Love the observation on how maturity plays a role in how we think. It’s easy to forget that our brains grow and change over our lifetimes, molding to new patterns of thinking that we rehearse. Therefore, it is vital that we choose to establish the neural pathways which lead to critical thinking as opposed to just going with the flow of others or doing what we’re told by institutions.
Happy to have discovered your Substack Michael. Thinking about letting my 12-year-old read it too (when I asked her what she wants to be when she grows up, she said “I want to be a polymath.” Funny - she already is! Exhibiting artist, singer, plays 3 instruments, loves math and writes at high school level).
On the ability to think critically and with nuance. This is an ability we are losing fast, ironically due in large part to the way we approach and use technology. Technology that has such profound potential, and humans are blowing it a little. This is the reason I’ve joined Substack in fact. To do my part in fomenting nuanced thinking in society. And to find others doing so.
Yes, especially social media. Offend, shock, enrage, bully, goad... all the raw emotions we love to hate with. Also a lot of positive ones ofc, but the person-to-person connection and empathy are largely lost.
One element one could also weave through this is the idea of experience with age. At 60, my brain thinks very differently than it did at say 30 or 40, about many things. COVID was a good example of that. I know a 30 year old who followed every irrational rule and mandate that came along. We had other thoughts, based on experience and a knowledge base. Masks were dumb, not to mention ineffective, so was the random 6 feet apart “rule” and I won’t even wander into the whole “vaccine” issue.
I wonder how many are critically thinking about COVID, post COVID.
Great points. Age does have the advantage of patterns of failure and absurdity you don't have when you are young. Yet it is my contention, with COVID, that everything was already there but was lacking logic and critique. It didn't take much logical formulation to see the absurdity in the rules by and large.
Now as to whether they'll think critically about COVID post COVID? I'd say my emperical and annecdotal observations don't inspire confidence. I actually wrote this essay on Cognitive Blindness after a series of conversations where people who were totalitarian in 2020 had no memory of it and even 'glitched' when shown their posts and comments and instead blamed everyone else for their behavior.
Interesting! I wonder, with polymathic disciplines, is there an exploration to "mind-mapping"? I recently discovered this on a 6 levels of thinking youtube video and I see similarities to this post.
Likely, If you can share the link I'd love to take a look. There's a lot of different 'mind mapping' concepts out there so I want to make sure I know which one this was. One of the biggest benefits of polymathic disciplines is that it's inclusive, not exclusive, and the main goal is to figure out how to break down complex problems more successfully not matter what tools.
The "mind-mapping" explanation starts at the 9:20 timestamp. Of course, what stops anyone to view the entire video to decide for themselves.
What comes to mind is "strategic-thinking" mapping out the possibilities in results anyone can achieve through analysis, hypothesizing, and evaluations to practical living. One can see, it can be a challenge for one to explore the unknown with this thinking.
That's a great video. I would say my writing here starts at the Analyze and Evaluate levels of Blooms and then does work down into the details. I think a lot of 'hot takes' online are just at level 3. One solution - One problem and misses the complexities.
I've also always been more of a tops down learner where a lot of people follow the bottoms up. I could never do the rote memorization without context for why it mattered. Once I had that context, I didn't have to memorize the crap anymore.
I gonna challenge myself to learn something new (play the lyre), and apply Bloom's level of taxonomy. I clearly see myself start at level 1 to learn the notes, chords, and placing of the fingers on the lyre. I feel like in order for me to jump at least to a level 4, I would need to at least know the notes of each string and have an understanding to each notes tune. I sense if I jump to a level 4,5, or 6, I would create garbage, which I don't want...
Love the observation on how maturity plays a role in how we think. It’s easy to forget that our brains grow and change over our lifetimes, molding to new patterns of thinking that we rehearse. Therefore, it is vital that we choose to establish the neural pathways which lead to critical thinking as opposed to just going with the flow of others or doing what we’re told by institutions.
Exactly right and the power of the learning, unlearning, and relearning to maintain that growth.
Happy to have discovered your Substack Michael. Thinking about letting my 12-year-old read it too (when I asked her what she wants to be when she grows up, she said “I want to be a polymath.” Funny - she already is! Exhibiting artist, singer, plays 3 instruments, loves math and writes at high school level).
