Wednesday, April 1, 2015

Systems Thinking Skills Mind Map


http://mappio.com/mindmap/vvojtko/systems-thinking-skills

Dueling Loops Video Series on Systems Thinking

Dueling Loops Video Series on Systems Thinking


The essence of systems thinking is thinking in terms of system structure. System structure consists of nodes, their relationships, and the feedback loops that cause the system to behave the way it does. That's what the videos demonstrate.
Therefore the essence of solving difficult systemic problems is understanding the relevant system structure. Once you understand it and can "see" it as well as the back of your hand, solving the problem becomes relatively easy because you can now "see" the root causes and the high leverage points for resolving the root causes. Your solution elements push on the high leverage points. That's the main message of the videos.
This is a powerful way to solve common good problems.
It's best to start with the first video and watch them all in sequence, since they tell a cohesive story.
1. Overview of the Dueling Loops, 11 minutes
2. Discovery of the Sustainability Problem by Limits to Growth Project, 6 min
3. The Basic Concept of Feedback Loops, with Population Growth, 10 min
4. How Simulation Models Work, with Population Growth, 10 min
5. The Importance of Structural Thinking, 3 types, 8 min
6. What Jared Diamond’s Collapse Book Attempted to Do, 6 min
7. Extracting the Competitive Spiral from Collapse, 8 min
8. The Two Fundamental Loops of All Political Systems, 5 min
9. The Four Loop Model of Why Some Societies Collapsed, 7 min
10. The Basic Dueling Loops Shape, 15 min
11. The Race to the Bottom Simulation Model, 6 min
12. The Five Main Types of Political Deception, 15 min

http://www.thwink.org/sustain/videos/DuelingLoops/index.htm

What is Lack of Systems Thinking?

Lack of systems thinking produces a mental model based mostly on what you can physically see. This tends to give a shallow understanding of the way a system works. For example, when pouring a glass of water we usually think only in terms of turning on the faucet until the glass is full, and then turning it off.

 

http://www.thwink.org/sustain/glossary/SystemsThinking.htm

Definitions of Systems Thinking

Systems Thinking

Here are a few definitions about systems thinking, let's take a look:

Wikipedia:  
Systems thinking is the process of understanding how things, regarded as systems, influence one another within a whole. In nature, systems thinking examples include ecosystems in which various elements such as air, water, movement, plants, and animals work together to survive or perish. In organizations, systems consist of people, structures, and processes that work together to make an organization "healthy" or "unhealthy". Systems thinking has roots in the General Systems Theory that was advanced by Ludwig von Bertalanffy in the 1940s and furthered by Ross Ashby in the 1950s. The field was further developed by Jay Forrester and members of the Society for Organizational Learning at MIT which culminated in the popular book The Fifth Discipline by Peter Senge which defined Systems thinking as the capstone for true Organizational learning. (1,2)
 Waters Foundation:
Systems thinking utilizes habits, tools and concepts to develop an understanding of the interdependent structures of dynamic systems. When individuals have a better understanding of systems, they are better able to identify the leverage points that lead to desired outcomes. (3)
“What do we mean when we say ‘systems thinking?’” We can use the phrase to refer to a set of tools – such as causal loop diagrams, stock and flow diagrams and simulation models – that help us map and explore dynamic complexity. We can also use it to mean a unique perspective on reality – a perspective that sharpens our awareness of whole and of how the parts within those wholes interrelate. Finally, systems thinking can refer to a special vocabulary with which we express our understanding of dynamic complexity. For example, systems thinkers often describe the world in terms of reinforcing and balancing processes, limits, delays, patterns of behavior over time, and so forth.” – Barry Richmond, isee systems, inc. (4)
 “Systems thinking is a vantage point from which you see a whole, a web of relationships, rather than focusing only on the detail of any particular piece. Events are seen in the larger context of a pattern that is unfolding over time.”
isee systems, inc.(4)
 Systems thinking is a perspective of seeing and understanding systems as wholes rather than as collections of parts.  A whole is a web of interconnections that creates emerging patterns. (4)
Mental Models:
System
A system is an entity which maintains its existence
through the mutual interaction of its parts.
The key emphasis here is one of "mutual interaction," in that something is occurring between the parts, over time, which maintains the system. A system is different than a heap or a collection, mostly.
Emergence
Associated with the idea of system is a principle called emergence. From the mutual interaction of the parts of a system there arise characteristics which can not be found as characteristic of any of the individual parts.
One has to study the system to get a true understanding of wetness. Studying the parts will not provide an appropriate understanding. (5)
Thwink:
Here's a definition from Barry Richmond, who coined the term in 1987: 1
Systems Thinking is the art and science of making reliable inferences about behavior by developing an increasingly deep understanding of underlying structure.
Cultivating this "art and science" leads to routine use of correct mental models that see the world as a complex system whose behavior is controlled by its dynamic structure, which is the way its feedback loops interact to drive the system's behavior.  The term systems thinking is preferred to holistic or whole systems, which have looser and more intuitive meanings, and emphasize understanding the whole rather than the dynamic structure of the system.
Systems thinking is not stepping back to look at the whole, the big picture, or a higher level. Nor is it realizing that when a butterfly flaps its wings in one place, that could cause a hurricane far away. This helps, but does not lead to the major insights that emerge when the feedback loop structure of the system becomes visible. When this happens night becomes day. Systems thinking is the first step to an even higher level: system dynamics, where instead of just thinking in terms of system structure you model it.(6)

