Textbooks and Fast-Food Restaurants

Posted on February 10, 2013 by marklangley

As much as I try I now find it nearly impossible to get enthusiastic about any textbook.

There is something about the whole textbook genre that just seems almost intrinsically boring- or at the very best, interesting for a very limited amount of time.

In my former days as a curriculum developer (for a fairly spiffy NCSMO- that would be “National Charter School Mangagement Organization” for you non-education people out there) I remember, hazily, that the topic of text books interested me a great deal.

It was, at one time, delightful for me to compare one Algebra II textbook with another.

It used to be thrilling to receive big boxes from the six or seven publishers of note, like Houghton Miffllin and Scott Foresman and McGraw-Hill, stuffed with grade school and High school math and science texts.

With the help of consultants, I would place the books side by side and compare one highschool biology book to another making a judgement about which appeared to be the best. Then after several weeks of studying the major Biology books and preparing a 15-25 page analysis, I (well….we) would then proceed with enthusiasm to the chemistry books.

Then after that I would study the Algebra textbooks and the Geometry text books. And then, with the necessary reports having been duly reported, I launched into a comparison of the highschool physics textbooks!

After at least a full year of examining Math and science textbooks it them became my delight to examine writing and composition textbooks.

Of course, with “literature,” given the sheer number of books to read and infinite opinions about approaches, it became my delight to coordinate the writing, by a half dozen talented writers, literature text books and teaching manuals! So I suppose that I have even added one or two textbooks to the world (albeit, perhaps now only to the list of completely obsolete and forgotten textbooks!)

Comparing one textbook to another is a laborious process. One has to examine the order of each text, its readability, proportionality to grade levels, its coherence with itself as well as with other previously chosen textbooks, the “problem sets” that each proposes for students, testing and assessement tools, quality and ability to hold interest, perhaps even the politcal agenda, and yes even the pictures!

Sometimes I wish that I had been more careful to keep copies of all this work carefully filed away somewhere, but then it occurs to me that all of the text books that I examined ten years ago have all vanished and have been replaced by new textbooks – or at the very least new and updated editions. And to make matters worse, new authors have stepped forward and have written new textbooks.

I don’t wish to say anything more about textbooks at the moment- except merely to note that, quite simply, the subject bores me.

Well… not quite. I suppose if you happened to have a box of Algebra II textbooks, or highschool physics textbooks hanging around I could summon up some enthusiam and probably spend a couple hours comparing them and discussing their relative merits with anyone who might be willing.

But then again I am also able to get enthusiastic about telling you why I like McDonalds better than Burger King- and would be willing to spend some time on the subject trying to convince you why Burger King is better.

I suppose one can get excited about anything…

 

 

 

 

 

Posted in Mathematics, Textbooks, Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

The Olive Wreath

Posted on February 4, 2013 by marklangley

When Xerxes discovered that the Greeks were celebrating the Olympic Festival  the first day after the battle of Thermopylae he asked a Greek deserter “for what do the Greek athletes contend?”

When told that they were not competing for money or for any sort of material posession, but rather for an olive wreath-  Herodotus reports that one of the men in Xerxes’company could not help himself but to cry out:

Good heavens Mardonius,  what kind of men are these against whom you have brought us to fight? Men who do not compete for riches, but for honour.

Those who pursue liberal education do not contend for a material possession either – and somehow I think that it will also be upon these that civilization rests.

Posted in ad libitum, classical education, truth for its own sake | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Wisdom is the Most Honorable and Best Knowledge.

Posted on January 6, 2013 by marklangley

What better subject to contemplate on the Epiphany- a feast in which kings from the east found wisdom lying in a cradle and worshiped Him as that which is most honorable.

Wisdom is in fact the most honorable kind of knowledge and we might even go so far as to say the most honorable thing that we can pursue.

So far – just to recapitulate we have discussed St Thomas’ first three attributes of wisdom (which it goes without saying is a ‘science’ about first causes and principles):

  1. Wisdom is a speculative knowledge
  2. Wisdom is a liberal knowledge
  3. Wisdom is  not really properly speaking a human possession

And now, finally, we are going to say that Wisdom is the most honorable and therefore best knowledge.

