9.3. "The seeds of all sciences are congenital to us ..."
In Europe, the XV-XIX centuries. no idea has caused such bitter controversy and disagreement as the theory of "innate ideas". Scientists understood: the fundamental foundations of human existence and upbringing are hidden here. Any statement - there are ideas or they are not - drastically changes the entire science of man. The answer was required unequivocally-yes or no. Almost all outstanding minds spoke on this issue. As a result, no one received a decisive advantage. The problem remained open, and everyone remained at their own opinion. As a result, the further development of the science of man took an unsystematic path and led to patchwork, contradictory results, and did not illuminate the principle decision. Perhaps a powerful ray of new scientific discoveries will penetrate a little deeper into the mysterious abyss of human existence?
Ideas are products of the ideal, spiritual. Where do they come from, where do ideas come from? Former pedagogy suggested that we remove them from sensations, but the reality does not confirm it. A person has a lot of ideas, knowledge, concepts, which had never been in his senses before. A scientific fact is known: infants sleep 16-18 hours a day and, according to scientists, almost all the time watching dreams, reacting with a smile, crying, body movements. Newborn babies and animals have information about how to act in it before they see the world around. The fact that infants and blind kittens, as well as newborn babies of other animals see dreams that imitate life in the real conditions of the Earth, testifies to the presence in their brain of information about the world in which they will have to live. During sleep, the brain learns to use this information, so that then the real world is perceived without excesses.
How to ...
Tired of looking for a solution?Get Your ESSAY Now!
Conscious knowledge emerges from innate ideas in the human head when, thanks to the applied efforts, a resonance is excited, to which our consciousness responds by the appearance of new (but new only for consciousness) information. Consciously acquiring knowledge means only one thing - put an unknown identification sign on the unknown, which will bring him into consciousness. Knowledge and signs are the same root essences.
It is known that the same ideas, knowledge, forms of behavior are constantly repeated, as if "emerging" in different periods of time, repeated in generations. From the history of civilizations it is known, for example, that the same scientific discoveries have been made many times, electricity, according to the experts of the previous civilizations, opened at least 100 times. We are well aware that each person is rediscovering for themselves what has been known from time immemorial.
Everything necessary for life in this world man has already brought with him. In the deep layers of our brain, in coded form, all the necessary information awaits its hour, as well as the programs of this actualization. Conditions are created-and the necessary structures move from zones of sound sleep to zones of actual behavior. It does not matter how to call it all-unblocking programs, reprogramming, education, recapitulation of ideas, development of spirit, moral ascent.
Theory of innate ideas - the first and main in ancient science - remained misunderstood. Several times in the history of civilization, it arose, was discussed and again forgotten. In philosophy XVII-XVII centuries. it was developed by such outstanding minds as R. Descartes, N. Malbranche, G. Leibniz. Later, it was occasionally returned to it in different ways in the nineteenth and even the twentieth century, but no one could practically adapt to the needs of practical education. The idea of a "clean whiteboard," which claimed that a person was born without any knowledge, was more understandable, for it was good at living with ordinary consciousness, with religion, and with the paradigm of the dominant science. However, where people think a lot about upbringing, they try to understand its mechanisms, the sources of educational power, sooner or later come to the idea of the existence of innate ideas.
J. Locke was one of the most fierce critics of the theory of "innate ideas". His evidence contributed to a great extent to the fact that innate ideas were rejected. The philosopher categorically asserted that man does not and can not have any innate principles, and his soul is a white paper without any signs and ideas. As a proof, several arguments are given. First, people, as Locke wrote, are arranged in such a way that they, through their own natural abilities, can "achieve all their knowledge and come to credibility without such initial concepts or principles." Secondly, there are no principles that would enjoy the recognition of all mankind, namely such principles are advocates of the theory of innate ideas called imprints that people's souls receive at the beginning of their being. Third, the statement that there are imprints of truth that she does not realize, but which determine the nature of cognition, is contradictory. Objecting, Locke says that "imprinting ... means nothing more than to encourage some truths to be realized." According to J. Locke, moral rules are not innate, as they need proof, and virtue is not approved because it is innate, but because it is useful. Moreover, even the idea of God is not innate, although most of all can be considered as such. This is because not all of humanity has always had a concept of God.
