“In Letter #27, I argued that an advantage of being an amateur in any field of endeavor is that you are not constrained by the dictates and beliefs that constitute professional boundaries or by the demands of an employer.” Yes! This is very accurate and important. In higher education we see some scholars doing interdisciplinary work, but academic freedom—to the extent that it still exists—is small in comparison to the advantages and liberties of being an amateur, in which one is not constrained by boundaries and funding of the state, profession or employer.
I have another comment about this post in relation to Charles Darwin, but that will have to wait until another day. Thanks Peter. This is excellent.
We have SO got 'education' wrong...and I think I really, REALLY want to be an activist when I grow up...far too many people are completely stifled by the current 'education system', and who knows how many great, creative thoughts and discoveries and inventions haven't happened because of it.
I particularly love what Einstein had to say about schooling (btw, I think it's 'annus mirabilis' rather than 'annus mirable').
Wonderful follow up to the prior article. I love it. I really enjoyed this final thought:
"It is noteworthy, I think, that all of the great contributors to science I have discussed here were following passions they developed in childhood. Childhood is a natural time for play, exploration, finding out what one loves to do. Sadly, in modern times we are controlling children to such an extent, in schools and other adult-controlled settings, that they seldom have time or opportunity to discover what they love to do and pursue it."
I agree, schooling does not have to have a malevolent intention to harm kids--it can simply do so by taking away their freedom to play and learn. Of course the controlling and assessment aspects of schooling also often do an effective job of crushing the curiosity and motivation of young people, as you've touched upon in the past.
I stumbled upon an interesting note in Marnina Kammersell's latest post that (referencing Nick Walker) talks about how the environment or experiences that people have can fundamentally change the way that they think (in that case leading to that person becoming "neurodivergent"). I have spent so much time focused on how schooling can change people in ways that dampen and dull their drive to engage with their world that I sometimes lose sight of the ways that freedom can open up new ways of precocious being. It seems that each of your four examples may fit with that theory. Here's the link to that note (I hope weblinks work in comments):
We tend to think of differences in the nervous system causing differences among people in how they behave, and we forget that differences in how people behave can also cause differences in the nervous system. The nervous system is like the muscular system--parts of it grow or atrophy depending on use or disuse.
This post made me think of Matilda. With the freedom to do what she wanted and sufficient mental energy, she could make objects move. Once she was more thoroughly mentally occupied, she lost her special ability.
Sometimes I wonder if we lose something when we convert from amateurism into professionalism. It's somewhat counter-intuitive. Wouldn't it be better to get paid to do what you love so you have more time to do it? Maybe. Unless that puts such structure around it as to suffocate it.
Your letters inspire me a lot and encourage me to pursue my new adventure in unschooling my kids and enjoying their play the whole day in a community where no one knows homeschooling is possible and that play is true living.
The story of Fred is amazing. Also, your son who went to a school where they were free to do what they want. Unfortunately, my kids don't have unschooled friends but they can manage to play with them after school time.
Anyone who had an empire (or was interested in creating one) was interested in the new military technology. Once they obtained an empire they were interested in agricultural projects because they had to feed people and the army. They also needed roads and various other engineering projects for army logistics.
All that required science and wasn't let to chance.
Universities are a rather new idea (8th century in Ummayad caliphate, I think), but life was organized differently back then, without grand institutions. That doesn't mean that there were no professionals and no jobs for them.
All largish temples were projected by professionals, for example, whatever "largish" meant at their time.
“In Letter #27, I argued that an advantage of being an amateur in any field of endeavor is that you are not constrained by the dictates and beliefs that constitute professional boundaries or by the demands of an employer.” Yes! This is very accurate and important. In higher education we see some scholars doing interdisciplinary work, but academic freedom—to the extent that it still exists—is small in comparison to the advantages and liberties of being an amateur, in which one is not constrained by boundaries and funding of the state, profession or employer.