St Thomas offers the following syllogism:

That science which is most divine is most honorable, just as God Himself is also the most honorable of all things. But this science is the most divine, and is therefore the most honorable.

and then he explains

First, the science which God has is said to be divine; and second, the science which is about divine matters is said to be divine. But it is evident that only this science meets both of these requirements, because, since this science is about first causes and principles, it must be about God; for God is understood in this way by all inasmuch as He is one of the causes and a principle of things.

So Wisdom is divine- and then he hearkens back to the fact that wisdom is not really a human possession- confirming what we might be thinking, namely that if we have wisdom maybe we are just sort of borrowing it?

Again, such a science which is about God and first causes, either God alone has or, if not He alone, at least He has it in the highest degree. Indeed, He alone has it in a perfectly comprehensive way. And He has it in the highest degree inasmuch as it is also had by men in their own way, although it is not had by them as a human possession, but as something borrowed from Him.

So there we have it – Wisdom is speculative, liberal, borrowed from God, and therefore absolutely divine!

Maybe it does make sense to expend considerable trouble to get some of it. Those three wise men really knew what they were doing.

Posted in classical education, truth for its own sake, Wisdom | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Wisdom is Not a Human Possession

Posted on January 3, 2013 by marklangley

As one reads through the little section on St Thomas Aquinas’ commentary on the Metaphysics where he sets forth the four attributes of wisdom (from which we have been shamelessly borrowing- without even the slightest acknowledgement), one runs across this little  passage:

Here he proves the third attribute, namely, that this science is not a human [possession]

Which is kind of a strange thing to say- but then again apparently it was inspired at least in part by the poet Simonides, who said,

Only god has this honor

which of course also sounds like Pythagoras who said,

no man but only god is wise

Pythagoras and Simonides may in fact have hatched this sentiment together for all I know since they lived in the same century basically (6th -5th century BC ).

But the point is that Aristotle takes this as the third attribute of wisdom and I think it strikes one as kind of strange at first glance, as I was saying a moment ago.

Nonetheless, St Thomas clarifying Aristotle says,

A science which is free in the highest degree cannot be a possession of that nature which is servile and subordinate in many respects. But human nature is servile “in many respects,” i.e., in many ways. Therefore this science is not a human possession.

And that is as nice a little syllogism as anyone could hope for, although I don’t like St Thomas insinuating that people (i.e. like me particularly) are servile.  As a matter of fact who does he think he is anyway?!

But he goes on to explain why human beings are in fact quite ‘servile’

…human nature is said to be servile insofar as it stands in need of many things. And on this account it happens that man sometimes neglects what should be sought for its own sake because of the things necessary for life.

I think he is being extra nice here when he says that “man sometimes neglects what should be sought for its own sake ….” This is the sort of understatement that  we might even call a “litotes,”

Thus it is said in Book III of the Topics that it is better to philosophize than to become wealthy, although sometimes becoming wealthy is more desirable, that is, to one lacking life’s necessities.

Incidentally, it is also reported that when Simonides was asked “whether it was better to be wealthy or wise” he apparently replied:

Wealthy; for I see the wise spending their days at the doors of the wealthy.

But this is a mere digression and I don’t think we should believe Simonides here. It is clear to me that he is making a joke and probably has lots of friends involved in fundraising for small classical schools. But let us return to St. Thomas,

From this it is clear that that wisdom is sought for itself alone which does not belong to man as his proper possession. For man has as his possession what he can have at his command and use freely. But that science which is sought for itself alone, man cannot use freely, since he is often kept from it because of the necessities of life.

This is an interesting distinction. Those things which are properly called our possessions are things that we have at our “command” and can “use freely.” This makes sense to me. Especially when it comes to material possessions. If one has to ask permission to use something, that is a sure sigh that one does not really own it.

This reminds me of a lawnmower which I “deeded” to friend in return for many favors he did for me. Well grass being what it is, I ended up borrowing this lawnmower for several years after and each time I asked permission to use it I recognized that I really did not own the lawnmower. It was no longer properly speaking my possession. I no longer could use it freely anytime I wanted to. It was not at my command. This is a painful memory for me- but you will be happy to know that I now have another lawnmower that I purchased on Craigsglist for 50 bucks. This lawnmower is now my possession in every sense of the word.