Ready to make your order?Get your great paper now
The theory of innate ideas is beneficial only to those who wish to rule people. "To have the authority of a dictator of principles and a mentor of unquestionable truths and to urge others to believe that for an innate principle everything that can serve the teacher's purposes," says Locke, "is a considerable human power over man." It is easy to see that this explanation has a pedagogical connotation, as it contains a hint of imperfection of the traditional system of education and upbringing.
Congenital, according to Locke, is only the ability to cognize, therefore knowledge is always acquired.
But if from birth a person has no ideas and his soul is like a blank sheet of paper, then what is the essence of man, asked Locke. He replied that the essential element of human nature is the sensory reactions and actions that Locke calls simple ideas of sensations. To them he referred, first of all, to pleasure or pleasure and displeasure or suffering, which occur either from the states of our body or are connected with thoughts. They are connected to each other and can be caused by the same objects.
The witty and subtle E. Condillac also disdained the theory of innate ideas, calling it empty and fantastic, and even reproached Locke for having spent so much effort in denying it. According to many researchers, Condillac brings the concept of Locke to the "clean board" to the extreme. Indeed, on the one hand, the French philosopher asserts that natural talents are imaginary, from birth man is like a statue devoid of any ideas whatsoever, and its essence is nothing more than what it acquired. Nature has given only organs to man and the only advantage that is given to a person at birth is better placed organs, and people who have them get more vivid impressions and easier to acquire habits. All human abilities are contained in the sensations that are acquired.
On the other hand, Condillac speaks of the unequal activity of abilities in different people and the presence of two kinds of gifts: some are acquired through violence against organs, others are the result of a happy arrangement of organs. The latter kind of gifts depends on nature and is stronger. Condillac even talks about two kinds of ingenuity - talent and genius. A talented person has features that other people have, and he is able to combine the ideas of one science or art. An ingenious person has original properties, he is inimitable and capable of inventing new arts or sciences.
In the history of philosophy, many attempts have been made to reconcile the "clean plaque" with innate ideas & quot ;. Philosophers, and among them very prominent, have varied a lot: on the one hand, the influence of sensory experience is obvious and the theories built on this basis seem logical, but, on the other hand, if sensory experience has nothing to catch on, then how can it evoke what is it a transformation and even growth in the human mind? Among the vacillators was a great connoisseur of human nature, K. Helvetius. In his main work "About the Man" he writes, in particular: "The soul is nothing but our ability to sense, and that's why, as Locke proved and as follows from experience, all our ideas are obtained through our sensations." However, immediately the philosopher hastens to correct himself and explains everything differently: "It should be understood that sensations are the catalyst, the accelerator of pulling out of the subconscious of the necessary ideas: that the sensations themselves contribute to the birth of ideas in consciousness and the emergence of knowledge is not subject to and is recognized by both materialists and idealists. Receiving the same feelings from the same subjects, he (the child - I. P.) remembers them, and the memories are all the brighter, the more often the influence of objects on them is repeated. Their influence should be seen as an important part of his upbringing. " "A man is born an ignoramus: he is not born a fool and not without effort even becomes it."
However, soon Helvetius departs from the high theory and concentrates its efforts on the practice of human education. Most of all he is concerned with the question: are there differences between people due to nature or upbringing? The philosopher's answer is unequivocal: it is the result of education. However, whatever upheaval education has achieved, one should not think that it will make all people genius, anyone who is capable of receiving it. With the help of upbringing one can cause rivalry between citizens, accustom them to attention, open their hearts for humanism, and their minds for the truth and ultimately make of all citizens if not genius, then virtuous and understanding people. "Quintilian, Locke and I repeat: the inequality of the mind is the result of a certain cause and this is the cause of differences in upbringing."
Categorically does not deny the existence of innate ideas in humans and D. Diderot. He believes that man is born with the ability to acquire knowledge with greater ease and pleasure than anything else in life. From his point of view, the soul is nothing without a body, and all ideas go from body to soul, and not vice versa, therefore they can not be considered as heterogeneous substances.