References
  1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Systems_thinking
  2. Senge, Peter (1990). The Fifth Discpline. Doubleday.
  3. http://watersfoundation.org/systems-thinking/what/
  4.  http://watersfoundation.org/systems-thinking/definitions/
  5. http://www.systems-thinking.org/index.htm
  6. http://www.thwink.org/sustain/glossary/SystemsThinking.htm

The Role of Questions in Teaching Thinking

Thinking begins with questions.  It is through deep questions that ask beyond the surface superficial "fact" that thinking can begin.  Formulating questions, and ever asking questions keeps the mind sharp.  Unfortunately, many minds in fact-driven classrooms are being slowly dulled through the concept of the right answer.
Asking questions is in itself an exercise in thinking.  To think of all the questions one has about a topic, and then to think of all the questions that each one of those questions generates builds a whole curriculum and a way of understanding and engaging solutions to problems.  Answers, or the "right answer" often are thought-stopping processes that end discussions in dulled classrooms. Deep questions drive our thoughts and our curiosities, inciting creative solutions and ideas about the questions.  Many kinds of questions should be asked.

Questions about information
Questions about interpretation
Questions about purpose
Questions about implication
Questions about point-of-view
Questions of relevance
Questions of accuracy
Questions of precision
Questions of consistency
Questions of logic

These kinds of questions can wake up sleepy minds and get them used to again thinking, and learning, and communicating.

References
  1. Never-Ending Story, Galas, C., http://www.cathleengalas.com/papers/9ISTEL&LNeverEndingStoryApril99.pdf
  2. http://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/the-role-of-questions-in-teaching-thinking-and-learning/524

EDUCATIONAL REFORM

Education reform is the term used for any changes made to our public education system.  Reform efforts are taken to make public education more effective with higher standards and focus on the needs of the students in terms of health, wealth, and well-being. In classical times, Plato believed that children would not learn unless they wanted to learn.  From the Republic:
  " . . compulsory learning never sticks in the mind."
John Dewey approached educational reform as a way to reform society on more scientific, humanistic, pragmatic, or social principles.  Maria Montessori approached education on humanistic principles, in educating for peace, and the social goal of meeting the needs of the child.  The modern notion of educational reform is tied into the concept of compulsory education.  There is continuing debate in the US about education reforms, but the goal is clearly to use what we have learned about what works in education to try to improve teaching and learning in schools.  (1,2)