Nor again is it subject to man’s command, because man cannot acquire it perfectly. Yet that very small part of it which he does have outweighs all the things known through the other sciences.

This is also a little strange. First he says that wisdom is not really properly speaking a human possession- but then he consoles us by saying that the very small part of it which we may finally get far “outweighs” all other things that are in fact probably, properly speaking, human possessions. Interesting that something which is not properly speaking a human possession is better than anything else we have- could wisdom be something kind of ….divine?

 

 

Posted in classical education, Wisdom | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Wisdom is about causes

Posted on January 1, 2013 by marklangley

Forgive me for having skipped what I think is the most obvious characteristic of wisdom – namely that it is a knowledge of causes.

Therefore we now have three characteristics of wisdom- to wit:

  1. It is a knowledge about causes
  2. It is speculative
  3. It is liberal

The fact that it is about causes is clear to anyone who has had the experience of speaking with a wise person. Whenever, for example, I chance upon someone who is wise in a certain  subject I find myself asking questions like “Why is the sky blue?” or “what is the secret of happiness?” or “How can I make  more money?”

And anyone who has questions that begins with “why,” “what,” or “how,” knows that very often the only satisfactory answers must ultimately entail some sort of cause.

The wise person will, in fact, sometimes even begin a reply with the word “beCAUSE” which I think provides us with sufficient evidence for the truth of what I am asserting here- namely that wisdom has to to do with knowledge of causes.

Posted in Uncategorized, Wisdom | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Wisdom is Liberal

Posted on December 30, 2012 by marklangley

Well I hate to say it, but the second (or third) characteristic of wisdom is that it is liberal. But of course we don’t mean ‘liberal’ as in ‘Teddy Kennedy liberal.’ We mean liberal as opposed to servile or what we would call today ‘mechanical.’

 

Wisdom is knowledge that is pursued for its own sake. One ought to repeat that idea in his head until it rolls out of the mouth with perfect ease- and not even a trace of embarrassed hesitation.

We Americans have many many virtues not the least of which is our national work ethic. Americans are known for their industry. Their rugged individualism and practicality. We are known for our enterprising and entrepreneurial-business-minded-get-things-done-efficiently attitude.

“The business of America is business”

quoth Calvin Coolidge – and even if he did say it on the eve of The Great Depression, nonetheless, I think he captures something of the American character.

Needless to say, coming from such a powerful American custom which places pragmatism as a priority and a chief value to be inculcated, I need hardly mention that the concept of doing something “for its own sake” is something of an embarrassment to red blooded Americans like me.

We tend to equate doing something for its own sake either with some sort of recreation (which is fine on the weekends or during a holiday), or with simply doing nothing at all (which is much to be frowned upon unless when sleeping).

The idea of seeking knowledge for its own sake appears to be an extravagance that perhaps is justifiable for the very wealthy, but certainly not for the middle class and by no means for the poor.

We mutter to ourselves “How does improving the mind for its own sake benefit anyone? How does it make the world a better place? What sort of amelioration to suffering mankind does it promote?”

Nonetheless, when I was growing up I was always taught to seek wisdom, like Solomon of old, and it turns out that wisdom is a kind of knowledge which is for its own sake.

A slave by definition is one who exists for the sake of someone beyond himself-the master (we simply allude to the fact and not to the morality of slavery), whereas a master is one who exists for his own sake. This is why every kind of knowledge which is ordered to something beyond itself is called “servile.”

Knowledge which exists for its own sake is liberal- and this is the kind of knowledge that wisdom is.

Posted in classical education, education, slavery, truth for its own sake, Uncategorized, Wisdom | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

The first Characteristic of Wisdom

Posted on December 28, 2012 by marklangley

Speaking of wisdom, perhaps it would be good to review four characteristics that will help us to distinguish the kind of knowledge that it is. I do but merely transcribe from the fading memory of a certain lecture these humble notes:

Let us only examine one of these characteristics today.

First is wisdom something practical or speculative? And here we do not mean speculative in the sense of “speculation” (as in the art of losing one’s money in the stock market). We mean, rather, speculative in the root meaning of the Latin word ‘speculo, speculare’ which means ‘to look.’

Wisdom is not practical knowledge and we might guess this from two signs.

