Autodidactism 2010: A Student's Summer of Learning and Writing

Autodidactism (from the Greek αὐτοδίδακτος, meaning self-taught) “is self-education or self-directed learning. An autodidact is a mostly self-taught person, as opposed to learning in a school setting or from a full-time tutor or mentor. Autodidacts might spend their time reading either in solitude or in public spaces such as at libraries or via educative websites. They may or may not have designed a plan for their course of study. They may or may not engage a network of experts for guidance.” [Wikipedia]

I would like to spend my summer break reading books, learning about and trying things I am interested in. If I raise at least $1,400, I will do these things in addition to writing and self-publishing a book composed of essays written over the course of the summer. The money will go towards my college education.

Flexibility is an important element for any autodidactic pursuit, but I do have a starting point. I maintain a list of books that I would like to read on Goodreads (http://www.goodreads.com/review/list/543548…. I am studying the Great Books at St. John’s, so I would like to supplement that knowledge with more modern works of non-fiction and literature. Some general areas that I am interested in studying this summer include psychology, linguistics, education, Eastern religions and philosophy, mathematics and science, and history.

As far as the experiential part of my summer, I have a few projects I will investigate and probably try: polyphasic sleep, Vipassana meditation, new exercise routines, learning languages such as Esperanto and Latin, attempting programming, etc.

I will self-publish the book on Lulu.com, a print-on-demand self-publishing company.

Thank you in advance for your generous support! I’m very excited about this project and with your help, I can achieve something that will not only be formative and educational, but I will also have a tangible final product, my book.

Comments (View)
What must survive a student’s higher education today is a facility for life-long learning. Consider how steep the learning curve has become in the professional workplace. Knowledge has become so ephemeral that management experts have tried to get a handle on the educational challenge by using a yardstick they call the “half-life of knowledge.” This is the amount of time it takes for half of one’s professional knowledge to become obsolete. I’ve seen estimates that, overall, the half-life of knowledge is somewhere between four and seven years. For technical fields, it is much less; half of what software developers know now, for example, will likely be irrelevant in just 18 months.9 As Maryanne Rouse has written, “We used to think of the long run as ten to fifteen years; in many technology-dependent industries the long run may now be six months or less. And while the pace of knowledge-creation is accelerating, the half-life of knowledge becomes shorter each year. What this means for us is that concepts are far more important than facts and the ability to analyze and synthesize has much greater value than the ability to memorize. In short, school may be multiple choice but real life is all essay.”
In real life, then, the skills of synthesis and systemic thinking are not just luxuries, they are invaluable. We are, after all, living through an Information Revolution, which parallels the Industrial Revolution in its impact and far-reaching consequences. Information—of all varieties, all levels of priority and all without much context—is bombarding us from all directions all the time.
Higher Education in an Age of Specialized Knowledge

The Campaign for St. John’s College published a transcript of this lecture to promote liberal education and The Program in particular. The Library of Congress also has a streaming video of this lecture.

Comments (View)
‘In the first place,’ I said, ‘the man who is to take it [philosophy] up must not be lame in his love of labor, loving half the labor while having no taste for the other half. This is the case when a man is a lover of gymnastic and the hunt and loves all the labor done by the body, while he isn’t a lover of learning or of listening and isn’t an inquirer, but hates the labor involved in all that. Lame as well is the man whose love of labor is directed exclusively to the other extreme.’
Gotama had listened to him quietly, motionless. And now the Perfect One spoke in his kind, polite and clear voice. “You have listened well to the teachings, O Brahmin’s son, and it is a credit to you that you have thought so deeply about them. You have found a flaw. Think well about it again. Let me warn you, you who are thirsty for knowledge, against the thicket of opinions and conflict of words. Opinions mean nothing; they may be beautiful or ugly, clever or foolish, anyone can embrace or reject them. The teaching which you have heard, however, is not my opinion, and its goal is not to explain the world to those who are thirsty for knowledge. Its goal is quite different; its goal is salvation from suffering. That is what the Gotama teaches, nothing else.
Values

Well, as you may have noticed by my recent quote, I’m reading Lila by Robert Pirsig; it’s the sequel to his uber-famous Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance. I’m not particularly good at assessing the Quality (pun intended) of a work. One part of me says this is dumbed-down mystic philosophy for n00bs, incomparable to the Great Books. Another says, “Hey… this is provocative. Shove off, you elitist *******”. Pirsig’s foil in the book (at least as far as I’ve read), points out that “you carefully tie your critics’ hands and feet so they cannot give you any opposition, tar their reputations for good measure, and then you say ‘Okay, come on out and fight’.” This is true, but the book is one perspective on Truth, which as of now is one half of my goals / values in life (the other being Happiness). After having been seduced by Ayn Rand, though, I’m wary of philosophy in general and I force myself to assess every proposition in every argument to the best of my ability.

That said, the subject of Lila is Values and Morality (as they relate to Pirsig’s Metaphysics of Quality). This is something I’ve been thinking about, independently of Lila. For example, one issue that has been pressing me is the dichotomy of values evidenced in AP English (Lit). These perceptions, interestingly enough, utilize Pirsig’s idea of subjective anthropology, where one actually experiences the culture instead of observing from the sidelines. I “have” to participate in AP English. This, of course, reflects my values; the other students do too, although certain individuals put higher value in not embarassing themselves. I value learning: most of my conversations with other students reflect their investment in the value of the grades. This is reflected externally in our different choice of colleges: Acme University vs. St. John’s College, where there are so many differences in pedagogy. There is some overlap, of course, and most have a higher level of interest in the subject to start with. Discovering whether or not I am an outlier (not in the Malcolm Gladwell sense: I doubt I will be the next Bill Gates or even Chris Langan in this life).

This example reveals for me a very interesting area of philosophy and anthropology / sociology (Mr. N clarified this for me the other day, but I’m going to go look it up again on Wikipedia now). Which value has more Quality, and is this a subjective or objective truth, internal or external? Is it individual, American, human, biological, spiritual? If values are subjective (as the cynic in me is inclined to believe), do we align ourselves by nature or nurture?

Mr. W pointed out to me in my Philosophy course earlier this year that there are no real answers in Philosophy, at least to some extent. Forgive me for leaving you without Truth. In the mean-time, perhaps you might consider your own values.