Progressive reforms in Europe and the US

Child study Jean-Jacques Rosseau

Horace Mann (1796 –1859)
Mann used his political base and role as Secretary of the Massachusetts State Board of Education to promote public education in his home state and nationwide.  Mann is seen as the father of American public education.
No one did more than he to establish in the minds of the American people the conception that education should be universal, non-sectarian, free, and that its aims should be social efficiency, civic virtue, and character, rather than mere learning or the advancement of sectarian ends.(3)
 John Dewey (1859-1952)
Dewey was an American philosopher and educational reformer whose ideas are associated with pragmatism, progressive education, and liberalism.  His belief in democracy was the lens of all of his philosophies.  
"Democracy and the one, ultimate, ethical ideal of humanity are to my mind synonymous." (4)
 Dewey's educational theories were presented in My Pedagogic Creed (1897), The School and Society (1900), The Child and the Curriculum (1902), Democracy and Education (1916) and Experience and Education (1938).  Democracy and social reform are  embedded in all of his writings on education.  He views education as a place to learn knowledge and learn how to live in the world to their full potential. He argued that the presentation of content must allow the student to relate their prior experiences to create deep connections to the curriculum. He is one of the first proponents of hands on learning experiences and experiential education.
"if knowledge comes from the impressions made upon us by natural objects, it is impossible to procure knowledge without the use of objects which impress the mind" (5: Dewey, 1916/2009, pp. 217–218)
Dewey re-imagined the learning process in the classroom.  Up until his time, education was seen as a way to train students for work by teaching them job skills.  In The School and Society (Dewey, 1976) and Democracy of Education, Dewey claims that education should prepare citizens for ethical participation in society as reflective, autonomous, ethical humans who can arrive at social truths through critical discourse, but instead raise passive, docile pupils through subject mastery and authoritarian structures.  (8,9).

Dewey believed that adequate training of teachers was critical forreforming education as a process that cultivated autonomy and inquiry:
“The thing needful is improvement of education, not simply by turning out teachers who can do better the things that are not necessary to do, but rather by changing the conception of what constitutes education” (Dewey, 1904, p. 18).

Professionalization of teaching as a social service  

A teacher's knowledge

A teacher's skill

A teacher's disposition

The role of teacher education to cultivate the professional classroom teacher

 Maria Montessori (1870-1952)

 Maria Montessori's first work with disabled children applied the methods of Itard, Seguin, Frobel, Pestalozzi, emphasizing sensory exploration and manipulatives.  She considered her work "scientific pedagory", and later began to develop her own pedagogy. She developed what became known as the Montessori method,   a method of educating young children that stresses development of a child's own initiative and natural abilities.

 
 
Jean Piaget (1896-1980) 

Piaget was a Swiss developmental psychologist who placed great importance on the education of children.  

"only education is capable of saving our societies from possible collapse, whether violent, or gradual." (10)
Harry Beilin described Jean Piaget's theoretical research program[17] as consisting of four phases:
  1. the sociological model of development,
  2. the biological model of intellectual development,
  3. the elaboration of the logical model of intellectual development,
  4. the study of figurative thought.
The resulting theoretical frameworks are sufficiently different from each other that they have been characterized as representing different "Piagets." More recently, Jeremy Burman responded to Beilin and called for the addition of a phase before his turn to psychology: "the zeroeth Piaget.

Loris Malaguzzi (1920-1994)

developed the Reggio Emilia approach

 “Influenced by this belief, the child is beheld as beautiful, powerful, competent, creative, curious, and full of potential and ambitious desires." (25)

1980s

In the 1980s, some of the momentum of education reform moved from the left to the right, with the release of A Nation at Risk, Ronald Reagan's efforts to reduce or eliminate the United States Department of Education. (21)
"[T]he federal government and virtually all state governments, teacher training institutions, teachers' unions, major foundations, and the mass media have all pushed strenuously for higher standards, greater accountability, more "time on task," and more impressive academic results". (21)

1990s and 2000s

Standards-based education reform In the US in the 1990s, many states adopted Outcome-Based Education (OBE). Each state created committees to adopt standards, and choose assesment instruments. The standards-based National Education Goals (Goals 2000) were set by the U.S. Congress.  The standards-based reform movement culminated in the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001.

