"Stanton L. Berberich" <sberberi@uhl.uiowa.edu> writes
>Greetings At,
>
>I've learned much from your posts and I am currently exploring the realm
>of "becoming being" pairs that you've mentioned before and again in this
>post.
>
>My question however, is actually off topic from what you were discussing
>in this post and has to do with your statement, "Ignorance is an antonym
>for learning."
>
>Sometimes I find that a particular phrase will stand out from everything
>else being communicated because of some experience or discovery that is
>personal to me. This phrase is one of them. It immediately caused me to
>examine the relationship between ignorance and learning and led to the
>question, "Is ignorance really the opposite of learning?"
>
>Isn't ignorance actually a prerequisite for learning?
I think that 'conscious ignorance' is, but 'unconscious ignorance' is not.
There is an old learning 'thing' that goes as follows: (someone help me as
to its source)
Learning goes through four stages
1. unconscious incompetence (ignorance) - 'ignorance is bliss' no need to
learn
2. conscious incompetence - awarness of a skill gap potential to learn
3. conscious competence - the awkward phase of learning
4. unconscious competence - masterful performace of new skill/learning
Thus ignorance can be a prerequisite for learning under certain
conditions. I think the ZEN master (my weak understanding of ZEN stuff)
creates the conditions of conscious incompetence by using Koan and having
the student perform seemingly impossible task, forcing the learning.
Paul Rousseau
roussea@server.uwindsor.ca
St. Clair Beach, Ontario
Interested in Creativity? Contact the Creative Education Foundation
1 800-447-2774 or <cefhq@cef-cpsi.org> WWW: http://www.cef-cpsi.org/
Tell them Rousseau sent you.
--Paul Rousseau <roussea@server.uwindsor.ca>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>