[lnkForumImage]
TotalShareware - Download Free Software
Usa Forum
 Home | Login | Register | Search 


 

Forums >

rec.music.classical.guitar

Re: Strategy Shifts, and Learning Tools in General

Matt Faunce

7/5/2011 2:33:00 PM

On Friday, July 1, 2011 7:50:27 PM UTC-4, Slogoin wrote:
> On Jul 1, 8:43 am, Matt Faunce <mattf...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Data is essential.
>
> The show would not be the same without him.

One of these days I'll get that straight. <shrug> Stadia too.

> > I'm downloading all the pdfs you post and will read them.
>
> Some are short but one was long and had lots of data but little in
> the way of conclusions.

BTW, you didn't define what you meant by "more fundamental." Learning could mean at a fundamental level, or a higher level; and inherent could mean inborn, or where the brain pathways developed, after birth, more or less without regard* to the specific metaphor learned, or without regard to the aspect learned on which the metaphor is based, ex., learning the difference between head voice and chest voice.

*I suppose this could be from the pathways developing because of being pre-programmed in our dna. Is this what you meant? Or maybe the development from leaned and inherent are inextricalby tied.

> > Unfortunately my time to read has been slim the past few days, I hope it widens soon.
>
> I've been reading quite a bit about music education lately and got
> to teach some classes this year in addition to private tutoring in
> maths and music. Working with teachers, kids and parents makes all the
> theory gel in a way that brings clarity to the data that I don't think
> can be learned any other way.

Yes, too much book-smarts and too little experience leads to a skewed view. Probably worse than the opposite.

This reminds me of C.S. Peirce's defense for inductive inference in science.. At one point he uses a beautiful mathematical computation for the cube root of 2 as a metaphor for induction. If I can't type it out in usenet legibly, I'll post a picture. I think you'll appreciate it.

BTW, I've been reading Peirce lately, and I think he is a towering genius. But I don't necessarily agree with him in lock-step. Where he strays from Immanuel Kant I'm a little uneasy. Although I have a feeling that these disagreements might disapate when (if) understood from a deeper level. ("Deep" meaning to the depths where knowledge is not so sure, where ascertaining things get very complicated, where a-proiris you didn't even know you had come to light, not a fuzzy new-age feeling.)

Matt
1 Answer

Slogoin

7/5/2011 11:25:00 PM

0

On Jul 5, 7:33 am, Matt Faunce <mattfau...@gmail.com> wrote:

> BTW, you didn't define what you meant by "more fundamental."

I'm not big on "defining" the words I use in RMCG. I'm not trying to
win a point here but I do like to talk about this with others who are
also interested in the subject even if they are new to the dialog.

> Or maybe the development from leaned and inherent are inextricalby tied.

Probably. I think the point is that it's not a random metaphor. In
fact it looks like metaphor is not a simple random association but
reveals things about how our brains work and maybe even how language
shapes our thinking a la B.L. Whorf.

> Yes, too much book-smarts and too little experience
> leads to a skewed view. Probably worse than the opposite.

Only if the bookie has power and abuses it.

> BTW, I've been reading Peirce lately, and I think he is a towering genius.

I noticed you were into him for a while now.

> But I don't necessarily agree with him in lock-step.

I hope not.

> Where he strays from Immanuel Kant I'm a little uneasy.
....
> ("Deep" meaning to the depths where knowledge is not so sure...

Dude, that's way too deep for me.

I prefer comedians to philosophers - they don't expect me to take
them seriously.