|


|

The International Writers Magazine: How to Speak
Learning
How to Speak
M.
C. Wood
In the college philosophy courses I conduct, students are encouraged,
if not expected, to participate in discussions. Lectures are conversations,
not dictates, and questions, problems, confusions and objections
are always welcomed.
|
|
This method
of pedagogy requires organizational vigilance on my part so that we
stay on topic, and also openness on the part of the students to critically
evaluate their own ideas. On the best of days, discussion is like a
bronco ride. The worst days feel to me like pulling teeth, and the result
is that I have no idea how things are going for the class. This latter
problem is important, for it reveals at least two things about free
speech in the form of discussion.
First, when a public body is silent, there is no telling what and how
its members are thinking. People tend to be silent when, among other
things, they believe their ideas are not taken seriously, when they
are precluded from participating in public discourse, or they do not
know how to present their ideas and may not be clear about what they
think in the first place.
Through the process of articulating their views and their confusions,
students learn how to organize and present their thoughts. More often
than
not, they realize that they1re not sure how to express what they mean,
and
find themselves running into the contradictions of incoherent thinking.
They also learn that discussion among the group requires each member
to work hard to understand and be understood. There are some who love
to speak and actively try to sort out what they1re thinking, and others
who speak rarely, but when they do, work to speak well. This dimension
of learning is all-too-often a skill unrealized, and many students prefer
to make like baby chicks and have material that has been digested by
their professor merely regurgitated in an easy to absorb format. Though
the path of learning with discussion is arduous and painful, if neglected,
it will grow over with the weeds of one-sided and stunted thinking.
Students certainly don't have models of discussion in their everyday
lives, so this difficulty in class is not surprising.
One need only look to the fare on various media outlets to see how little
actual discourse there is. What passes for discourse, be it on television
or radio 'talk' shows, on campuses when visitors come to speak, or in
public protest, is mere shouting. Sometimes people take turns shouting
at each other, or they simply shout simultaneously, sounding more like
stuck pigs than thoughtful conversationalists. The result, in either
case, is the same: people remain entrenched in their opinions.
Moreover, college students are not prepared to engage in dialogue. Elementary
and high school curricula by and large do not engage in thinking that
is philosophical (the majority of my students never read any philosophy
before college) and are practiced only in taking notes later to be memorized.
There
is much debate in this country about 'putting education first', but
no real debate about what it means to be educated.
Finally, taking people seriously is difficult. This is partly the case
because people often don't know what they're saying, and partly because
we're no longer used to taking each other seriously. Instead, we pretend
to listen until the other person stops shouting, and then we open up
our own floodgates of vitriol.
Even political texts are exercises in WWF-style rhetoric. Many, from
Bill O'Reilly to Ann Coulter to Al Franken seem less concerned about
examining their ideas than presenting stone tablets of quasi-political
ad hominem attacks. People who are practiced at discussion won't stand
for such spectacularly unproductive displays. I can only hope students
I meet throughout my career find themselves willing to practice with
me, and won't be already inured to the real joys of free speech.
© M.C. Wood Feb 2004
girlzilla@mindspring.com
More Comment
Home
©
Hackwriters 2000-2004
all rights reserved
|