The beginning of the 21st century debates over education reform include:

References
  1. Education reform, Wikipedia
  2. Whelan, Lessons Learned (2009)
  3. Ellwood P. Cubberley, Public Education in the United States (1919) p. 167.
  4.  Early Works, 1:128 (Southern Illinois University Press) op cited in Douglas R. Anderson, AAR, The Journal of the American Academy of Religion, Vol. 61, No. 2 (1993), p. 383.
  5. Dewey, J. (2009). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education. New York: WLC Books. (Original work published 1916).
  6.  Dewey, J. (1902). The child and the curriculum. Retrieved from http://books.google.com/books
  7. "What Humanism Means to Me," first published in Thinker 2 (June 1930): 9–12, as part of a series. Dewey: Page lw.5.266 [The Collected Works of John Dewey, 1882–1953, The Electronic Edition]
  8. Dewey, John, The School and Society, 1899.
  9. Dewey, John,  Democracy of Education, 1916.
  10.   International Bureau of Education - Directors" search.eb.com Munari, Alberto (1994). "JEAN PIAGET (1896–1880)". Prospects: the quarterly review of comparative education XXIV (1/2): 311–327. doi:10.1007/bf02199023
  11.  Beilin, H. (1992). "Piaget's enduring contribution to developmental psychology". Developmental Psychology 28 (2): 191–204. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.28.2.191.
  12. Burman, J. T. (2011). "The zeroeth Piaget". Theory & Psychology 21 (1): 130–135. doi:10.1177/0959354310361407.
  13. Piaget's The Language and Thought of the Child (1926).
  14.  The Moral Judgment of the Child by Jean Piaget (1932).
  15. The Construction of Reality in the Child by Jean Piaget (1955).
  16. Genetic Epistemology by Jean Piaget (1968).
  17. Comments on Vygotsky by Jean Piaget (1962).
  18. Piaget's Developmental Theory: An Overview - Part 1 on YouTube, a 27-minute documentary film used primarily in higher education.
  19. Piaget's Developmental Theory: An Overview - Part 2 on YouTube, a 27-minute documentary film used primarily in higher education.
  20.  Ron Miller (2002). Free Schools, Free People: Education and Democracy After the Nineteen Sixties. SUNY Press. p. p110. ISBN 978-0-7914-8824-9. Retrieved 1 April 2015.
  21.  A Nation at Risk, http://www2.ed.gov/pubs/NatAtRisk/risk.htmlhttp://www2.ed.gov/pubs/NatAtRisk/risk.html.
  22. No Child Left Behind, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Child_Left_Behind_Act.
  23. The Montessori Method in 1912
  24. The Discovery of the Child in 1948
  25.  Hewitt, Valarie (2001). "Examining the Reggio Emilia Approach to Early Childhood Education". Early Childhood Education Journal 29 (2): 95-10.


The Agile Gene


Agile Gene, and curriculum ideas based on it’s content.  Additions to the themes and examples from the book have been added to expand understanding in some areas.

1st theme:  Genes are not static elements in the processes of life. 
Examples showing that the genome is an an amazingly dynamic structure, responding sensitively to the environmental circumstances, internal and external, of the living forms of which it is a part.
       The reason this is useful is that our minds want to confirm our beliefs, so it ignores how much of an outlier a statement might be and just uses it as though it was general.
The main thing about Theme 1 is the general *stability* of species, in forms and traits, and especially the general stability of the creation of an individual from a fertilized egg. This dominates all of the other "wiggle-rooms". The latter are important for the changes that do occur, but the time scales are very different between stabilities and "instabilities that count". AK

2nd theme:  The absurdity of the nature vs nurture debate
All life is a product of both nature and nurture.  All life processes involve an interaction between a genome and an environment. Everyone realizes and admits this; and yet, it is typical that as soon as this realization is admitted, many thinkers promptly develop arguments where one or the other of these two themes is given prominence. Ridley clearly, and in detail, shows both the futility and destructiveness of such approaches.