First wisdom is birthed from wonder and wonder is not a practical thing.Take note:

Twinkle Twinkle little star how I wonder what you are!

not

Twinkle Twinkle little star how I want to figure out how to make money from you!

Second, consider how those who call themselves lovers of wisdom- philosophers- are generally not very practical people (with the exception of a few, and – by the way- I, being far too humble, do not claim to be  philosopher, except in a very general sense.) In the generations of men it is common to see something like the following:

A very practical father who may be a carpenter or a skilled trades person works to make a better life for his children. He wants to give them the education that he never had.

https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQ7oolMM0qm-6efCG0Dva12bA4XmIwb2KJ1_IyFMgyO5oMSAcXUxA

His son perhaps goes to college and learns the art of business, or perhaps he even becomes a doctor or an attorney or something else. He is consequently even more successful than his father.

He in turn has some children some of whom turn themselves towards the pursuit of entirely useless things like art or dance or acting or even- and some might say this is the most useless- the improvement of the mind for its own sake.

I think this is a pretty common experience. It takes three generations to produce a philosopher. I suppose some people might see this progression as rather a devolution (or a digression?). It seems to proceed from men standing up and working to the fellow sitting down and thinking. What does the sitting man have to show for his work. Nothing!

And in all likelihood the so called homo sapiens et sedens will have children who will be penniless and therefore have to return to very difficult labor in the fields or shops or wherever.

Nonetheless, we maintain that wisdom is speculative.

 

 

 

 

Posted in classical education, Liberal Arts, truth for its own sake, Wisdom | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

How Must Wisdom be Loved?

Posted on December 26, 2012 by marklangley

On this second day of Christmas, what better thing than to meditate upon Wisdom whose birthday we have just celebrated and draw attention to the fact that He must be loved in the same four ways that the philosopher loves wisdom.

We might first begin with an allusion to the first O Antiphon.

O Wisdom that camest out of the mouth of the most high, reaching from end to end and ordering all things mightlily and sweetly, come and teach us the way of prudence.    (Ecclesiates 24: 5 and Wisdom 8, 1)

First we must love wisdom for its own sake. Quite simply if we loved wisdom for the sake of something else like money or power or honor, someone would quickly see that it was not wisdom that we loved but rather one of these other things. Similarly if we loved a woman not for her own sake but rather for the sake of say -her money, then she could quite correctly accuse us of not loving her but loving her money. To love wisdom for the sake of something else is a bit of an insult to wisdom.

Second given that we love wisdom for its own sake, it follows that we must love wisdom for its own sake more than other things that we love for their own sakes. For example we ought to love music for its own sake, but if we love music more than wisdom then we really are not lovers of wisdom.

Third, it follows that if we love wisdom more than anything else, therefore we must love wisdom as the end or purpose of our life. This needs no further explanation.

Fourth, because truth, and therefore pre-eminently wisdom,  is not a private good, therefore we must love wisdom for what it is – the good of all. In other words wisdom is a common good.

Pope Benedict XVI beautifully says (Dec 25, 2009 Vespers in St Peter’s Basilica):

The Christian professor, or a young Christian student, carries within him a passionate love for this Wisdom! He reads everything in her light; he finds Wisdom’s imprints in the elementary particles and in the verses of poets; in juridical codes and in the events of history; in works of art and in mathematical formulas.  Without Wisdom not anything was made that was made (cf. Jn 1:3) and therefore in every created reality one can see Wisdom reflected, clearly visible in different ways and degrees…”

and then he says,

“Dear friends, helping others to see the true face of God is the first form of love, which for you takes on the role of intellectual charity…”

Posted in ad libitum, classical education, Science | Tagged , , , , | 1 Comment

Liberal Education Works

Posted on December 24, 2012 by marklangley

The late philosopher Marcus Berquist once made a remark about how working with ones hands has a significant value for the one pursuing philosophy. I wish I could remember his words exactly- but the point was that hard work never hurt anyone – and don’t trust a philosopher who has no experience with honest labor. That is at least the way I understood it at the time.

Hence this posting in the “Liberal education at work” series.

Please be advised that I am not ready to defend this posture when using a sledgehammer. But I think whoever coined the phrase “back-breaking labor,” was certainly a man with sledgehammer experience.

