Reified Randomness…

Reification. The process/reasoning error of which is defined as viewing an intangible, immaterial concept as a tangible, quantifiable, measurable construct. As the human species and our seemingly insatiable curious tendencies develop, we tend to create reified, societal, cultural, constructs and objects, perhaps the most prominent being intelligence, which serves as the focus of this post.

Defined as our collective experience, capacity to learn and adapt mental sets, etc. what truly is intelligence? How can such a truly intangible, reified concept be so ingrained in our society, specifically our education? As I often ponder about this world, our existence, the human capacity, and the abstractions that are so fundamental, yet seemingly  irrelevant (I typically spend much of my “free” time wondering what reality is, how our species collectively has developed, and what truly is the purpose of this reified cyclical “thing” called life, but I digress…) I find intelligence to be specifically interesting. Why has the human species defined intelligence, among other conceptual constructs? It is purely an instrument of distinguish, exemplifying the mental diversity of our species/society? More so, we see the significance of IQ Tests and standardized measures of “intelligence” dwindle, exemplifying, to me at least, that reified concepts are largely unquantifiable despite their integration into our societal organization.

Though, from a computational perspective, have we quantified “intelligence?” Machine Learning, statistical modeling and dynamic, parallel programming would perhaps have support for a different definition, as collection/threshold of information/knowledge, and the dynamism to apply such to presented, experienced-based problems, this definition, reified or not, has no direct, range of quantifiable values, but certainly could explain some of these aforementioned immaterial abstractions, and emphasize the role of the developmental environment in the development our mental capacities.

Overall, as I read over this post, I recognize that this is merely an array of questions, a display of my (some would argue “our”) own ignorance of our species, capacities as an entity, and cannot help but wonder, what does anybody who happens to come across this post think? Are reified concepts legitimate or purely demonstrations of our attempts at justifying, rectifying, and explaining our experiences, natural differences, etc.?

My quest…for understanding.

This post is going to be in regards to the further topics established within this category, of which I will share with the world, my theories, upon life, consciousness, but more specifically cognitive neuroscience, discussing this “three-pound thing of flesh” within our skulls, and my theories, thoughts, and postulations for perhaps why we “think”, “dream”,etc.

Perhaps the most significant thing in these posts, is remembering that I have no  certain, quantifiable evidence (in most cases, that I can thoroughly, support or prove), and I am only following a deep intrinsic interest and passion, I only have knowledge of this “stuff” from Cognitive Computational Neuroscience textbook, a mostly outdated  Psychology textbook, Quora, and TED talks, and the spontaneous unexplained thoughts that pop into my head in the most sporadic of times… If you want to go as far as calling me ignorant and naive, then go ahead, because I am… Comment, disprove me, debate me, I insist, the only way I will get something right, is by being wrong…

Topics:

– My thought, postulations on:

• Dreams
• Thoughts
• Brain Formations
• Sleep
• Connectome Development
• Cognitive Computing

– Wesley Roth

Why do we compete?

         Perhaps one of the most interesting aspects of society that I have been analyzing, of which is related to the productivity, performance, and capabilities of our species, is our necessity to compete and compare with each other. For example, when presented with a score or standardized measure, from a contextual perspective, we care less about the score, unless juxtaposed to that of another individual. “You did 5 points better than (__Insert Name Here__)! Good Job” seems to mean a lot more than “You did 5 points better than your last score! Keep on improving,” thus leading me to question, does competition promote success, innovation, and progress? This assumption sure is definitive of many industries, f.e. Twitter vs. Facebook or vs. Google+ (in which some ways are completely different in their purpose, implementation, and audience), and is used as a motivation for progress, as many would argue, without competition “we” wouldn’t innovate… However, several studies, events, and actions contradict this “perspective” or better yet, mindset, which only competition and comparison ensues in productivity and innovation. Perhaps one of the most notable examples, or soon to be notable examples, is that by which defines and structurally comprises the widely re-known, and prosperous school system of Finland. Of which, exemplifies that competition is not institutionalized and implemented into the system in hopes of the production of dynamism or progress, but rather “cooperation” [is] between schools, teachers, principals, etc., no competition between the progress of schools, teachers, etc., leading me to believe that our society’s “problem” (indeed, sometimes our desire for competition and comparison can be more of a hindrance than its intentions at being a benchmark purely for comparative purposes, I’ll be going into this later…) is going to be a bulwark at any true revolution of our school system, as well as having other social, economic, and political implications…

The Mindset

Instinctively, one might instantaneously associate this “mindset” with that of the American culture, as our society typically does promote competition, comparison, through mediums such as athletics, school, etc. While I am in no position to address the global scale of this mindset; however, I do feel there is a dominant emphasis specifically amongst the realm of American culture. This is where the connection can be made, in regards to the methods and problems within our Public Education System (that stem from this “mindset”) as well as methods and problems for the psyche of the “individual” person.  In relation to the revolution of our School System, I believe that by retracting focus from objectifying competition and promoting comparison as methods of motivation and progress, via less standardized testing, better teaching evaluations (no more seniority “bonuses” or “pay by performance”; they are treated with status and respect, better “overall” pay/compensation, etc.)… Furthermore, detracting focus from adapting students to curricula and broad-based testing/evaluations, independent, specially adapted curricula should be implemented in order for more efficient development of the student. I feel that by changing this “mindset” and as a subsequent result, these fundamentals in the American Education System can be changed, leading to a more productive, independent, and prosperous school system at its roots…

Why… this Mindset? 