On the ability to think critically and with nuance. This is an ability we are losing fast, ironically due in large part to the way we approach and use technology. Technology that has such profound potential, and humans are blowing it a little. This is the reason I’ve joined Substack in fact. To do my part in fomenting nuanced thinking in society. And to find others doing so.
If you haven't seen this one yet, I'd recommend it for your daughter too regarding social media and communication interactions in general.
https://polymathicbeing.substack.com/p/the-conoftext
thank you will take a look!
Great feedback and I'd love to help an aspiring polymath navigate the boons and banes in a world of specialization.
I agree on the technology, specifically social media. It's designed to trigger, not contemplate. I like saying you have to offend to trend.
Yes, especially social media. Offend, shock, enrage, bully, goad... all the raw emotions we love to hate with. Also a lot of positive ones ofc, but the person-to-person connection and empathy are largely lost.
Interesting read.
One element one could also weave through this is the idea of experience with age. At 60, my brain thinks very differently than it did at say 30 or 40, about many things. COVID was a good example of that. I know a 30 year old who followed every irrational rule and mandate that came along. We had other thoughts, based on experience and a knowledge base. Masks were dumb, not to mention ineffective, so was the random 6 feet apart “rule” and I won’t even wander into the whole “vaccine” issue.
I wonder how many are critically thinking about COVID, post COVID.
Great points. Age does have the advantage of patterns of failure and absurdity you don't have when you are young. Yet it is my contention, with COVID, that everything was already there but was lacking logic and critique. It didn't take much logical formulation to see the absurdity in the rules by and large.
Now as to whether they'll think critically about COVID post COVID? I'd say my emperical and annecdotal observations don't inspire confidence. I actually wrote this essay on Cognitive Blindness after a series of conversations where people who were totalitarian in 2020 had no memory of it and even 'glitched' when shown their posts and comments and instead blamed everyone else for their behavior.
https://polymathicbeing.substack.com/p/you-know-nothing
When I’m teaching people I often make the distinction between “seriously thinking” and “thinking seriously”…
Too many people conflate the second with the first.
Bingo…Either they don’t see a difference or they don’t know the difference…
The discussion of critic is especially important
It’s a lot harder to do right than most imagine.
As a mathematician and astrophysicist I am pretty much a critical thinking professional. Even so, I regularly examine my own thought processes.
Interesting! I wonder, with polymathic disciplines, is there an exploration to "mind-mapping"? I recently discovered this on a 6 levels of thinking youtube video and I see similarities to this post.
Excellent article. :)
Likely, If you can share the link I'd love to take a look. There's a lot of different 'mind mapping' concepts out there so I want to make sure I know which one this was. One of the biggest benefits of polymathic disciplines is that it's inclusive, not exclusive, and the main goal is to figure out how to break down complex problems more successfully not matter what tools.
https://youtu.be/1xqerXscTsE?si=FCYeE3KMWQZWOmNE
The "mind-mapping" explanation starts at the 9:20 timestamp. Of course, what stops anyone to view the entire video to decide for themselves.
What comes to mind is "strategic-thinking" mapping out the possibilities in results anyone can achieve through analysis, hypothesizing, and evaluations to practical living. One can see, it can be a challenge for one to explore the unknown with this thinking.
That's a great video. I would say my writing here starts at the Analyze and Evaluate levels of Blooms and then does work down into the details. I think a lot of 'hot takes' online are just at level 3. One solution - One problem and misses the complexities.
I've also always been more of a tops down learner where a lot of people follow the bottoms up. I could never do the rote memorization without context for why it mattered. Once I had that context, I didn't have to memorize the crap anymore.
I gonna challenge myself to learn something new (play the lyre), and apply Bloom's level of taxonomy. I clearly see myself start at level 1 to learn the notes, chords, and placing of the fingers on the lyre. I feel like in order for me to jump at least to a level 4, I would need to at least know the notes of each string and have an understanding to each notes tune. I sense if I jump to a level 4,5, or 6, I would create garbage, which I don't want...
Well wish me luck.
Let me know how it goes.
Is Gensler your favorite author on logic? Or is the quote incidental?
Quote is incidental. What are your thoughts on the rest of his arguments?