits but as people they apply it imperfectly.

Consider the Professor of Female studies. She will apply CT to question the assumptions of a patriarchal society. But when a student in her class takes it a step further and questions the assumptions she used to question the assumptions then he has not seen the light. She will no doubt argue that he is simply caught up in the first set of assumptions that belong to the patriarchal society.

RealClearPolitics - Articles - Indoctrination in the Classroom


Let's take another example from the boards of PH:

I have seen many people claim that since miracles violate the laws of nature; miracles are not possible. Long ago science questioned the assumption made by men that the private religious experience they had is real. Such subjective experiences are delusions or hallucinations. Moses wrote the Torah, he claimed to part the red sea. The scientific student of CT will explore the claim and question the assumption that his eyewitness account represents reality and he will attract people to his cause. This questions subjectivity. At present this is the dominant idea in our culture.

The person who applies CT a step further will question the assumptions of science that the laws of nature are regular and repeatable. Perhaps the laws of nature appear very regular but in reality there are a few exceptions which can be used to explain the various miracle claims made by people. The religoius student of CT will use it to question the assumptions of the scientists. This questions objectivity.

What is the next step? What assumption should the next person who applies CT to this dilemma question? Perhaps we should question the logical meaning of language which defines both subjective and objective?

Maybe we question the nature of logic itself? Nothing is real and all is a dream.

Ideally CT will lead to a balanced approach that does not fall into absurdity by claiming that all is a dream. But before that happens the proponents of questioning subjectivity will use their beliefs arrived at through CT to argue against the proponents of questioning objectivity who use their beliefs arrived at through CT argue their own case.

Unless CT renders all arguement moot people will use it as a weapon or a tool to indoctrinate the naive into their own point of view.

Originally Posted by freckles

I thought it was be all you can be, join your future (or is it get ahead in life) in the Army

You're right. The Marines motto is The Few (and getting fewer)

lakeman

You are correct, our facultry of reason is often used in bad ways. Likewise religion is often used in bad ways. Our problem is to create a society that corrects all of these poor performances before our species destroys itself. I think that our ability to reason and to learn is our only way to improve our society.

Originally Posted by coberst

lakeman

You are correct, our facultry of reason is often used in bad ways. Likewise religion is often used in bad ways. Our problem is to create a society that corrects all of these poor performances before our species destroys itself. I think that our ability to reason and to learn is our only way to improve our society.

I would suggest that prohibiting it will not correct it. We live in a world of rampant self serving interests. The only way a government can check a person's self serving interest is to allow others with competing self serving interests to flourish along side them; capitalism.

On a personal level, encouraging personal integrity and character through religious and humanistic ideas can certainly help. The Bible says that God's rules, rewards, and consequences have been ineffective in curbing man's nature toward evil. It is only through the gratefulness of a heart forgiven in grace that men are changed. A grateful person wants to change for the intrinsic value of virtue.