Another interesting aspect to look at this “mindset” from is that of the personal psyche of individuals, and self-improvement/ personal development.  The underlying reason, I think that “we” think that we are in constant competition with each other is because our society has emplaced us in such positions. As the world and its Peoples become more connected, specialized, and populous, we objectify concepts of development through money and prospects of money (i.e. employment). Therefore, in order to “officially develop” (defined by being recognized for your efforts) you augment in pay and must compete, compete with an x amount of others for an n amount of jobs (where n < x in all instances); thus competition. Now whether this is bad or good, I would assume in most aspects, both… Competition for the individual typically provokes and motivates people to enhance themselves, try new things, learn, etc., but it also can come at a cost, whether that be “stress” or unemployment at times of economic hardships, etc., thus leading me to conclude that a society will always have competition in some form or another, whether it range from the individuals that comprise the society, the industries that make the societies’ economy, or the politicians that “compete” for legislature, etc. leading me incapable of truly contriving what a realistic “society” without competition would look like, think about it, can you imagine a society without competition? (Keep in mind, that competition could be eradicated if every individual in the designated society was self-motivated purely off of intrinsic interest and motivation, and were able to provide (food, shelter, the necessities) based off such interest, but I am trying to be as realistic as possible). Feel free to comment about it, I am interested in your guy’s thoughts… Do you think competition is necessary, good, or bad?

Teach yours students… Not just your discipline…

There is a foundational and fundamental problem that is plaguing our education system, and is derived from the methodologies of which our students, our succeeding generation, is taught. Our teachers are trained to be specialized within their designated curricula, whether that be English Grammar and Composition, or Biology, or even Human Geography, and there is nothing directly wrong with such, as a teacher should be well versed in their curricula that they are expected to teach to children. However, an indirect problem results from this specialization in only their designated curriculum, they become “regurgitat-ors” of material, teaching their curricula only, and not teaching their students. Wait? What?! Isn’t teaching your material to your students the same thing? Not exactly… While a teacher may repeat, recite, or regurgitate material from a medium (typically a textbook, or pre-composed Slideshow presentation), they aren’t necessarily teaching their students, typically recognized by the exams and test evaluations at the end, in which, despite the presentation of the material, no actual learning or cognitive memorization and understanding of the material occurred. Now this, is a problem…

What teachers must do, is understand how the human species thinks and the brains’ systematic processes of memory, of which are fundamentally based of “chunking” material and creating associations and connections with past experiences. This can be done by providing relevant or more simplistic examples and applications of the material. Also, the presentation of material, in “chunks” of three, four, five, pieces of content at a time, will benefit the facilitation of the learning processes. Furthermore, they must cater and adapt the material the students, digitally (heres that term again…) and specifically, because one learning strategy may be effective for one student, but not the other. These learning strategies could range from “hands-on” activities, or just basic Jeopardy Review Games. However from even just a rudimentary understanding of these processes, our teachers will become more effective, and as a result, be teaching not only their discipline (Science, Math, English, Social Studies, etc.), but also their students…

Digital Re-wiring… of our Brain

This post is a socio-cultural aspect exemplifying the impact of videogames on our society, especially amidst the social and emotional development of American children and teenagers, more so males than females. As expressed by numerous Social Psychologists, specifically the venerable Philip Zimbardo, videogames, have an immense impact on shaping the future of American Education. Digital, multi-functional, and immersive technology is incidentally, the future; as the time American teenager spend with videogames and such devices augments, if any hope at changing and successfully re-kindling American Public Education is present, we must not ignore this fact… As, the nature of videogames “re-wire” American teenagers brain to become digital (multi-functional, lessened attention span, more acute sense of times; thinking in “seconds,” not “minutes” or “hours”). What’s so bad about that? What is maligned about this “re-wiring,” is that of when these children get in the classroom. The curriculum and methodology within the classroom is analog whilst the subjects being taught are digitally wired, meaning that our classrooms are boring, uneventful, non-captivating, interacting, or “fun,” leaving our children with a distaste, boredom, and exhaustive perspective of school. They are bored because they are not being digitally stimulated, with curricula that immerses them, engages them, and becomes digital within and of itself. Thus, with the proliferation of such digital technologies, applicable to both genders, our generations became increasingly digitally focused, a pattern we must recognize if we want to be dynamic in our educational revolutions.

The main point of this post, in essence, is that in order to prescribe academic change, we must understand how children think, how they develop, and remove our hindsight bias, by implementing a digital, not analog,  curriculum in classrooms spanning across all educational levels. 

Simplified Point: You want to be prosperous in the classroom, then adapt the curriculum to the children (individually and digitally), not the children to the curriculum…