Proper use of a sledgehammer? Ouch…maybe they should make these with longer handles?

After a full day I think I would have  opted for a jack hammer.

Next… an actual shovel ready job!

Liberal education and the “shovel ready job.”

After several weeks of buying 20 bricks at a time, we ended up with this. Now I just to have replant the grass along the sides.

Voila! Brick Pavers.

Posted in ad libitum, liberal education works, slavery | Tagged , , , , | 1 Comment

Herodotus and History

Posted on December 13, 2012 by marklangley

https://i0.wp.com/upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/da/AGMA_H%C3%A9rodote.jpgReading Herodotus with students in the ninth and tenth grade presents some challenges. I always tell them not to worry if they don’t feel like they are understanding it on the “first read.” That is the way Great Books are. If a book is entirely intelligible the very first time it is read, that is probably a sign that it is a mediocre book- probably a text book- and not therefore, self evidently, worth reading a second time. (I might anticipate a possible objection about children’s stories which we read again and again. But isn’t it true that the most read children’s stories do in fact contain something of the mystery of human life- and often deep ethical questions that are worth pondering again and again?)

After many years of reading and hearing the Bible read, how many of us feel like we have anything but a superficial understanding? We continually go back to it for more and more. It is capable of feeding our souls and minds endlessly. Likewise with the Great books although to an admittedly (perhaps infinitely) less extent. No less a thinker than Blessed John Henry Newman made this very point when he said somewhere that the canon of Western Literature has something of the character of Holy Scripture in this regard. Don’t get me wrong here- I do not want to elevate the status of the Great Books to the level of God’s own word, but I simply mean to say that the Great Books are great because they have something in them that transcends ordinary human insight. One could almost say that many of the authors of the Great Books wrote what they did with the inspiration of God, or at least under the influence of some minor deity or another. That is precisely why they should be read again and again.

At any rate, Herodotus is difficult to understand the first time. There are so many names and places. If one is not familiar with Greek Mythology and Homer it is even tougher to get a foothold.

Obviously Herodotus is important to read for those who strive after a classical education. I don’t think anyone would maintain that it is possible to be educated without knowing who the Delphic Oracle was or who Croesus was or Miltiades or Themistocles or Darius or Cambyses or Xerxes or….

Clearly anyone who is interested in politics and the origin of our own democratic institutions would forever be frustrated if he did not read about the origins of democracy in Athens and by contrast the more kingly rule in Sparta- although a rule according to law.

Anyone who is interested in ethics, law, morality and the effect of custom on human behavior would be handicapped without a familiarity with Herodotus’ colorful descriptions of the various peoples and nations that he covers with encyclopedic breadth. Of course I mention this with a caveat that those who misread Herodotus might use these stories as material to advance a moral relativism, given the diversity of accepted customs among various northern tribes (like the Scythians) some quite appalling! But one cannot read Herodotus without seeing clearly the improving influence that civilization has on behavior.

Herodotus, in contrast to many so called ‘historians’, makes it clear that individuals have a profound effect on history. In consequence, it becomes apparent to his readers that human character, virtue and vice, are of the utmost significance in determining historical causes. This is especially refreshing in our day when students are fed historical accounts that seem to attribute causation to far more impersonal causes such as the purely economic or geographical- or social movements or “systemic or environmental  causes.”

Of course Herodotus also gives us a refreshing account of not just human causality, but also a great deal of attention to divine causality as especially manifest through the attention that he gives to the oracles.

The reader might be slightly skeptical about the verity of the often ambiguous Delphic utterances, but say what you will Herodotus makes a clear case for the significance of divine causation in History.

In our day it is customary to belittle men greater than ourselves. My version of Herodotus comes with a full plate of footnotes which are careful to kabitz and point out minor inaccuracies and discrepancies within the text.  The effect that these notes have in my view is to finally render Herodotus rather innocuous to the student and relegate him to the status of a harmless but unscientific yet charming author- certainly not a historian!

Nonetheless, as I point out to my students, such clever foot-note writers would have absolutely no standing whatever were it not for the big man- Herodotus.

Posted in classical education, History, Literature | Tagged , , , , , , | 1 Comment