@meaningness Do you have any links that claim to rebut staged/systematic learning models like Dreyfus or shu-ha-ri in favor of Schön-like/metasystematic learning models? I may be talking myself into agreeing to give a "big think" talk.
-
-
Replying to @marick
Sorry to be slow getting back to you on this; I have had to think, and am not coming up with anything. The D&D model is pointing at something real and important, but it’s overly simplistic. I’ve definitely read things saying that, but I can’t remember what/where.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Meaningness @marick
I didn’t know about shu-ha-ri (or had forgotten it) until you mentioned it. I wonder if D&D were influenced by it? (I can’t remember if they mention it.)
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Meaningness @marick
I’ve never gone beyond beginner level in martial arts, but in other fields that I have pretty well mastered, it seems to me that one still operates in all these modes at times. There’s times to follow the form precisely, times to play with it, times to ignore it.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness @marick
I vaguely recall one of the debunkings of D&D quoting a famous concert pianist saying this, that in fact they do still sometimes think intensely and conceptually about what they’re doing, and that’s part of how they continue to improve and innovate
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness @marick
Schön’s reflection-in-action does seem to be pointing at that. His books are a bit frustrating, though; he’d got hold of something tremendously important, but didn’t really develop the themes to their potential. I wish other people had taken them and run with them!
3 replies 1 retweet 1 like -
Replying to @Meaningness @marick
Oh, also, I think a fundamental and central error in Bert D’s understanding, or at least presentation, was taking practiced routine action as “unconscious.” This is his reading of Heidegger, and I think it’s a misreading of B&T, but more importantly it’s just wrong.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness @marick
There’s certainly *something* absent in breakfast-making and also in transcendent musical performance. It’s definitely not *consciousness*. It’s difficult to say exactly what’s not there. Conceptual reflection, perhaps? Also not clear if it’s the same absence in those two cases.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness @marick
It’s not clear whether D was using “consciousness” in a standard sense, or if he was recycling the word to refer to whatever that thing is that’s absent. On the whole, I think he really did mean consciousness, and so was just outright wrong.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness @marick
Although, it’s hard to see how you could make that mistake. But philosophers, even the best of them, have astonishing powers of self-confusion.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Or maybe, like Dennet, he was a p-zombie, and couldn’t actually tell whether he was conscious or not! 
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.