that's me...

that's me...
...just to give you a first impression of what I look like. I'll add some more pictures soon.
Showing posts with label philosophy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label philosophy. Show all posts

Sunday, March 16, 2008

On Friday we continued our discussion about Popper and his theories. Popper’s approach to alter the historical way of knowledge acquiring also implemented a change in the social hierarchy proposed by Plato (philosophers at the top of a pyramide). In Popper’s view democracy was not to elect a government but to have the possibility to get rid of a bad government. This could only work if the respective leaders subordinated their own interests to the interests of the society. The education of pupils therefore has to serve the aim of providing the possibility for the pupils to stay within the “democratic circle” discussed a few lessons ago. Hence we should train pupils in scientific working.

The concluding discussion about Popper's scheme of the human mind should again underline the differences between traditional learning and modern approaches. While traditional teaching methods often concentrate on learning the modern problem-solving approaches invclude parts of all three areas (learning, storing, practising). But it also warns against always using the same strategies because in this case nothing would be learned.

In the second part of the lesson we were asked to come up with problem-solving-exercises that we could use in our subjects. Since I had been taught about problem-solving teaching methods in chemistry lessons it was no problem to create a task according to Popper's approach of falsifying theories. I developed a lesson about acids and bases, the pH-value and indicators. I used a similar one during my school practical course last year. In my opinion it was a quite good example but I can also understand that my classmates were a bit overburdened and maybe bored. Well, nevermind...

Thursday, March 13, 2008

Cogito, ergo sum...

Monday afternoon we met with Torbjörn again for a rather theoretical lesson. We were presented the philosophical roots of Popper's way of thinking starting with Plato and his "cave" tale. The guiding question in traditional philosophy: "How can we reach the truth (or also Truth when refering to the one and only truth)?" was answered by Plato with the assumption that truth can't be found when looking at the world. One of Plato's students, Aristotle, devided truth into three parts:

1. episteme (logical truth (scientific truth))
2. techne (used knowledge (technology, art,...)
3. phonesis (wisdom to make good choices (behaviour))

With Christianity the traditional philosophy lost its importance due to God's absolute truth. Only with the renaissance, reformation and enlightenment the absolute truth of the church was again put to the question. Two different schools of philosophy developed out of this primordial soup: the French school (Descartes) going from theory to observation (deduction) on the one hand and the English school (Locke) going from observation to theory (induction). The latter was challenged by Hume who stated that for example not all swans are white.
Popper finally furnished a new approach. He answered the traditional guiding question with a denial. In his opinion we can't reach the truth, or at least we wouldn't know we are there. His new guiding question was then: "What mistakes do we make and how can we avoid them?" His idea of teaching deriving from this question focused on the pupil comming up with a theory and trying to falsify it. He stated that criticising theories is an important step in the education of innovative and democratic pupils. In this context it is necessary to mention that inductive and deductive teaching-learning-processes do not take part seperated from each other. Whenever the teaching is inductive (student-centred) the learning process is deductive (problem based learning). One the other hand, when the teaching is deductive (monologue) the learning is inductive (observation -> theorie).
The problem with Pooper's theorie is that he also talks about three different worlds:

world 1: everything you can touch (e.g. books, tables, pictures,...)
world 2: the world actual persons perseive it (personal impressions)
world 3: general knowledge of mankind (e.g. what's written in the books)

Pupils can only get access to world three when guided by teachers. This indicates one of the paradoxes of the Popperian philosophy. It is impossible to let the pupils come up with their own theories when they need guidance to world three at the same time. The solution
then has to be a mixture of teaching-learning-practices.