     Theme 2. Marvin Minsky's observation that "You can't teach calculus to a cat", meaning that what we can learn is quite limited by our nature -- if a brain isn't able to deal with something, it just can't deal with it.
What makes things tricky, especially with humans, is that we have language, and languages can make languages. So we can learn calculus because we can train our normal linguistic apparatus to deal with the ideas of calculus even though we don't have "a calculus gene" (however, we do have language learning and operations genes). This means we can learn to think of many things that would not remotely occur to a paleolithic human 150,000 years ago (and they could too if they were put into an educational environment at birth). And there are some things that we just can't learn to think about no matter what we try to do with what we do have as raw mental materials (this is our version of the "cat's calculus").
The important questions relative to education and civilization have to do with what Slovic and others have studied: to what extents can we stay with, or do abandon, learned behaviors under conditions of stress?  AK

3rd theme:  develops is a critique of the idea of linear chains of cause and effect. In general, cause and effect is a circular and very complex process. This applies even in sciences like physics and chemistry, but it is especially true in biology. Yet, it is very common (especially in the Nature vs. Nurture opposition) to assume that each effect has only one cause. Ridley lays such approaches to rest as both inadequate and misleading.
I.               Examples of Genes are not static elements in the processes of life.  (He demonstrates from a dozen different points of view HOW causality flows both ways, from the genes to the environment and back.)
a.     until very recently it was thought that there was a one to one correlation between genes and their proteins. It was also unknown what, if any, purpose breaking genes apart into exons on the chromosome served. Now we have discovered that many - ninety five on one mouse gene - different versions of one exon can exist on the chromosome, allowing one gene to make many different versions of its protein. Different versions mediated by... environment, of course.
b.     how nerve cells grow through the brain, from a starting point (for instance, the olfactory bulb in a mouse) to the place where those nerves interact with other nerves so that a smell is meaningful (to the mouse). This is amazing stuff, showing that the propagating nerve itself is exquisitely sensitive to its immediate environment as it grows, first detecting which way to go, and then detecting the other nerves in the brain (among trillions of others) that is its target. This whole process is mediated by the genes in the nerve, that are turned on and off by cues from its environment, and that cause it therefore to do different things.
c.      Genes are not unchanging little bits of DNA: their expression varies throughout a person's life, often in response to environmental stimuli. Babies are born with genes hard-wired for sight, but if they are also born with cataracts, the genes turn themselves off and the child will never acquire the ability to see properly.
d.     stuttering used to be ascribed solely to environmental factors. Then stuttering was found to be clearly linked to the Y chromosome, and evidence for genetic mis-wiring of areas in the brain that manage language was uncovered. But environment still plays a role: not everyone with the genetic disposition will grow up to be a stutterer.
e.     Ape studies/comparisons to humans— to shed light on the behavior of ancient human ancestors, compare human tool use, emotional feelings, sex for pleasure, waging war, language (What makes us human?)
                                               i.     1967 Naked Ape Desmond Morris
                                              ii.     Lois Leakey
                                            iii.     Bonobos- sex for pleasure, homosexual and with juvenilles to celebrate
                                            iv.     Jane Goodall-- 55-year study of social and family interactions of wild chimpanzees in Gombe Stream National Park, Tanzania.
1.     challenged two long-standing beliefs of the day: that only humans could construct and use tools, and that chimpanzees were vegetarians.
a.     While observing one chimpanzee feeding at a termite mound, she watched him repeatedly place stalks of grass into termite holes, then remove them from the hole covered with clinging termites, effectively “fishing” for termites.[18] The chimps would also take twigs from trees and strip off the leaves to make the twig more effective, a form of object modification which is the rudimentary beginnings of toolmaking.[18] Humans had long distinguished ourselves from the rest of the animal kingdom as "Man the Toolmaker". In response to Goodall's revolutionary findings, Louis Leakey wrote, "We must now redefine man, redefine tool, or accept chimpanzees as human!".
2.     observed behaviors such as hugs, kisses, pats on the back, and even tickling, what we consider "human" actions.
3.     also found an aggressive side of chimpanzee nature at Gombe Stream. She discovered that chimps will systematically hunt and eat smaller primates such as colobus monkeys.
                                              v.     Are humans the only beings with culture? ( culture is described as the ability to transmit acquired habits from one generation to another by imitation.)
1.     Chimpanzees of the Tai Forest in West Africa
                                           
