A lot of insight in this one. I tutor Asian kids in composition, and they are thoroughbreds par excellence. A Hong Kong girl, aged 10, dared me to give her any two numbers and she would multiply them immediately in her head. Not a problem for her. This is a typical sort of thing for hyper-achieving Asian kids who are constantly monitored and spurred on by their parents. So I've been grappling with the question of this laser-focus on academics and official systems of merit for some time now. I'm frustrated because I can see the value of it, but there's just . . . something . . . missing.
I grew up in the typical American way, with education being almost an afterthought, my parents oblivious to what I was doing in school, much less what I did in my free time. By the grace of the Almighty I was born pre-internet and my family always had books lying around, so by the age of 14 I was browsing Shakespeare comedies and becoming mentally seasoned in my own way. Despite the seasoning, I found that a young man becomes a "draft horse" by default in the States unless he has special oversight, preparation, and connections. Those are Asian advantages, and though I have affection for the kids I teach, I'm concerned that their "thoroughbred" upbringing will make them the next generation of leadership in all American institutions. What then? When I picture "great leaders," I don't think of super-bright East Asians who took the prize at the spelling bee.
I don't think the western genius lies in getting the highest test scores or in preparing every child to be a famous researcher. I think it's possible that elitism itself is foreign to the west, and we have allowed it to creep in from outside. But I say this as someone who never won any awards or trophies.
From what I've seen, the truly innovative naturally gravitate to their skill set if not distracted by easy distractions. The ones interested in music would move heaven and earth to get an instrument, same with the computer kids. The killers of these instincts is time sink activities like busywork or pointless phone scrolling and being overly socialized. It's why I believe, no matter the intelligence, that more than a few hours of formal schooling a day is detrimental.
Respectfully, I disagree that "the truly innovative naturally gravitate to their skill set." John Moses Browning was taught gunsmithing and engineering in his father's workshop. Mozart learned the fundamentals of pianoforte under his father, a music teacher and minor composer. Far from expecting them to move heaven and earth to induce their own growth, I say children need shepherding. People naturally glue to things, yes, but early exposure and assistance seems to be a constant as well. On the other hand, it's hard to imagine a Browning or a Mozart or indeed a Jack White popping in the days of Tik Tok, as you point out.
Love it Alan, it's a good Analogy and gets at a lot of what I've been writing about in the current series on slaves within our society. We stopped seeing ourselves as needing to take care of those lower than us in any kinds of manner - whether a part of natural law or God's commands to love those in the Image of Christ. We don't value the humanity in others and, thus, we haven't valued their work. We've gone looking for slave labor and tried to do what we can to drive down the values of it, increase the dependency of laborers upon the masters, and cut all ties to culture to make it so that they have nothing to fight for.
But, it can change. We can choose to see each other as humans again. Choose to raise those below us from slaves to servants - those with more agency, who tend to the cares of each other. The master looks after the servant, and the servant looks after the master. They carry each other; for each has strengths and weaknesses. Each fulfills something that is lacking in the other, to accomplish goals that could not be done without the other.
All nations, all Empires, are built on slaves or servants.
A lot of insight in this one. I tutor Asian kids in composition, and they are thoroughbreds par excellence. A Hong Kong girl, aged 10, dared me to give her any two numbers and she would multiply them immediately in her head. Not a problem for her. This is a typical sort of thing for hyper-achieving Asian kids who are constantly monitored and spurred on by their parents. So I've been grappling with the question of this laser-focus on academics and official systems of merit for some time now. I'm frustrated because I can see the value of it, but there's just . . . something . . . missing.
I grew up in the typical American way, with education being almost an afterthought, my parents oblivious to what I was doing in school, much less what I did in my free time. By the grace of the Almighty I was born pre-internet and my family always had books lying around, so by the age of 14 I was browsing Shakespeare comedies and becoming mentally seasoned in my own way. Despite the seasoning, I found that a young man becomes a "draft horse" by default in the States unless he has special oversight, preparation, and connections. Those are Asian advantages, and though I have affection for the kids I teach, I'm concerned that their "thoroughbred" upbringing will make them the next generation of leadership in all American institutions. What then? When I picture "great leaders," I don't think of super-bright East Asians who took the prize at the spelling bee.
I don't think the western genius lies in getting the highest test scores or in preparing every child to be a famous researcher. I think it's possible that elitism itself is foreign to the west, and we have allowed it to creep in from outside. But I say this as someone who never won any awards or trophies.
From what I've seen, the truly innovative naturally gravitate to their skill set if not distracted by easy distractions. The ones interested in music would move heaven and earth to get an instrument, same with the computer kids. The killers of these instincts is time sink activities like busywork or pointless phone scrolling and being overly socialized. It's why I believe, no matter the intelligence, that more than a few hours of formal schooling a day is detrimental.
Respectfully, I disagree that "the truly innovative naturally gravitate to their skill set." John Moses Browning was taught gunsmithing and engineering in his father's workshop. Mozart learned the fundamentals of pianoforte under his father, a music teacher and minor composer. Far from expecting them to move heaven and earth to induce their own growth, I say children need shepherding. People naturally glue to things, yes, but early exposure and assistance seems to be a constant as well. On the other hand, it's hard to imagine a Browning or a Mozart or indeed a Jack White popping in the days of Tik Tok, as you point out.
Love it Alan, it's a good Analogy and gets at a lot of what I've been writing about in the current series on slaves within our society. We stopped seeing ourselves as needing to take care of those lower than us in any kinds of manner - whether a part of natural law or God's commands to love those in the Image of Christ. We don't value the humanity in others and, thus, we haven't valued their work. We've gone looking for slave labor and tried to do what we can to drive down the values of it, increase the dependency of laborers upon the masters, and cut all ties to culture to make it so that they have nothing to fight for.
But, it can change. We can choose to see each other as humans again. Choose to raise those below us from slaves to servants - those with more agency, who tend to the cares of each other. The master looks after the servant, and the servant looks after the master. They carry each other; for each has strengths and weaknesses. Each fulfills something that is lacking in the other, to accomplish goals that could not be done without the other.
All nations, all Empires, are built on slaves or servants.
We cannot get around those facts.
So, which do we want to have?