Autodidactic: A Means for Self-Actualizing

[coberst]

Autodidactic: A Means for Self-Actualizing

I am a retired engineer with a good bit of formal education and twenty five years of self-learning. I began the self-learning experience while in my mid-forties. I had no goal in mind; I was just following my intellectual curiosity in whatever direction it led me. This hobby, self-learning, has become very important to me. I have bounced around from one hobby to another but have always been enticed back by the excitement I have discovered in this learning process. Carl Sagan is quoted as having written; “Understanding is a kind of ecstasy.”

I label myself as a September Scholar because I began the process at mid-life and because my quest is disinterested knowledge.

Disinterested knowledge is an intrinsic value. Disinterested knowledge is not a means but an end. It is knowledge I seek because I desire to know it. I mean the term ‘disinterested knowledge’ as similar to ‘pure research’, as compared to ‘applied research’. Pure research seeks to know truth unconnected to any specific application.

I think of the self-learner of disinterested knowledge as driven by curiosity and imagination to understand. The September Scholar seeks to ‘see’ and then to ‘grasp’ through intellection directed at understanding the self as well as the world. The knowledge and understanding that is sought by the September Scholar are determined only by personal motivations. It is noteworthy that disinterested knowledge is knowledge I am driven to acquire because it is of dominating interest to me. Because I have such an interest in this disinterested knowledge my adrenaline level rises in anticipation of my voyage of discovery.

We often use the metaphors of ‘seeing’ for knowing and ‘grasping’ for understanding. I think these metaphors significantly illuminate the difference between these two forms of intellection. We see much but grasp little. It takes great force to impel us to go beyond seeing to the point of grasping. The force driving us is the strong personal involvement we have to the question that guides our quest. I think it is this inclusion of self-fulfillment, as associated with the question, that makes self-learning so important.

The self-learner of disinterested knowledge is engaged in a single-minded search for understanding. The goal, grasping the ‘truth’, is generally of insignificant consequence in comparison to the single-minded search. Others must judge the value of the ‘truth’ discovered by the autodidactic. I suggest that truth, should it be of any universal value, will evolve in a biological fashion when a significant number of pursuers of disinterested knowledge engage in dialogue.

In the United States our culture compels us to have a purpose. Our culture defines that purpose to be ‘maximize production and consumption’. As a result all good children feel compelled to become a successful producer and consumer. All good children both consciously and unconsciously organize their life for this journey.

At mid-life many citizens begin to analyze their life and often discover a need to reconstitute their purpose. Some of the advantageous of this self-learning experience is that it is virtually free, undeterred by age, not a zero sum game, surprising, exciting and makes each discovery a new eureka moment. The self-learning experience I am suggesting is similar to any other hobby one might undertake; interest will ebb and flow. In my case this was a hobby that I continually came back to after other hobbies lost appeal.

I suggest for your consideration that if we “Get a life—Get an intellectual life” we very well might gain substantially in self-worth and, perhaps, community-worth.

As a popular saying goes ‘there is a season for all things’. We might consider that spring and summer are times for gathering knowledge, maximizing production and consumption, and increasing net-worth; while fall and winter are seasons for gathering understanding, creating wisdom and increasing self-worth.

I have been trying to encourage adults, who in general consider education as a matter only for young people, to give this idea of self-learning a try. It seems to be human nature to do a turtle (close the mind) when encountering a new and unorthodox idea. Generally we seem to need for an idea to face us many times before we can consider it seriously. A common method for brushing aside this idea is to think ‘I’ve been there and done that’, i.e. ‘I have read and been a self-learner all my life’.

It is unlikely that you will encounter this unorthodox suggestion ever again. You must act on this occasion or never act. The first thing is to make a change in attitude about just what is the nature of education. Then one must face the world with a critical outlook. A number of attitude changes are required as a first step. All parents, I guess, recognize the problems inherent in attitude adjustment. We just have to focus that knowledge upon our self as the object needing an attitude adjustment rather than our child.

Another often heard response is that “you are preaching to the choir”. If you conclude that this is an old familiar tune then I have failed to make clear my suggestion. I recall a story circulating many years ago when the Catholic Church was undergoing substantial changes. Catholics where no longer using Latin in the mass, they were no longer required to abstain from meat on Friday and many other changes. The story goes that one lady was complaining about all these changes and she said, “with all these changes the only thing one will need to do to be a good Catholic is love thy neighbor”.