f.      Argument: do only humans have subjectivity, consciousness, agency?
                                               i.     Pro argument recently brought up again by Kenan Malik
                                              ii.     Con- read Goodalls descriptions
g.     Are humans the only animals to wage war and kill?
h.     Are humans the only animals with language?
                                               i.     Chomsky-nativist theory
                                              ii.     Language Instinct, 1994, Stephen Pinker, nativist
1.     Criticitzes notions of language: that children must be taught to use it, that most people's grammar is poor, that the quality of language is steadily declining, that language has a heavy influence on a person's possible range of thoughts (the Sapir–Whorf hypothesis), and that nonhuman animals have been taught language (see Great Ape language)
2.     sees language as an ability unique to humans, produced by evolution to solve the specific problem of communication among social hunter-gatherers. He compares language to other species' specialized adaptations such as spiders' web-weaving or beavers' dam-building behavior, calling all three "instincts".
3.     Pinker sees language as an ability unique to humans, produced by evolution to solve the specific problem of communication among social hunter-gatherers. He compares language to other species' specialized adaptations such as spiders' web-weaving or beavers' dam-building behavior, calling all three "instincts".
4.     ‘When researchers focus on one grammatical rule and count how often a child obeys it, ... the results are astonishing: for any rule you choose, three-year-olds obey it most of the time.’
5.      
                                            iii.     The Language Instinct Debate by Geoffrey Sampson--a devastating critique of Steven Pinker’s Language Instinct, critique of nativism, debating the hypothesis that there is such a thing as Universal Grammar, and that it’s innate.
1.     Sampson’s thesis: Children are good at learning languages, because people are good at learning anything that life throws at us — not because we have fixed structures of knowledge built-in.
2.     Provides a view of how human languages work without appealing to nativist assumptions.  brought a different perspective to the empiricist/ nativist debate. It shed reasonable doubt upon the idea that we are born with innate semantic structure. Sampson does a good job of showing the empirical evidence does not always indicate the universals the nativists claim are substantial.
3.     he believes that the mind is literally infinitely creative. This seems to contradict his statement earlier in the book that he believes Stephen Pinker's The Blank Slate to be of great value despite the fact that this conclusion can only come from complete denial of everything this book stands for. Sampson calls upon the ghost in the machine, Descarte's dualism, as the source of human creativity. This view was not integrated into the book but simply pops out at the end.
i.       Thinking-consciousness human only?
                                               i.     Pinker, Stuff of Thought, words use reflects innate brain structure,
                                              ii.     see the human capacity to frame events in alternate ways through the dual function of verbs like "load." This verb draws attention to the hay and its movement in the first sentence, but to the transformation (a kind of metaphorical "movement") of the wagon in the second.
                                            iii.     7 words you cant say on television
                                            iv.     universal patterns of human thought can be adduced from common patterns observed in many natural languages. The bulk of the book is about the patterns, and the connection back to conclusions about the innateness of various ways of looking at the world sometimes takes the back burner. But what is useful about the book is that he does it in a way that is not as complex and convoluted as the previous sentence.
                                              v.     there are clear syntactic distinctions between the usually unprintable words for sex and their more presentable cousins, such as have sex, make love, sleep together, copulate, etc. I had never before noticed that the taboo and vulgar forms, which tend to specify physical motion, differ from the non-taboo terms in that they usually occur in a subject-verb-direct object construction (e.g., Austin shagged Vanessa). The more respectable terms lack a direct object and do not specify "a particular manner of motion or effect." Furthermore, they are semantically symmetrical, so that if Austin had sex with Vanessa, Vanessa also had sex with Austin. More fundamentally Pinker ties the cathartic effect of some swearing with "the Rage circuit, which [is]... connected with negative emotion." The Rage circuit, as part of the limbic system, is found in other animals and is associated with "a reflex in which a suddenly wounded or confined animal would erupt in a furious struggle to startle, injure and escape from a predator, often accompanied by a bloodcurdling yowl."
1.     helps make sense of Tourette's syndrome and otherwise identifies swearing as "a coherent neurobiological phenomenon." Other chapters are similarly rewarding. Pinker's analysis of metaphors both expands on, and, to an extent, revises the classic works in this field by George Lakoff, Mark Johnson and others.
                                            vi.     explanation of how groups of people use talking and silence to affect the distribution of power. Why do people ignore the elephant in the room? What happens to the dynamics of a conversation and a relationship when 2 or more people bring into the open what each suspects but does not know for sure, or does not know if anyone else knows? What is gained by blunt openness, and what is irrevocably lost? What options for saving face or resolution, are protected by the way we structure a question or a conversation? What does polite speech mean about the power relationships in a group? Is he who yells intimidating or desperate, and how do you tell? Why do governments restrict freedom of speech and assembly? What is the difference between 100 people who each understand the situation and 100 people who all know the truth together?