Herder's own original view of the theory of innate ideas is available to I. Herder, who believed that they can be talked about only as a "predisposition to perception", the combination and development of certain ideas and images. Thus, innate character has only makings of inner abilities, which are not self-sufficient.
In principle and in detail, the theory of "innate ideas" defended R. Descartes, N. Malbrance, G. Leibniz. The great Ya. A. Komensky supported her unconditionally. And for us, his testimonies are the most valuable. The intellect itself does not understand anything, and only when it is applied to things it lights up with things and illuminates things ... The contours of the whole universe and the whole harmony of the world are naturally laid in our mind. But they are actualized only under the influence of feelings ... For even the ability of sensation from nature, but the feeling itself is from perceived things. So our mind accepts things measured by it from outside, and the measures themselves are a gift of nature, but because in order to be measuring they must measure, it turns out that they are called and are considered, and are actual measures only in so far as a measurement takes place , that is, the measurement of things. And that the measures are actually imprinted inside the mind in a coiled way, is evident from the nature of all the seeds: in a potential and collapsed image they contain the whole of the creation, and where there is nothing in the seed, there can not be anything, as we see in animals in which no the exercise of the higher senses can not bring the inner feeling to such perfection that it can be called mind, judgment or reason. Therefore, Aristotle's comparison of the mind with a clean slate is not very good, although it is no better than comparing it with a closed book from one of the new writers (Herbert). He makes the mind to understand as a purely passive potency, this one - as an already completed act; but the mind is neither one nor the other, but something in between these extremes: it is an active potency, actualized by its own power, but under the influence of external objects. " Therefore, there is no need to bring anything to a person from without, but it is necessary to develop, to find out what he has inherent in himself, in the bud, indicating the meaning of all existing & quot ;. Recall Seneca: "We inherited the seeds of all sciences, and God, as a teacher, brings abilities out of the mysterious depths."
To. Ushinsky also did not deny the idea of an innate mind. Asked about the limits of education, he answers: "Attaching great importance to education in human life, we nevertheless clearly realize that the limits of educational activity are already given in the conditions of the soul and body nature of man and in the conditions of the world among which man is destined to live." We are confident that upbringing, being perfected, can far push the limits of human strength: physical, mental and moral. "
KD Ushinsky returns to this question many times, consistently explaining his understanding of the realization of innate ideas: "... In every embryo there is a life-giving idea that develops and is found in the organization ... Now it becomes understandable by itself, to which our soul can absorb with the greatest pleasure those activities, thoughts, aspirations, feelings, inclinations, bodily features for which one already finds training in the nervous system ... Our soul unconsciously, during sleep or rest, continuously develops primary forces, connecting with external impressions or following the tracks of previous impressions, give us new impressions or a conscious repetition of the old ... The influence of the external world on the nervous organism gives him many impressions that leave in the body a great many tracks or "reflections" about the existence of which says, starting from Aristotle, in all psychologies and physiologies. " And, in the end, it is unequivocal and expressive: If sensation can be called reading our soul by some mysterious alphabet of the states of the nervous organism that vibrates under the influence of the external world, then remembering (remembering) can be called reading by heart for the same mysterious alphabet traces of past vibrations in the same nervous system. But how does the soul find the traces in the nervous system that it needs? .. So, regardless of nervous memory, the soul, after all, the human soul, must have its own special memory - the memory of ideas ... ".
Philosophy and pedagogy of the 20th century. completely abandoned the idea of an innate mind, preferring to stand firmly on the position of the emergence of all knowledge from sensory experience. Net board was very convenient for teachers. The author of the textbook also wrote on it his thoughts, following as an obedient student, for the great predecessors, until he became convinced that in pedagogy without innate ideas the ends will not converge, the theory will remain poor, soulless and contradictory.
This is how the book "New Didactics" begins. one of the modern pedagogy theorists VK Dyachenko: "The source of all our knowledge is ultimately an experience". From this postulate further provisions are derived, a theory is built up.
Yes, no! Although collective, though individual, even their own, though alien, but not experience, the source of our knowledge. Knowledge already exists, with them a person is born. Experience only launches them, activates, makes them arise. The more experience, the more ideas in mind are activated.