I am not suggesting a stroll in the park on a Sunday afternoon. I am suggesting a ‘Lewis and Clark Expedition’. I am suggesting the intellectual equivalent of crossing the Mississippi and heading West across unexplored intellectual territory with the intellectual equivalent of the Pacific Ocean as a destination.

Would you consider having an intellectual life as a hobby to be beneficial to you?

Do you think that a society with many citizens who have a hobby of an intellectual life would benefit that society?

Do know anyone who has an intellectual life as a hobby?

[scameter]

Well, I think an intellectual life as a hobby could really only be about as meaningful as any other hobby - just for fun. But, to say the only other way to pursue it is through one's career is not true, for an intellectual life,e specially one that is spiritually or religiously bent, can be done by anyone wise and insightful enough to do it. And, I think that the intellectual life only benefits society if it is done as a career; otherwise, it is too personal to have widespread societal assistance. Unless one's intellectual life causes one to not succeed at something they might would have without having an intellectual life of any magnitude, which in a sense would help society by having the job they would have occupied be occupied be someone else. Though this may or may not help society as a whole, depending on the skill deference between the intellectual and his replacement, it certainly helps others individually.

[coberst]

My experience leads me to conclude that there is a world of difference in picking up a fragment of knowledge here and there versus seeking knowledge for an answer to a question of significance. There is a world of difference between taking a stroll in the woods on occasion versus climbing a mountain because you wish to understand what climbing a mountain is about or perhaps you want to understand what it means to accomplish a feat of significance only because you want it and not because there is ‘money in it’.

I think that every adult needs to experience the act of intellectual understanding; an act that Carl Sagan describes as “Understanding is a kind of ecstasy.”

This quotation of Carl Rogers might illuminate my meaning:

I want to talk about learning. But not the lifeless, sterile, futile, quickly forgotten stuff that is crammed in to the mind of the poor helpless individual tied into his seat by ironclad bonds of conformity! I am talking about LEARNING - the insatiable curiosity that drives the adolescent boy to absorb everything he can see or hear or read about gasoline engines in order to improve the efficiency and speed of his 'cruiser'. I am talking about the student who says, "I am discovering, drawing in from the outside, and making that which is drawn in a real part of me." I am talking about any learning in which the experience of the learner progresses along this line: "No, no, that's not what I want"; "Wait! This is closer to what I am interested in, what I need"; "Ah, here it is! Now I'm grasping and comprehending what I need and what I want to know!"


When we undertake such a journey of discovery we need reliable sources of information. We need information that we can build a strong foundation for understanding. Where do we find such reliable information? We find it in the library or through Google on the Internet or combinations thereof.

I have a ‘Friends of the Library’ card from a college near me. This card allows me, for a yearly fee of $25, to borrow any book in that gigantic library. Experts in every domain of knowledge have written books just especially for laypersons like you and I.

Lincoln was an autodidact. Perhaps self-actualizing self-learning is for you. When your school daze is complete it is a good time to begin the learning process.

[scameter]

Well, that's essentially what I was talking about, in one part of my post, that pursuing it merely as a hobby for fun is different than pursuing it (an intellectual life) out of passion or for one's career, with the former being the most powerful I feel.

[coberst]

Most people are familiar with the arts as a form of intellectual acuity but far fewer have any recognition of self-learning through books as a means of developing an intellectual acuity that can penetrate the surface reality.

I think that our ability to constantly advance our technology requires that we counter balance that technology with a more sophisticated citizen to understand what is going on and in understanding to take better control.

Examples are establishing a stewardship of the planet and dealing with poverty amongst plenty that leads to a lack of hope that leads to terrorism. Other examples are evidence of how dangerous it is when citizens in a democracy make a really bad choice for their leaders and the fact that we are unable to dialogue in any suitable manner.

Also I think that a more intellectually acute comprehension of all forms of reality can prove to be a delight to the individual. Carl Sagan said “Understanding is a kind of ecstasy”.

We waste away our most wonderful legacy, our brain, which atrophies from lack of challenge. Our unconscious reason is our every active servant and it is a shame to leave that servant unemployed for most of our life.

The books depend upon the interests of the individual. I prefer non fiction but others may well prefer quality literature and poetry. It is important that the individual is motivated by a search for understanding that which s/he desires to comprehends.

