[peirce-l] Re: Pragmatic inquiry == "the love of learning"

[Gary Richmond]

Arnold, Jim, list, I hope you won't mind my posting my response to your personal email, Arnold, as your comments seem most pertinent to the subject of the thread. [Note: off-list I sent Arnold a graphic image: the reflection of teaching as learning which is attached here and should appear at the bottom of this post. All the quoted material is from Arnold's email.] Hi Arnold, As I'm caught up in the beginning of the new college term so just a few inter - linear/ -paragraphical comments. Arnold Shepperson wrote:   Oh yes.  But it still leaves one wondering about the WHAT that's being taught, and equally about the WHAT that's being learned!! But, of course! Further reflection on the graphic image (teaching reflecting learning) as symbol of the thread's theme got me thinking that it is not just any teaching which will be reflected as learning, but a certain kind of teaching, a structuring and shaping of teaching with learning in mind from the get go in order that it might reflect learning (certainly a different shaping of "teaching" in the graphic might not have reflected "learning" at all). Perhaps we should think of working this into Peirce's way of expressing the categories in NLC:   WHAT -- IS -- IT?   One gets the impression that when Peirce defined "university" in the Century Dictionary as an `Association of men (ahem) for the purpose of learning and research', he was as much concerned with this WHAT as he was with the IS and the IT. Yes, and the WHAT may perhaps be seen to center around logic for Peirce, ultimately in its methodeutical branch around sound inquiry itself, how one goes about researching, whatever the subject matter (hypothesis formation regulated only by the pragmatic maxim and a certain 'economy of research'). Personally, I can't see that one can have a peircean version of the University without SOME modicum of `teaching'; This is pretty much the theme of the faculty development seminar I'm developing/co-leading at my college this year. College instructors need to learn to teach students how to go about efficiently accessing the best information for their purposes (e.g., they tend to use the free web & Google almost exclusively, not tapping into the great data bases the university subscribes to, etc.), critically evaluating the material they find (there's a lot of garbage out there on the web and they haven't always established sound criteria for evaluation), and effectively and creatively using it. From a Peircean perspective, the question regarding the purpose it is being used for begins to take on greater significance as well--I see it mainly through ethical lenses at the moment. I guess it's the difference between what my sort of experience has shown and what passes for `teaching' in the lecture theatre, that offers a place to start some kind of inquiry into just what `Higher Learning' entails in an era where `study' seems to have become an occupational hazard of sorts. 'Study' is discipline, and we live in a pretty undisciplined era as regards a great deal that goes by the name 'Higher Education'. As you know, Peirce has a great deal to say about the development of the habit of rigorous discipline (his remarks to Lady Welby, for example--"If I had a son. . .", etc.). Otherwise, we just adjust to the Work that comes with the Job, I suppose, and make the best effort we can at learning. An American association of college librarians has proposed that teaching ought entail promoting 'information literacy' in students, helping them acquire the requisite 'attitudes' and skills leading them to the goal of becoming 'life long learners' so that after they've left those proverbial '"ivy covered walls" (most of the campuses of the very urban City University of NY have much starker walls, btw ) they can continue to learn in those areas of interest and importance to them. This leads directly to your concluding remark. If the Internet has anything to recommend it, it's the opportunity it provides for serious learners to communicate in a way that ultimately lets the subject-matter `speak for itself' intelligibly (so to speak, of course). Best, Gary --- Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com