A little too similar

Maybe we should all be asking who these two are really working for.

Constructivism and Standpoint Theory

It may be going too far to say that Social Constructivism is contingent upon Standpoint Theory, but the two paradigms undoubtedly intersect. 

Since blog postings generally stand alone, forgive me for re-stating the Alison Wylie quote from the last post:

"[T]here would be no incongruity in claiming that, with respect to particular epistemic projects, some social locations and standpoints confer epistemic advantage. In particular, some standpoints have the especially salient advantage that they put the critically conscious knower in a position to grasp the effects of power relations on their own understanding and that of others."

Constructivism assumes that knowledge is created in relation to, not copied from, perceived objects, the objective "realness" of which is irrelevant. This knowledge is constructed from within a coherent system by which individuals and cultures attempt to understand the world and cope with its complexities.

Similarly, Standpoint theory offers the possibility of greater objectivity from particular social locations concerning objects, which in themselves are socially determined, reflexive, and locally confined– objects which again do not have "realness" in the traditional sense.

Thus, Standpoint Theory would support and affirm one of the basic contentions of Social Constructivism, namely that knowledge of the world is achieved within an active relationship to the facts at hand and their relevance for day to day life.

The implications for pedagogy are myriad. To begin, classroom content is valuable as it relates to students' day to day lives and their ability to cope with real problems. Facts can be known as they relate to these real lives and real complexities. Additionally, as Wylie asserts, students, who come from different standpoints may have a greater chance at understanding than the teacher, possessing knowledge of great value for the group, regardless of past education. The value of the student's social location is not only determined by race, gender, class, or other traditional social determinants, but also by his or her subdominance under the teacher's authority. The value of empathy, collaboration, and critical thinking are confirmed for the classroom by the intersection of Standpoint Theory and Constructivism, since knowledge is connected to the individual. So much is the case not just for the humanities, but science too, so far as it can be emancipated from the confines of traditionally objective "realness," can benefit from the application of these theories.

The Epistemic Advantage of Oppression

"[T]here would be no incongruity in claiming that, with respect to particular epistemic projects, some social locations and standpoints confer epistemic advantage. In particular, some standpoints have the especially salient advantage that they put the critically conscious knower in a position to grasp the effects of power relations on their own understanding and that of others."

Alison Wylie

From the cover of Gustavo Gutierrez' A Theology of Liberation

Liberation theology offers a haunting inversion of our traditional understanding of these words:

"The King will reply, 'Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.'"

-Matthew 25:40

"God is disclosed in the historical 'praxis' of liberation. It is the situation, and our passionate and reflective involvement in it, which mediates the Word of God. Today that Word is mediated through the cries of the poor and the oppressed."

-Gustavo Gutierrez

The revelation of God as mediated through the cries of of the poor and oppressed offers a new image of the crucifix and a bolder understanding of Christ.

"Where is the wise man? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe . . . We preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, but to those whom God has called . . . the power of God and the wisdom of God."

-1 Corinthians 1:20-24

"Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. . . ."

-Matthew 5:3

"As soon as a religion begins to dominate, it has as its opponents all those who would have been its first disciples."

-Friedrich Nietzsche

Why Creationism Isn't Scientific, and Why that Doesn't Necessarily Mean It's False

"A recent newspaper article advocating Christian Science was headed 'Science speaks and says the Christian Bible is provedly true,' and went on to tell us that, "even the scientists themselves believe it these days."

-Alan Chalmers

I'm still not entirely sure if Chalmers is talking about Christian Scientists or scientists who are Christians (my bet's on the former), but both groups could certainly have come up with this audacious headline. I've grown up in the Evangelical milieu of prophecy proving and Young Earth Creationism, and I've watched how, in seeking to make science dependant on revealed truth, so many devout individuals have dedicated themselves to the task of making revealed truth dependant on science. Chalmers' superb, lucid critique of naive inductivism makes one wonder why anyone with such a firm foundation for knowledge as "Thus saith the LORD" would want to board that sinking ship.

I am only familiar with the philosophies of science advocated by Popper and Kuhn, philosophies which Chalmers hints that he will yet attempt to critique and refine. But from within both these paradigms, more sophisticated than that of the naive inductivist, Creationists and Christian Scientists certainly have some ground to stand on. The belief in a young earth is as subject to falsifiability as the belief in an old one, and each rests on an essentially valid paradigm. A question of which paradigm is more valid, in the words of Thomas Kuhn, "cannot be resolved by proof. To discuss their mechanism is, therefore, to talk about techniques of persuasion."