Elite—a group of persons who by virtue of position or education exercise much power or influence

Populist—a believer in the rights, wisdom, or virtue of the common people

I claim that a believer in the rights, wisdom, or virtue of the common people who exercises much power or influence by virtue of his or her learning is a populist elitist.

It is obvious that there is a class of people who manage the government, who influence those that manage government, and who interpret it all to the voting public exists in the United States. Such a class is essential to the functioning of a liberal democracy.

Presently in the US this class of elite individuals consists primarily of ‘experts’. This class of experts “is inevitably so removed from common interests as to become a class with private interests and private knowledge, which in social matters is not knowledge at all.” The result, Dewey warns, is a democracy that risks both unaccountability and error. It is obvious to me that such a situation is no longer a risk but is a reality.

I offer, for consideration, a possible solution that will take much time to implement but will be the fastest solution available. I suggest that those adults, who can, begin the process of self-actualizing self-learning in order to become a populist elitist.


Judge a man by his questions rather than by his answers.
--Voltaire (1694-1778)



Who is an intellectual? I think that Socrates/Plato would agree that an intellectual is a person who examines life beyond its superficial characteristics.

I think that reality is multilayered like an onion. We live our life on the surface rarely penetrating the surface of reality. To seek a comprehension beyond the surface requires some kind of intellectual acuity. Thus the person who seeks answers to the deeper aspects of reality would be considered as an intellectual and since few people qualify in this regard the intellectual will always be at odds with popular opinion.

I might use movie as my analogy. I think that our day-to-day lives are like watching a movie. We can go a step beyond that reality by examining backstage to see how a movie is made. Then we can seek understanding of a deeper level by searching out how the director and producer put together a movie with the writers. Then we might find a deeper reality by examining the reality of the movie studios or the independent makers of movies.

In the world of physics we might study Newton and his laws. Or we might go further and try to comprehend Relativity. Then we might go further and seek to understand QM.

We might study one million other things in our quest for understanding our world beyond its appearance.

It appears to me that we call experts in a particular field of knowledge as being intellectuals. I do not accept that definition of intellectual. “As the saying goes the expert knows more and more about less and less.”

A person can walk the corridors of any big city hospital and observe in wonder at the effectiveness of human rationality in action. One can also visit the UN building in NYC or read the morning papers and observe just how ineffective, frustrating and disappointing human rationality can be. We seem to be capable of developing vast systems to efficiently provide good or evil; but have not been able to completely ‘accentuate the positive and eliminate the negative’. Why does human reason perform so well in some matters and so poorly in others?

This is a question that has long intrigued me. How can we be so successful in developing a technology and yet be so unsuccessful in developing the ability to manage that magnificent technology? We seem to be like the man with an ‘Arnold’ like upper body mounted on a spindle, varicose veined, arthritic lower body.

I have lately begun to formulate an answer to the question. I am not saying that I have discovered a new problem but that I have discovered how others have been struggling with this problem and that it is only now that I have become conscious of this aspect of reality. I am saying that I have discovered a problem that has worried mankind for centuries and that I have only now begun to understand the problem. I also want to be so bold as to suggest I may have a practical proposal to significantly impact the problem with a partial solution.

A certain part of reality exists for me only when I have become conscious of it. The first step of becoming conscious of any part of reality is to formulate a coherent question about it. It is possible to create solutions to problematic situations only after developing a clear understanding of the facts.

I have discovered that those who struggle with such questions have theorized that rationality can be classified into two major categories; instrumental rationality is that form that allows us to develop our technology and communication rationality is that form that allows us to deal with the other type of problem.

There are problems where the end is known and only the best means are of question. The dentist knows that I have a toothache and the problem he must decide is the best way to eliminate that toothache. The dentist is the subject and the toothache is the object. The problem exists between a subject and an object. The end is clear, eliminate the ache, the means will be either pull the tooth or do a root canal. Instrumental rationality is to determine the best means to reach a specified end.

Instrumental rationality is not a method suitable for developing ends. Dialectical rationality is the only mode of reasoning suitable for arriving at satisfactory ends.

In a criminal jury trial each juror ideally begins hearing the case as a mental blank slate. The witnesses engage in a controlled and guided dialogue wherein each witness communicates to the jury their particular truth regarding the matter under consideration. Each juror modifies his or her blank slate as the witness’s parade through; each providing his or her view of the truth. A dialogue takes place for the benefit of the juror who is not a member of the dialogue.

