Astral Facts, September 2013
Support for the Stem
Astral: (Theosophy) Consisting of, belonging to, or designating, a kind of supersensible substance alleged to be next above the tangible world in refinement; as, astral spirits; astral bodies of persons; astral current.
Support for the Stem
Culturally it is a social given that education is a major component in any stable society, and much discussion has focused on the roles of the core combinations known as “STEM”: Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics, as areas of high importance. The acronym reveals an interesting analogy, for a stem only exists as an extension of some trunk or branch. To extend that analogy, the obvious trunk and branches are rooted in the fields of the Humanities, for it is there that the basic skills of reading, writing, and critical thinking are fostered and nurtured. also in combination with what goes on in the social environment trunks, these skills grow into the budding STEMs of the science of the natural and external worlds. Ultimately, the blossoms and fruit that emerge at the end of the STEMs are not created solely by the STEM itself. The elements of the Humanities and Social Sciences are key factors as well. The connection between stem and fruit is much more complex than it seems to be, with roots not always recognized.
Last spring, while we on campus were in the throes of finals and graduation, Annie Murphy Paul looked to such roots in her Time Magazine article “Reading Literature Makes Us Smarter and Nicer” (June 3, 2013). Paul cites separate research studies from Canada that indicate “individuals who often read fiction appear to be better able to understand other people, empathize with them and view the world from their perspective. This link persisted even after the researchers factored in the possibility that more empathetic individuals might choose to read more novels.” She also cites research that suggests children who had exposure to literary stories resulted in higher level skills later in life, warning that lack of experience in deep reading-“ slow, immersive, rich in sensory detail and emotional and moral complexity involved in reading” - puts limitations on intellectual and emotional development of the individual. As Paul says, “Although deep reading does not, strictly speaking, require a conventional book, the build-in limits of the printed page are uniquely conducive to the deep reading experience.”
Paul also references the studies of psychologist Victor Nell, who found that people slow down during “pleasure” reading, which allows them to contribute to the text with personal experience and opinion combined with reflection and analysis. Nell says this results in similar emotions and conversations within the mind of the readers “like people falling in love.” Paul compares this to the distinctions made by literary critic Frank Kermode between “carnal” reading (such as technical or informational reading) and “spiritual” reading (such as considering why the caged bird sings or feeling the frustration of someone obsessed by a white whale), noting that spiritual reading skills become underdeveloped and atrophied when young people become obsessively “attached” to their digital devices, for spiritual reading takes discipline and practice. Her conclusion is that we are mistaken if we focus on the attempt to “meet kids where they are” by tailoring our teaching around their onscreen habits. Rather, we need to show them someplace they’ve never been, where deep reading is the logon and password.
Here is the link to the whole article:
Then last week on October 3rd in The New York Times, Pam Bulluck’s article “For Better Social Skills, Scientists Recommend a Little Chekhov” reported on an article from the journal Science regarding the role of “literature” in mental development (and by extension – mental maintenance). The same article was reprinted locally on the front page of The Seattle Times the next day. Here is a copy of the abstract from Science:
Abstract: Understanding others’ mental states is a crucial skill that enables the complex social relationships that characterize human societies. Yet little research has investigated what fosters this skill, which is known as Theory of Mind (ToM), in adults. We present five experiments showing that reading literary fiction led to better performance on tests of affective ToM (experiments 1 to 5) and cognitive ToM (experiments 4 and 5) compared with reading nonfiction (experiments 1), popular fiction (experiments 2 to 5), or nothing at all (experiments 2 and 5). Specifically, these results show that reading literary fiction temporarily enhances ToM. More broadly, they suggest that ToM may be influenced by engagement with works of art.
In her commentary, Bullock quotes Nicholas Humphrey, an evolutionary psychologist who has written extensively about human intelligence, and who was not involved in the research. “That they would have subjects read for three to five minutes and that they would get these results is astonishing.” Dr. Humphrey, an emeritus professor at Cambridge University’s Darwin College, said he would have expected that reading generally would make people more empathetic and understanding. “But to separate off literary fiction, and to demonstrate that it has different effects from the other forms of reading, is remarkable,” he said.
Others have noted the distinction between literature and “popular fiction.” Emanuele Castano, a psychology professor involved in the research noted “popular fiction seems to be more focused on the plot …Characters can be interchangeable and usually more stereotypical in the way they are described.”
In popular fiction, said David Comer Kidd, another of the researchers, “really the author is in control, and the reader has a more passive role.” In literary fiction, like Dostoyevsky, “there is no single, overarching authorial voice,” he said. “Each character presents a different version of reality, and they aren’t necessarily reliable. You have to participate as a reader in this dialectic, which is really something you have to do in real life.”
Thus, it seems that a healthy STEM really depends on the deep reading that fertilizes the ToM at the root. If you don’t believe me, ask people such as Prince Lev Nikolayevich Myshkin, Dolores Haze, Queequeg, Holden Caulfield, Lucy Honeychurch, Winston Smith, etc. If you can’t decide between the red pill or the blue pill, ask Nurse Ratched to help you.
Walter Lowe
Astral Facts is a somewhat regular presentation of Humanities Science, produced in the bowels of the Humanities Science offices during the academic year.
Astral Facts is a somewhat regular presentation of Humanities Science, produced in the bowels of the Humanities Science offices during the academic year.
1 comment:
I say we add Arts to STEM, and call it STEAM!
Post a Comment