Nonetheless, if the essential characteristics of science are as defined by an Arkansas judge in a case very pertinent to the teaching of high school science–if the essential characteristics of science include "naturalness, tentativeness, testability, and falsifiability," then much of revealed truth, most importantly for the concerned educator, the doctrine of creation, must be considered decidedly unscientific for lack of naturalness.

In reflection upon this decision, with due respect for the Scientific Aristocracy, I must admit that I don't see any reason to limit explanations of natural phenomena to natural causes. It seems right that we should search for the truth regardless of its naturalness. However, to do so is to step outside the realm of science and into a more holistic approach to understanding, that of natural philosophy–a paradigm for understanding within which science, even induction, may still have a part to play. 

Take my musings with a grain of salt. I don't expect to see Natural Philosophy 30 in the Saskatchewan curriculum any time soon.

Conspiracy Theory

We were right to be afraid of that awkward aluminum space-barbecue if its presence has led to the exclusion of students in practical and progressive math classes from the pursuit of an arts degree.

Is this what the Russians intended all along?!

Who Created Canadian History, Jack Granatstein?

From "The new Canadian Museum of History: Whose history will it tell?"

Kate Taylor - The Globe and Mail - Dec 16, 2012

"In an era when museums are increasingly called on to tell complex stories rather than simply display artifacts, the rebranding (of the Canadian Museum of Civilization) announced by the federal government in October is becoming a tussle of its own. Competing visions for the renovation of the history exhibits at Canada's most visited museum pit conservatives who favour political history of the kings-and-battles variety against liberals who prefer the museum's past emphasis on social and multicultural history, but want a lot more of it."

"I knew that whole museum routine like a book. . . . you'd pass by this big glass case, with Indians inside it rubbing sticks together to make a fire, and a squaw weaving a blanket. The squaw that was weaving the blanket was sort of bending over, and you could see her bosom and all. We all used to sneak a good look at it, even the girls, because they were only little kids and they didn't have any more bosom than we did. Then, just before you went inside the auditorium, right near the doors, you passed this Eskimo. He was sitting over a hole in this icy lake, and he was fishing through it. He had about two fish right next to the hole, that he'd already caught. Boy, that museum was full of glass cases . . . The
best thing, though, in that museum was that everything always stayed right where it was. Nobody'd move. You could go there a hundred thousand times, and that Eskimo would still be just finished catching those two fish . . . and that squaw with the naked bosom would still be weaving that same blanket. Nobody'd be different. The only thing that would be different would be you. Not that you'd be so much older or anything. It wouldn't be that, exactly. You'd just be different, that's all. You'd have an overcoat on this time. Or the kid that was your partner in line the last time had got scarlet fever and you'd have a new partner. Or you'd have a substitute taking the class, instead of Miss Aigletinger. Or you'd heard your mother and father having a terrific fight in the bathroom. Or you'd just passed by one of those puddles in the street with gasoline rainbows in them. I mean you'd be different in some way--I can't explain what I mean. And even if I could, I'm not sure I'd feel like it."

-Holden Caulfield (The Catcher in the Rye)

Contrary to Holden, who may represent the typical student's view of history, the Harper government's prioritization of history suggests that our stories may change as quickly as we do. All the more reason to pay close attention to who's talking and who's listening when something's being said.

The Epistemologistas

"Philosophers, when they have addressed the issue at all, have tended to group philosophy with science as the most gender-neutral of all disciplines. But feminist critiques reveal that this alleged neutrality masks a bias in favor of institutionalizing stereotypical masculine values into the fabric of the discipline–its methods, norms, and contents. In so doing, it suppresses values, styles, problems, and concerns stereotypically associated with femininity. Thus, whether by chance or by design, it creates a hegemonic philosophical practice in which the sex of the knower is, indeed epistemologically significant."

-Lorraine Code

Emanuella Kant

Davitte Hume 

Juanita Locke

Renée Descartes

"Supposing truth is a woman–what then? Are there not grounds for the suspicion that all philosophers, insofar as they were dogmatists, have been very inexpert about women? That the gruesome seriousness, the clumsy obtrusiveness with which they have usually approached truth so far have been awkward and very improper methods for winning a woman's heart?"

-Friedrich Nietzsche