I have another comment about this post in relation to Charles Darwin, but that will have to wait until another day. Thanks Peter. This is excellent.
Also J. Henri Fabre! He’s not as groundbreaking as these guys, but he’s awesome.
Another great article.
We have SO got 'education' wrong...and I think I really, REALLY want to be an activist when I grow up...far too many people are completely stifled by the current 'education system', and who knows how many great, creative thoughts and discoveries and inventions haven't happened because of it.
I particularly love what Einstein had to say about schooling (btw, I think it's 'annus mirabilis' rather than 'annus mirable').
:(
Cyrilla, thank you for spotting that error. I will correct it now.
No worries! :)
Wonderful follow up to the prior article. I love it. I really enjoyed this final thought:
"It is noteworthy, I think, that all of the great contributors to science I have discussed here were following passions they developed in childhood. Childhood is a natural time for play, exploration, finding out what one loves to do. Sadly, in modern times we are controlling children to such an extent, in schools and other adult-controlled settings, that they seldom have time or opportunity to discover what they love to do and pursue it."
I agree, schooling does not have to have a malevolent intention to harm kids--it can simply do so by taking away their freedom to play and learn. Of course the controlling and assessment aspects of schooling also often do an effective job of crushing the curiosity and motivation of young people, as you've touched upon in the past.
I stumbled upon an interesting note in Marnina Kammersell's latest post that (referencing Nick Walker) talks about how the environment or experiences that people have can fundamentally change the way that they think (in that case leading to that person becoming "neurodivergent"). I have spent so much time focused on how schooling can change people in ways that dampen and dull their drive to engage with their world that I sometimes lose sight of the ways that freedom can open up new ways of precocious being. It seems that each of your four examples may fit with that theory. Here's the link to that note (I hope weblinks work in comments):
https://wanderingbrightly.substack.com/p/the-ebb-and-flow-of-community-in?r=uj9mq&selection=087d92cb-bca6-4791-b8c9-1f4498cdd126&utm_campaign=post-share-selection&utm_medium=web#:~:text=In%20fact%2C%20since%20%E2%80%9Cneurodivergent%E2%80%9D%20is%20not%20a%20biological%20term%20but%20a%20term%20that%20describes%20social%20dynamics%2C%20it%E2%80%99s%20interesting%20to%20consider%20whether%20being%20home%2Funschooled%20could%20in%20itself%20lead%20someone%20to%20become%20%E2%80%9Cneurodivergent
We tend to think of differences in the nervous system causing differences among people in how they behave, and we forget that differences in how people behave can also cause differences in the nervous system. The nervous system is like the muscular system--parts of it grow or atrophy depending on use or disuse.
Dear Professor Gray, Nikola Tesla also would fit into this article very well.
This post made me think of Matilda. With the freedom to do what she wanted and sufficient mental energy, she could make objects move. Once she was more thoroughly mentally occupied, she lost her special ability.
Sometimes I wonder if we lose something when we convert from amateurism into professionalism. It's somewhat counter-intuitive. Wouldn't it be better to get paid to do what you love so you have more time to do it? Maybe. Unless that puts such structure around it as to suffocate it.
Your letters inspire me a lot and encourage me to pursue my new adventure in unschooling my kids and enjoying their play the whole day in a community where no one knows homeschooling is possible and that play is true living.
The story of Fred is amazing. Also, your son who went to a school where they were free to do what they want. Unfortunately, my kids don't have unschooled friends but they can manage to play with them after school time.
Anyone who had an empire (or was interested in creating one) was interested in the new military technology. Once they obtained an empire they were interested in agricultural projects because they had to feed people and the army. They also needed roads and various other engineering projects for army logistics.
All that required science and wasn't let to chance.
Universities are a rather new idea (8th century in Ummayad caliphate, I think), but life was organized differently back then, without grand institutions. That doesn't mean that there were no professionals and no jobs for them.
All largish temples were projected by professionals, for example, whatever "largish" meant at their time.