In addition to the above arguments, consider new questions-examples.
1. Can a person who has no experience, but already reached puberty, conceive a child? Yes, he is called to this by nature. He has no experience, he has not seen anything yet and does not know, he lived in some sterile, unblemished Sermy. And the skill appeared, somehow arose. Where from? Instinct, you will say. But reproduction in humans is not instinctive at all, but quite conscious and controlled process.
2. This example we will borrow from the book "Indigo Children-2". Grandmother says: "I have a wonderful granddaughter, she is about to turn two years old. It often happened that she would do or say something, and we just marvel at: "And how does she know this?" I think she's a very smart child. At the same time, she has a character. However, as stated in the book "Indigo Children," "high self-esteem is not such a problem" and "they come to this world with a sense of their own greatness." Still quite a baby, she quite unequivocally gives us to understand what she likes and what does not! She has her own opinion about everything in the world. First of all, I recall two relatively recent cases.
1) When she was only one and a half years old, her mother sat her to watch the video "Little Mermaid", and she went to another room. But my granddaughter wanted to look not "Little Mermaid", but "Lady and the Vagabond." Mom was tired of this readiness and said: "Sit and see" The Little Mermaid, "I'll be back soon."
And when she returned, my granddaughter sat on the sofa with a contented look and watched "Lady and the tramp"! She took out a cassette with the "Little Mermaid" from the tape recorder, inserted the correct cassette correctly and turned on the video. Mommy was dumbfounded! This crumb had to find the cassette eject button, take out the cassette, push the other side with the right side and far enough for the mechanism to pull it back - and then press the "start" button.
2) Most recently (as I said, my granddaughter was not yet two years old), several members of our family were sitting in the living room and discussed plans for Christmas. My mother-in-law said she bought a canopy for my crib as a gift to my granddaughter. The girl was sitting next to her, and so the mother-in-law pronounced the word in letters: "en-a-us-e-es." Then the granddaughter turned to us, very clearly said "canopy" and again began silently watching TV. We just exchanged glances - we just could not believe our ears. "
3. This example is also not fictional. Under the influence of certain factors that lead to the blocking of individual brain programs, memory loss (amnesia) occurs. How to explain the fact that, despite the usual conditions of life, the action of the same stimuli, the person's experience, memory does not return, knowledge does not resume. So, is not experience directing our intellect?
4. In many species of animals (insects, fish and some others), offspring never learn anything from their parents. Their growth and development is guided by instinct. Why do we argue that it is not instincts, but only experience that leads to the emergence of knowledge in humans? We have more instincts than enough, they act exactly and lead us through life. Where the instinct comes to an end, the action of consciously acquired knowledge begins. Knowledge is the continuation of the instinct. Experience is an assistant, but not a source.
It is known that the same events are constantly repeated in history, which led to the well-known question of B. Russell: what does history teach us? It teaches us that it does not teach anything. People always behave the same way. Why is the experience accumulated by many generations silent?
5. This example is associated with dementia, which is called a hereditary disease. The brain is sluggish, incompetent. Offer to a person with dementia any experience in any volumes - will knowledge arise? Sick cells can not function normally, extract knowledge, in much the same way as a diseased liver can not release bile. Experience does not help here.
Tell me, where do (from what?) scammers scoop their stories? In everyday life they can not observe what they write about. Hence, they extract them from themselves, surprising us with plausibility. Much of what was predicted by the science fiction writers has already come true. It turns out that all this was already experienced, it was in previous lives, and some vague shadows were preserved in the gene baggage.
Many adults are surprised by the ability of small children to quickly and without stress control the most sophisticated technology - computers, mobile phones, and use the Internet. Where did these skills come from? Is this fact confirmed by the existence of such devices in previous civilizations? You can try to calculate the remoteness in time of cycles of repetition of civilizations and in this way to establish the periodicity of the return of souls to new beings.
