urgency of belief

First of all --- is anybody still out there? Or did I accidentally
get unsubscribed from the ASA list? Two days with nothing! I'm going
into withdrawal.

I encountered a book title at the library that has piqued my interest
even though I won't have time to read it for a while. "Myth of
Ability: Nurturing Mathematical Talent in Every Child" by John Mighton
(2003).

The title alone provoked a whole train of thoughts for me. As a
teacher I've developed opinions of my own regarding the balance of
"nature vs. nurture" (or the balance, rather, that those two things
have.) What strikes me, though, is the difference between what I feel
compelled to maintain as a "working" belief and what I actually think
about the subject if I were cornered and forced to theorize on
reality. I will never (at any parent-teacher conferences or any other
situation wearing my "teacher's hat") -- never ever let the admission
slip: "well -- Johnnie just isn't very good at math." It is expected
that this will never come from my lips even if Johnnie has been failing
-- even if his parents and everybody else are saying that he just can't
do it (which could be part of the problem, but not always), even if that
thought has formed into a conviction in my own mind. My profession
demands that I believe in the latent ability of each and every one of my
students to master all the material I am prepared to teach. The moment
I concede to them or anybody that their performance or lack thereof has
been genetically hardwired into them is to lend undue power of
suggestion to that very argument (even if it is true to some extent, as
I believe it is) and to undermine my own professional calling. Nothing
is less helpful than a parent who suggests in front of their own child:
"Well -- I was never any good at spelling so I'm not surprised my child
isn't either." As good-intentioned as this 'comfort' is supposed to be,
it gives the student permission to let up on the effort since, after
all, they "just are the way they are". Any of us with children are
probably guilty of similar comments at one time or another. But
professional pedagogues must be vigilant against this for obvious reasons.

I wonder if a similar dynamic tension is in play between various
proponents and postures regarding evolution? Anti-evolutionists at one
time were quick to point out the many spiritual pit-falls of
evolutionary philosphy -- how it would lead one to marxism, or naziism,
atheism, etc, and how easily it is appropriated to justify all sorts of
horrible mischief. One got a clear sense of urgency that "we must not
believe this" because of the horrible places it must lead. I don't
think we hear this so much these days because so many creationists have
tried to bring their arguments into the strictly scientific domain where
such things would be irrelevant. Perhaps it is because greater numbers
of Christians have migrated to evolutionary type thinking and, thus far,
seem to have escaped all the dire predictions about the horrible loss
of morality that must accompany such a belief system (although it might
be too early to conclude this yet!).

I know I insisted in a previous post that we can't have
compartmentalized beliefs -- either we believe something or we don't.
But I wonder if we (as a public) don't still feel that hesitancy of
implications when we consider what science is trying to tell us. We
are interested in truth, yes. But we also want to know where such
conclusions will lead us. I can easily imagine a scientific minded
person keeping personal conclusions to themselves because of misgivings
they have about where a general apprehension of that knowledge would
take us. In a sense I do this as a teacher with my students all the
time -- when I encourage them: "you can do it!" while privately I may
harbor doubts. Is this a horrible lie?

--merv
Received on Sun Jan 22 18:42:17 2006