Learning and Intelligence

Learning and Intelligence:

I have a saying on my wall at work.  It says, “Knowledge tears the world apart.  Wisdom makes it whole.”  That is from an African tribal proverb.  I expanded upon that and continued, “Intelligence is the ability to use knowledge to gain wisdom.  True learning is the practice of intelligence.”  That was written many years ago.  Today my understanding has developed some.  I would amend it to say that true learning is acquiring the intelligence to incorporate knowledge into wisdom and to then disseminate wisdom into positive technologies.  Technology in this sense isn’t limited to electronics or even machines, but to the practice of making a useful and productive difference with the development and use of available physical, mental, systemic, and influential resources.

Knowledge that doesn’t lead to wisdom is nothing more than empty facts and concepts.  While the regurgitation of such might seem impressive, it doesn’t make a positive difference unless you are taking a scholastic test.  Wisdom takes the disparate facts and concepts and combines and develops them into the understanding which can lead to a positive difference.  Even then, until that wisdom or understanding is translated into objects, behaviors, and attitudes (technology) that really do result in positive developments, the wisdom is empty.  The true value of the guru on the mount isn’t in what he or she says, but in what difference their “wisdom” makes once the supplicant comes down off the mountain and makes day to day changes to thoughts and behaviors.

It can be understood, then, that true intelligence isn’t measured in the knowledge a person can recall and express.  It is only partially exhibited in the wisdom and deeper understanding  they develop from the knowledge they have acquired.  Ultimately, it is demonstrated in the positive difference that is made from the dissemination and application of that wisdom to themselves, others, and the world around them.

Our education system seems weighted towards rewarding those who can acquire and demonstrate knowledge.  It should, in addition, expand recognition to those who are able to transform that knowledge into measurable wisdom.  The highest reward would then be reserved for those who demonstrate the application of their wisdom into technologies that serve the world around them.

How might that work?  Here are some simplified examples applied across some different disciplines:

Math, Physics, and Chemistry:  Like many, I was not a big fan of story problems.  That said, learning how to manipulate formulas correctly without tying those formulas to application examples would seem to strike at the heart of what I’m concerned about.  All of our learning should be focused on how to apply what we learn--if not to something the student will occasionally face, at least to something concrete enough that they can see why there is value in learning the formulas.  I hated high level math and chemistry because all it seemed to be were rules and methods for moving numbers and symbols around on a page.  Physics was a little better, but often deteriorated to merely a different form of math.  Problem solving should be the focus of our STEM education, rather than problem solving be a method to get the right equation and answer on a test.

English and literature:  The best English teacher I had threw out the sentence diagrams and endless grammar and taught us what and how our words communicated.  If you want to say this, then here is how you approach it.  If you want to communicate this, then here are the basic rules and reason that governs your communication.  She even told us we could break some rules if we did it on purpose and if it accomplished the purpose of what we were trying to communicate.  Literature is too often presented as classical stories that students are forced to read and then regurgitate facts about the plot and characters.  The next level would be to try and foster an understanding of what the writer wanted to communicate in the story, how the characters’ actions and motives lead to the consequences seen, and what we learned from the story that might change how we approach our own challenges and joys in life.  Taken from that perspective, even younger children could get much more out of literature and, I might add, more quickly learn to distinguish between really good writing and simple fluff.

Some who agree with me otherwise may object to my thesis because it doesn’t address the valuable knowledge and experience that wouldn’t seem to directly lead to technology.  What about music, literature, classical studies and other so-called liberal arts?  This is a valid criticism.  I would like to learn Latin, be able to discourse on classical philosophies and comparative religions.  I want to be exposed to great painting, sculptures, fine music, and other ennobling and uplifting experiences.  There is more to life than STEM knowledge.  I would only say that I think these are also useful and do lead to valid technologies by sharpening and increasing the value of our primary tool, our intellect.  These classical disciplines help shape our creativity and expand our perspectives, thus increasing our capacity to achieve greater intelligence and more effectiveness in all other pursuits.  So, don’t get me wrong, I am all for any person’s exposure to more classical pursuits.  I think it is a shame that our school systems seem to be moving away from these things to a focus on solely STEM stuff and sports.

In summary, I think we do a disservice to our society and our developing youth by too narrowly measuring what we deem as academic success.  While acquiring knowledge and skills is important, I think it pales in comparison with an education that teaches the upcoming generation how to reason, problems solve, and constantly be learning in order to adapt to an ever more quickly changing world.  To do this, we have to get beyond facts and concepts to concentrate more on developing the wisdom and intelligence that will be necessary to take our species successfully on into the future.