Common sense is anchor

[coberst]

Common sense is anchor

We live, love, and learn by metaphor. ‘Common sense is anchor’ is, I am convinced, a useful metaphor for learning.

In what sense is common sense an anchor?

An anchor keeps us steady when we just want to lie on deck either sleeping or day-dreaming. It keeps us safely anchored in place. It is our security. If we put one out fore and aft we cannot move without a great force compelling us to move.

However, the anchor functions as security only in shallow water.

To go to sea, to explore, to discover the adventure of the deep water and distant shores one must ‘up anchor’, one must dislodge the anchor from solid ground and take a leap of faith, we must learn to develop confidence in our instincts and to navigate by the stars. It entails risk; but what form of action can we indulge our self in if we remain at anchor?

All of this is just to set the stage for stating my conviction that we must put on hold our common sense while we explore a new domain of knowledge. I am not talking about what happens in school where the teacher takes us by the hand and shows us charts and maps about other lands wherein we never leave anchor. I am talking about what we must do when our school days are over and we wish to find a new means to reach another intellectual domain.

We must place on hold our common sense while exploring new domains of knowledge until we have gained sufficient knowledge about these new domains to make good judgments. Of course, this requires that we do ‘due diligence’ when choosing our maps and charts before we set out. Seek out the best minds as your guide when entering a new domain of knowledge and then up anchor for a voyage of discovery.

Quantum Theory and Psychology are two examples of domains of knowledge that cannot possibly be explored while clutching a security blanket.

Do you think ‘common sense is anchor’ is a valid metaphor?

Have you ever explored a new domain of knowledge without a teacher at your side?

[LaurieAG]

Originally Posted by coberst

Quantum Theory and Psychology are two examples of domains of knowledge that cannot possibly be explored while clutching a security blanket.

Do you think ‘common sense is anchor’ is a valid metaphor?

Have you ever explored a new domain of knowledge without a teacher at your side?

Hello Coberst,

Both of the metaphors are valid in the shallow/deep sense.

If you read Johnathon Swifts "Gullivers Travels" and Lewis Carrols (Charles Dodgson) "Through the looking glass", you will find that they are good examples of what you describe, in a lateral way, but pertinent all the same.

[coberst]

Originally Posted by LaurieAG

Hello Coberst,

Both of the metaphors are valid in the shallow/deep sense.

If you read Johnathon Swifts "Gullivers Travels" and Lewis Carrols (Charles Dodgson) "Through the looking glass", you will find that they are good examples of what you describe, in a lateral way, but pertinent all the same.

I am familiar with Swift's work but not so much with Dodgson. I chose to write about this because I have been studying psychology and have posted ideas from this reading. I find that a large majority of responses were negative because their common sense did not agree with the truth seen by psychology

[LaurieAG]

Originally Posted by coberst

I am familiar with Swift's work but not so much with Dodgson. I chose to write about this because I have been studying psychology and have posted ideas from this reading. I find that a large majority of responses were negative because their common sense did not agree with the truth seen by psychology

Hello Coberst,

Dodgson was the Lucasian Professor of Mathematics at Merton College Oxford when the era of relativity was just beginning. He could therefore appreciate the changes made before (Newtonian) and after (Relativity) and gave a very good example of why the quantum relative world is different to the real world.

With Dean Swift (he was a protestant priest) you must also include his championing of the (catholic) Irish people over the treatment given to them by their English masters to see how he wished to communicate extreme social dislocations in the sense of how extreme physical/psychological differences (big/small/scientists/animals) would be experienced by an individual, while at the same time allowing the reader to occupy a relatively unchanging viewpoint.

The negatives you describe are the result of the fear of change by those who have a vested interest at continuing the status quo, however discriminatory/unfair or even correct it is.

[coberst]

I think that it is here that CT (Critical Thinking) is an aid. A critical thinker is constantly asking questions, is constantly analyzing. It is questions, curiosity, and caring that leads one on for further knowledge. Our formal schooling has left us handicapped in this regard. Our educational system teaches us to be passive learners. It is this passivity that we must correct when our school daze are over.

[LaurieAG]

Hello Coberst,

Originally Posted by coberst

I think that it is here that CT (Critical Thinking) is an aid. A critical thinker is constantly asking questions, is constantly analyzing. It is questions, curiosity, and caring that leads one on for further knowledge. Our formal schooling has left us handicapped in this regard. Our educational system teaches us to be passive learners. It is this passivity that we must correct when our school daze are over.

Unfortunately the powers that be prefer a passive (and ignorant) society to a questioning one, otherwise they wouldn't have to resort to blatant propaganda and populist politics to get their way (and retain their ill gotten 'power').

Well, in this day and age it is refreshing (if not greatly disturbing) that both the extremists and our own political elites have something in common, they both like to keep their people dumb because it makes them easier to whip up into a frenzy when so desired!