This article explores research in children concerning when they begin to develop awareness that others have minds that are different from theirs which is fascinating enough. But when you consider (which is beyond what the researchers are after here) the role that culture plays in constructing the very ideas that are being used to evaluate the children – lies, imagination, reason, belief, deception – well, then it starts to sound a little like the Egginton pieces. All of which means that you are likely to be doing ToK for the rest of your life.
Just to get it all out – for Oct 5, 6 – the readings are the two pieces by W Egginton (p95/p99) AND the first two sections of Unflattening (“Flatness” and “Flatland”). Sorry A-day kids, I added that after seeing you yesterday.
And to think about how ideas of the Andy Clark pieces are engaged in current thought, here are a couple of examples I came across yesterday:
The one on apes is particularly fascinating in that it powerfully suggests that how we have studies and tested apes has affected what we have learned about them. The kicker is that we were not aware of that bias for a long time. It’s also worth noting that Andy Clark is referenced in both articles. Just saying.
You could read this as “See Mr Whiteside, at least I’m not doing drugs”
“I am hooked, and I don’t even know on what – just whatever this device pushes on me.”
It does make me think about Marx’s line: “Religion is the opiate of the masses” and how completely he underestimated technology.
How could I not post this? It’s got it all – bees, cognition, consciousness, and, yes, a mention of twerking. Read it and see. Plus the video is cool.
More to ToK though is the question of what does it mean for us if other entities are conscious, thinking beings (I avoided the pun). How do we define ourselves as special if other entities can do alot of what we do?
Also, there was this one today:
And if we are in no way special, then what? Does that require any kind of shift in knowledge and/or how it gets used?
This is what it looks like when experts disagree, or perhaps this is what it looks like when standing on the cusp of a paradigm shift. Bear in mind that this is no small disagreement, the argument is over what the facts are – maybe a given constant in physics isn’t so constant. But for us what is more intriguing is the question as to what the new knowledge will look like and what it means for how we will do things – or as is suggested in the article, we are about to “learn new physics.”
I love life. Look at this – issues of neuroscience, knowledge, knowing, self-identity. AND David Byrne!?!?!?!! Are you kidding me? Who put this together? This is ToK as it should be – weirdo musicians and ways of knowing.
The experiments look fascinating and I love the interdisciplinary thinking that Byrne is using, not unlike his band’s interdisciplinary sound (Talking Heads for those of you not in the know). Look at all the things a ToK experience can prep you for – it’s like being an explorer, just of the mind.