IS EDUCATION DETRIMENTAL TO COGNITION?

[Dr. Funkenstein]

We are born with the capacity to rely on our cognition over time naturally, Is this capacity somehow diminished with the advent of secondary education, secondary meaning,(Schooling) out side of sense intake and inherent thinking capabilities.

 

And does this education somehow form limits to our inherent cognition?

Edited October 1, 2014 by Dr. Funkenstein

[swansont]

!

Moderator Note

I'm not seeing any question of ethics here. Moved.

[Phi for All]

We are born with the capacity to rely on our cognition over time naturally, Is this capacity somehow diminished with the advent of secondary education, secondary meaning,(Schooling) out side of sense intake and inherent thinking capabilities.

 

And does this education somehow form limits to our inherent cognition?

 

Why would you think this? The only reason I can think of is that you're trying to justify dropping out of school. Help me understand why you think formal education might be diminishing our capacity to think.

[Dr. Funkenstein]

Still have my dunce hat on, keep it when i dropped out, to the point, which was a question.

 

Education is a memory dependent form of learning, which may stifle inherent cognition, replacing that with given parameters of thought. No doubt this could be useful, but does it also limit ones ability to think independently?.

 

By the way Phi, Barnum Bailey called, they would like to have that red nose and size 50 shoes back.

[iNow]

There is no valid general answer other than, "It depends on the nature of the education being delivered, the teacher, the style, the capacity of the learner, how well they slept the night before, what they had for breakfast, what other stressors they face, and all manner of related confounding variables."

Edited October 2, 2014 by iNow

[Phi for All]

By the way Phi, Barnum Bailey called, they would like to have that red nose and size 50 shoes back.

 

Interesting approach to discussion. Not a fan of ad hominem arguments myself.

[John Cuthber]

It's an easy enough idea to test. There should be a negative correlation between years in education and cognitive ability.

Those whose jobs require a lot of problem solving- drs and engineers should have relatively little schooling.

Is that what we find?

[CaptainPanic]

Maybe the OP means that kids typically have LOTS of creativity. Then school comes along, and says: "You must solve this problem, and you must solve it this particular way", while a child might intuitively feel that another solution is either just as good or better, and is interested to try several methods.

 

Schools are often very much focussed on teaching a particular method (a tool), rather than teaching the skill of "problem solving". It is much easier to teach a kid a trick, and since teachers are often not so well-educated themselves, they may not even have a choice (at least in the Netherlands, the teachers are typically poorly educated in the exact sciences). I think that school systems in Western countries are slowly taking their first steps to fix this age-old problem, but it is a slow process because all children are different, and require different support and motivation to learn this more abstract concept of problem solving. New methods must be developed, and teachers must be better educated (and therefore perhaps also paid better?).

 

If a kid has correctly solved a problem, but used the wrong tool, and then gets punished with a lower grade (as happens sometimes), the system is not motivating this kid to be creative or to invest time to solve problems. And I guess it would be popular language to state that the system is "dumbing down this kid". Maybe that is what the OP is trying to say?

 

Note: I am just trying to make some sense of this thread. I don't know exactly what the point was of the OP. The above is my interpretation. Please don't think I am putting words into anyone's mouth.

[Strange]

Education is a memory dependent form of learning, which may stifle inherent cognition, replacing that with given parameters of thought. No doubt this could be useful, but does it also limit ones ability to think independently?.

 

No. Critical and analytical thinking skills, for example, have to be learned - in other words taught - and are improved by training.

 

Education is not (just) about memorizing facts. In as far as some things do have to be memorized, that is much easier if you develop (are taught) a good understanding of the subject first.

Edited October 2, 2014 by Strange

[swansont]

By the way Phi, Barnum Bailey called, they would like to have that red nose and size 50 shoes back.

 

!

Moderator Note

Can't really imagine why one might think such a remark is appropriate. If you have a point to make, make it. Insults are not to be thought of as an option.

 

Don't respond to this modnote in the thread.

[John Cuthber]

Of course, it depends on the nature of the education.

It is possible to avoid teaching people how to think, and it's the deliberate policy of some political groups.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/texas-gop-rejects-critical-thinking-skills-really/2012/07/08/gJQAHNpFXW_blog.html#

[pzkpfw]

There's a lot to know. I sure as heck wouldn't have come up with calculus by myself, let alone many of the other things I learned in school.

 

Now, maybe that has somehow held me back from coming up with some unique new mathematical insight - but I doubt it.

 

I'm quite happy with the whole standing-on-the-shoulders-of-giants thing.

 

 

Having said that: I very much agree with the sentiments in post #8.

Edited October 3, 2014 by pzkpfw

[Dr. Funkenstein]

@ Post 8 my point exactly. Historical education (Ancients) started at age 7 for children, Philosophical thought, critical thinking and logic was the main order of the day. This primary curriculum, boosted the natural cognition, which then in turn lead to mastery of the other courses in order.

 

Today's education can seem like a weight that has be be carried, as opposed to an adventure of discovery. Memorization, poor teachers quality, individual child's needs and a host of other factors, from place in society to tax revenue of the surrounding schools area, contribute to the education expected to receive. With so many things working within the education system, it's not difficult to see it as a detriment.

 

Mean while the child's natural ability, to want to come to some kind of terms with the substance of what education claims to deliver is in fact, adverse to natural cognitive pursuit, and these pursuits are not supported within the given education.

 

The ranks of those who gained their education in the distant past, and on their on initiative are the same people who made it possible for society to have such a firm grip on nature, life, science and the arts, today. I just think that it is possible that education as we know it, could be a detriment. So now i wonder if this is purposeful or just the byproduct of an advanced society.

[iNow]

Formalized education in its current form came into being in the 19th century and was implemented to meet the needs of industrialism. It was not put in place to ensure critical thinking or creativity. If I had to guess, I'd say creativity and imagination seem to be something we are born with and slowly lose. To avoid their loss they must be nurtured and protected, not stifled or forced into silence. That seems to be the concern you wish to address.

 

How can we maximize creativity and critical thought, and what can be done to minimize their destruction?

 

Education itself is not the issue. The issue is how it's delivered and in what manner it is shaped, as well as how we adjust that shape based on the unique and differing needs of each individual learner.

Edited October 4, 2014 by iNow