II.             Examples of All life is a product of both nature and nurture.  Genes are designed to take their cues from nurture.
a.     Twins studies elucidate the intricate interaction of both nature (ie an individual's genetic heritage) and nurture (i.e. the way they are raised and educated, and the individual's life experiences) in the creation of an adult.
b.     One interesting conclusion: one's childhood companions have more influence on one than do one's parents. But, as always, the processes are all very circular and complex. One's reactions to one's companions have a very large genetic component. The genes that are effective at any one time are greatly influenced by one's social circumstances. A person's parents have a large influence on both that person's genetic structure and on their companions. This is very complex stuff that is not well understood when one takes intellectual shortcuts.

III.           Example critiquing the idea of linear chains of cause and effect.

For Theme 3, much of our "logical/rational" thinking (which is done with what we've got inside our heads) requires identification of cases because so many of our judgments are of the "eliminating the impossible, and assuming what is left" -- this only works if one is starting with a complete list. Getting all the cases in math is sometimes possible (and often still very difficult -- so "reasoning by contradiction is usually a bit worrisome), but there is no possibility of *knowing* whether we have all the cases in the physical world -- this should be the underpining of thinking about what science is and what scientific knowledge is actually all about.  AK


Books as basis:
Agile Gene
Language Instinct
The Debate
The Web of Life, Fritjof Capra
The Selfish Gene
Living with our genes, Dean Hamer and Peter Copeland
  Goodall, Jane. Reason for Hope: A Spiritual Journey. New York: Warner Books, 1999.
  The Jane Goodall Institute: "Chimpanzee Central", 2008.
"Jane Goodall's Wild Chimpanzees". PBS. 1996. Retrieved 28 July 2010.
  Geoffrey Sampson: The ‘Language Instinct’ Debate.
  Webster, Richard (2005). Why Freud Was Wrong: Sin, Science and Psychoanalysis. Oxford: The Orwell Press. pp. 609–610. ISBN 0-9515922-5-4.
A review (PDF document) by Randy Harris for The Globe and Mail.