It is known that a computer by the speed and quality of the performance of specific actions can shame even a very capable person. The machine in chess of the most ex-champion of the world has beaten. Within the limits of a human-specified field, the computer demonstrates fantastic results. Look at least on computer graphics, the design of movies, listen to the music composed by the machine. What the person has thought up and asked, the machine will execute. Generating a new idea the machine will never be able to.
If there are no clear ideas about the mechanisms of training, what is happening in the brain of the student, it is impossible to organize the practical process correctly, to make it subject to our will, to achieve the required efficiency. Even in the XXI century. there are still representations that some of the knowledge from the head of the teacher somehow "passes" in the heads of the disciples. Professor V. K. Dyachenko writes: "... this is something material, physical, this is a sound-sign interaction, which has a structure and different forms through which knowledge (thoughts, ideas, theories, views) from the heads of the educators can go in the heads of students. Transition of the content of education from teachers through oral or written speech to the student is a learning process ... ".
While none of the known methods could detect the flow knowledge from one head to another. This is a pedagogical metaphor. But the idea is interesting. Flow it is possible, but only energetic, in some conditions still unclear to us and with the use of some special energy methods of brain interaction, and not with the help of a sound-sign interaction that suffers from strong losses and distortions. It is known that in the secret laboratories experiments were conducted and conducted on the "transplantation" knowledge, but they have not yet produced the expected results. A person of the future will regain the telepathic abilities of his ancestors and be able to comprehend knowledge without distorting intermediaries - sounds and signs.
The hypothesis about the transfer of knowledge directly "from head to head", bypassing the sign-speech activity, arose not yesterday. We already understand: if the knowledge modulate the energy radiation of the brain of the teacher and bring these radiation into contact with the energy field of the pupil, then with sufficient radiation power, the field of the inductor (teacher) will "break through" field of the recipient (student) and modifies it, i.e. Fill necessary knowledge. The powerful radiation of the inductor forces the student's brain programs to be forced and forces the consciousness they control to resonate with the teacher's waves, which leads to a "transplant" knowledge. The hypothesis is very tempting, and your professor is almost sure that this is really possible, and if it were not for fear of consequences, he would have started his own experiments long ago. May be fortunate for the student, who will fall into the soul of this idea.
What we know today about the mechanisms of the emergence of knowledge in the mind of a person allows us to talk not about their "ready transplant" with the help of means of verbal or written communication, but only about activation of the corresponding structures of the brain by sound or light signals. Everything happens in such an approximately way. There is a student's brain, capable of understanding the knowledge available to him by nature. At the same time, it makes no difference to us whether this knowledge is given by nature, which is stored in its structures (hypothesis 1) or in the course of life some initial information has been acquired, which, according to the laws of associative connection, will create new knowledge (hypothesis 2). Information from the teacher, passing through the communication channels, reaches certain areas of the brain and activates suitable programs, transferring them from the state of "ignorance" in the knowledge state. The amount (level) of activation depends on the strength of the stimulus. The higher the signal level, the higher the brain's readiness to perceive it, the higher the ability to decode and transfer to new states, the higher the level of knowledge (understanding, assimilation, memorization).
If this conclusion is correct, then it turns out that everything in learning is done right from the earliest times: the supports (frames, lattices, structures) are searched for or created, on which you can "apply", "hang" new knowledge, more powerful communication channels are created, which increase the level of signals that can cause the necessary level of cell excitation.
There is a "threshold of sensations". It creates the critical level of interaction above which the stimulus can not rise without fear of destroying the structure of the receptor cells.
The Almighty created people unequal. It is not possible to understand the fishing of God to the mortal. We are not equal initially, primarily because of their ability to learn. In one, the brain is strong and workable, in the other - sluggish and atrophied. Between extremes - the tiny point of everyone who came into this world.
Why try to train someone who is not able to learn. His destiny is predetermined from birth - occupation by simple craft. The highest joy of knowing is not given to him and is not available. Why do we go against the will of the Almighty, forcibly trying to introduce knowledge into the souls of those unable to comprehend it?
A student is someone who is looking for learning, whose brain is panting with a thirst for activation, who tries to quench this thirst in any way. Different people have fires of different desires. Do we need to collect all together and certainly educate everyone alike?