Each juror is required to reason dialectically. Dialectical reasoning is a process wherein the opinion of the juror is molded and remolded based upon the truths presented. The blank slate becomes slate A after witness A and then becomes slate A-B after witness B and then becomes slate A-B-C, etc.

At the end of the trial the jurors assemble in isolation to determine a verdict. Generally the members are polled to determine if all agree upon the truth of the case. If one or more jurors dissent from the others a new dialogue must take place. The jurors begin a dialogue in an attempt to reach a unanimous decision.

In this stage each juror is engaged in communication in dialogue while simultaneously each juror is engaged in a rational dialectic.

A jury trial might be a useful example of a problem engaged by many reflective agents with a multiplicity
of frames of reference. In such a situation the jury must utilize communicative techniques to enter into a dialogue wherein there is a constant dialectic until a unanimous solution is reached or deadlock prevails.

Communicating by dialogue together with reasoning dialectically is a technique for attempting to solve multi-dimensional problems. Problems that are either not pattern like or that the pattern is too complex to ascertain.

Most problems that we face in our daily life are multi-dimensional in nature. Simple problems that occur daily in family life are examples. Each member of the family has a different point of view with differing needs and desires. Most of the problems we constantly face are not readily solved by mathematics because they are not pattern specific and are multi-dimensional.

Dialogue is a technique for mutual consideration of such problems wherein solutions grow in a dialectical manner. Through dialogue each individual brings his/her point of view to the fore by proposing solutions constructed around their specific view. All participants in the dialogue come at the solution from the logic of their views. The solution builds dialectically; from a thesis and a contrasting thesis, a synthesis is constructed that takes into consideration both proposals. From this synthesis, a new thesis has developed.

When we are dealing with single dimensional problems well circumscribed by paradigms the personal biases of the subject are of small concern. In multi-dimensional problems, without the advantage of paradigms, the biases of the problem solvers become a serious source of error. One important task of dialogue is to illuminate these prejudices. These biases may be quite subtle and often out of the consciousness of the participant holding them.

Our schools have decided that our children should learn to be critical thinkers. CT can provide the student with the intellectual foundation to lean how to think and reason about multidimensional problems. I agree with their judgment. This disciplined form of thought is important to each child and is vitally important to our society. I have attempted to relay to you my sense of the importance of critical thinking in the hope that you may share that judgment and lend your support to the school system in this vital matter.

[Flux]

Quite true, I think. Personal exploration of knowledge can be of imense benefit to individuals and society in general. Specifically, I like what you said about not beginning to understand a subject until you had questioned it. By acting on our curiosity, we can develope what (Socratese?) called "learned ignorance"--we begin to realize how little we really know about subjects we once thought simple. This realization can do much to prevent us from making assumptions that are harmful to ourselves and others.

I think that the intellectual life only benefits society if it is done as a career; otherwise, it is too personal to have widespread societal assistance.

I think that's definitely a valid point. While think that learning has a certain level of intrinsic goodness, I don't think it's "the be all end all" of life. That is, I'd agree that the "Ivory Tower Syndrome"--learning for only oneself while failing to actually communicate with or help others--is something to be avoided. I don't think that an intellual life need necessarily be career based to be helpful to others though. There are many individuals who do alot learning that isn't job-related, but gain a sense of perspective of certain topics that can be of help to others.

[coberst]

If we wonder off the beaten path we can discover what we have not ‘seen’ before. If we only study that which enhances our present state then we will never know what we don’t know.

Hobbies are ways in which many individuals express their individuality. Those matters that excite an individual interest and curiosity are those very things that allow the individual him or her to self-understanding and also for others to understand them. Interests define individuality and help to provide meaning to life. We all look for some ideology, philosophy or religion to provide meaning to life.

When examining psychosis the psychiatrist advises either the establishment of an interpersonal evolvement or for finding interests and perhaps new patterns of thought.

None of us have discovered our full potentialities or have fully explored in depth those we have discovered. Self-development and self-expression are relatively new ideas in human history. The arts are one means for this self-expression. The artist may find drawing or constructing sculptures as a means for self-discovery. The self-learner may find essay writing of equal importance. Consciousness of individuality was first become a possibility in the middle Ages. The Renaissance and further the Reformation enhanced the development of individual identification.