One can not agree with the popular opinion that the entire educational and upbringing system has become useless. Nothing like this. Everything as usual. Who wants to - learns who does not want or can not - does not study. So it was and always will be. Opportunities for those seeking knowledge have increased significantly. The choice of tools, technologies is now very large - for every taste.
However, let us return to the pedagogical application of the principles of innate ideas and the programmable work of the brain. Relying on them, it is easier and more logical to explain the knowledge gained through observations and experiments. It is possible to answer the question about the sources of human knowledge and behavior, to understand correctly what will happen to a person as a result of a certain influence on him. According to the hypothesis under consideration, the answer is unequivocal: everything that a person needs is brought with him. Developing the question in this vein further, we must inevitably come to the conclusion that all kinds, forms, variants and problems of human upbringing have already been created in his psychic structure. It remains to call and cherish the necessary. To do this, only have to create the appropriate conditions. It is necessary to give the person the opportunity to make a choice (for this purpose, the Almighty and rewarded him with free will), and he will choose what his nature attracts to.
If we accept this hypothesis, we will be able to explain much more simply and convincingly. The mechanisms of upbringing seem not so strange and confusing. A person from birth has an educational potency. There are dormant forces in him capable of causing any transformations. Creating various conditions for their release, we obtain the corresponding results. The task of pedagogy is to explain what these results will be in different conditions of education, education, upbringing, development. Its main current question is how to relate the natural potency to the conditions of life and upbringing, to predict the level of human development, to discover ways of diagnosing the achieved changes.
Let's sum up. After a long rotation of our subject in all planes, considering numerous positions and points of view, we finally came up with two mutually exclusive hypotheses: the first traditional - a person comes into the world with a consciousness free from any information, like a "clean board" or blank page (tabula rasa) and mastering all knowledge starts from scratch. The second new (well-forgotten old): a man comes to this world with absolute knowledge, an ideal personality, and in terrestrial life he is revealed to as much as he has managed to extract from himself with his own efforts. No one can do this for the person himself: other people, teachers, society, nature, information - only necessary, but not sufficient conditions.
All the ideas, knowledge, activities, all forms of behavior a person brought with him. Even what we call morality, it carries within itself. He is the source of all ideas for himself. Everything in the encoded is stored in billions of brain cells that seem to be for nothing and are thought to contain the unconscious, unidentified. Education, training - only the actualization of already existing knowledge, skills, forms and ways of behavior. They come to consciousness when a person exerts efforts to call them.
In the light of new research on the mechanisms of human education, a number of refinements follow about its nature and features. Above, mostly traditional definitions were given, in which the idea of education was conveyed as the transmission of experience from the older generation to the younger. But if we take the path of recognizing innate ideas, we will inevitably have to admit that this experience already exists in the gene baggage. Education only activates it, adapts it to the emerged conditions of human life. In connection with this education is the adaptation of a person to the conditions in which he will live in this world. Education consists in the unlocking of hereditary programs, the formation of behavior scenarios (including knowledge and morality), which are most appropriate in the circumstances that have arisen. Parenting is not the transfer of experience, but its reclamation (restoration), depending on the emerging conditions of life: what will be required, it will be put into actual programs of activity. You can say so: education - transfer from the subconscious to the conscious of the desired patterns of behavior.
In principle, both the first and second hypotheses change little in our understanding of the practical organization of education: how much labor a person has spent on his upbringing, so much upbringing he has as a result of his efforts.
Also We Can Offer!
- Argumentative essay
- Best college essays
- Buy custom essays online
- Buy essay online
- Cheap essay
- Cheap essay writing service
- Cheap writing service
- College essay
- College essay introduction
- College essay writing service
- Compare and contrast essay
- Custom essay
- Custom essay writing service
- Custom essays writing services
- Death penalty essay
- Do my essay
- Essay about love
- Essay about yourself
- Essay help
- Essay writing help
- Essay writing service reviews
- Essays online
- Fast food essay
- George orwell essays
- Human rights essay
- Narrative essay
- Pay to write essay
- Personal essay for college
- Personal narrative essay
- Persuasive writing
- Write my essay
- Write my essay for me cheap
- Writing a scholarship essay