As technology developed there grew a further enhancement of the perception of the individual. It was in the Oxford English Dictionary in 1674 that the word “self” took on the present modern meaning of “a permanent subject of successive and varying states of consciousness”. “Self” as an instance of compounds with other words appeared over this period of time. Self-knowledge (1613), self-examination (1647). Self-interest (1649).

The word “individual” moved from the indivisible and collective to the divisible and distinctive. In this we see the development of an understanding of self-consciousness thus illustrating the dramatic change taking place in our developing understanding of the self as a distinct subject not just a cipher in a community. This was part of the Renaissance.

I recommend that each of us develop the hobby of an intellectual life. We could add to our regular routine the development of an invigorating intellectual life wherein we sought disinterested knowledge; knowledge that is not for the purpose of some immediate need but something that stirs our curiosity, which we seek to understand for the simple reason that we feel a need to understand a particular domain of knowledge.

[Thomas Knierim]

coberst: I recommend that each of us develop the hobby of an intellectual life.

While I fully agree with what you say, I cannot fend off the impression that you are preaching to the choir. :lol:

Cheers, Thomas

[scameter]

Flux:I think that's definitely a valid point. While think that learning has a certain level of intrinsic goodness, I don't think it's "the be all end all" of life. That is, I'd agree that the "Ivory Tower Syndrome"--

Well, I actually wasn't talking about that. I think it is perfectly fine for a person to pursue spirituality and, to a lesser degree, academia for their own personal enjoyment, and I'm not a big fan of the Ivory Tower Syndrome. To me, something doesn't have to have a specific practical, utilitarian value to society for it to be worth something; and, often times something will not benefit society because of a problem with society, not with the thing itself. To me, nothing is more important in life than what is behind it, with my loved ones being about equal to that thing, and only because that thing created my loved ones and made that love possible. I don't pursue spiritual and philosophical things for my own success, or really to benefit others; honestly, I don't think that my personal spirituality is what society needs. I pursue it because of it's importance to me.

[coberst]

coberst: I recommend that each of us develop the hobby of an intellectual life.

While I fully agree with what you say, I cannot fend off the impression that you are preaching to the choir. :lol:

Cheers, Thomas

I ride several hobby horses: CT (Critical Thinking) and self-learning are two of them. I often post about these two subjects and invariably I get the response "you are preaching to the choir here". If I thought that was true I could get off those hobby horses and I suspect the world would be a much better place.

[Thomas Knierim]

coberst,

Critical thinking and autodidactic learning are certainly good academic skills from which people can benefit greatly. Yet I dare to say that the our society and our planet would be better off if people learned to think less rather than more. Too much thinking is the very cause that leads to all kinds of problems which I describe below. I feel it is more important to teach people how to unlearn thinking, or perhaps I should say to unlearn crappy thinking. With crappy thinking I mean the mental chatter, idle distractions, runaway trains of thought, and fruitless fantasizing which occupies people's mind all day.

Think about the average person and what happens inside his/her brain during the day. Think about the brain as a TV screen and about thoughts as TV shows. When you observe people in the subway, in the streets, at work, ask yourself what show is on there right now. What are they running?

My observation is that most people are running the equivalent of junk TV most of the time. Soap operas, insipid shows, commercials, you name it. Few appear to spend their "airtime" productively. People seek distractions whenever the chance arises. They seek entertainment, emotional excitement, intellectual stimulation. Hardly anyone finds it bearable to just do nothing, even in their leisure time. Everyone is occupied all the time with thoughts, thoughts, and even more thoughts.

Under these conditions, awareness is not happening. Some people don't even know what awareness means; they confuse it with the ability to absorb information. So, my plea is for unlearning (obsessive) thinking. This certainly goes along with learning how to think properly, and that's where critical thinking, analysis, logic, and all of this comes in, but in the end that's secondary. First and foremost is getting rid of the chatter monkey in the brain. Thought is a great servant, but a terrible master.

Cheers, Thomas

[coberst]

Thomas

The only thing that I would argue with are your ststement about self-learning being an academic skill. Our educational system is directed at teaching by telling, self-learning and Critical Thinking are those needed for solitary self-learning after the academic life is over.

The other disagreement is perhaps just a quibble. What is necessary is that we learn not just what to think but how to think. We do not think too much but we think too poorly because our schools have never taught us how to think.