☆ Perspective: Modern education stifles creativity and critical thinking—here's how “classical” thinking can save SV's tech
Image by PickPik
Silicon Valley—perhaps the only place where interviewing an AI bot is as normal as walking—is a longtime exemplar of innovation. Below, pausing on local politics, our managing editor Lauren Oliver and Lyra Rufino-Maceda (executive director of Menlo Park's Chesterton Academy of St. James) discuss how the classical framework can enrich and enlighten our busy, tech-filled lives. An Opp Now exclusive.
Opportunity Now: Our team was considering Silicon Valley's political scene, particularly how many opportunities we get to debate X ballot measure, Y law—but how often do we stop and ask, “Where are we going? And ultimately, where do we want to be going?” This made me turn to the Valley's schools that regularly wrestle with these upstream cultural issues.
Lyra, as a local leader in classical ed, how do you think this ancient way of seeing the world is relevant to modern Silicon Valley workers—and students?
Lyra Rufino-Maceda: Classical education develops a broad, long-range perspective that “modern” education often struggles to provide, because the latter is hyper-focused on current relevancy. “Classic” isn’t a synonym for old; it’s a synonym for “proven” or “time-tested.”
Modern education is predicated on problem-solving and increasing specialization, which leads to a very compartmentalized system of knowledge. It’s akin to the manufacturing process during the Industrial Revolution, where each person on the production line specialized in one small part. The system was quite efficient and drove production, but it made an individual lose sight of the whole and denied him the satisfaction of completion.
But as humans, we want to understand what we are doing and why we’re doing it. We need to know how things fit together. This is why when one of our students noted that the ellipses he learned in Astronomy were being used in Art to draw cylinders and cones in perspective, he exclaimed in delight, “It all makes sense!”
Classical education helps cultivate an agile mind that can notice and draw connections across various time periods and areas of study.
ON: Yet it's too easy to slip into that compartmentalized mindset that numbers belong in Math, dates belong in History, etc. Any college student will hear others—and perhaps themselves—saying things like, “I'm an Engineering major. I'm not good at/don't need to know literature.”
So what's lost when traditionally schooled students are told to segment their learning like this?
LR: We get a lot of people with a lot of knowledge, but not a lot of wisdom.
Knowledge without context can lead to boredom, and a sense of futility or unsettledness. That’s inimical to true human flourishing.
One of the blessings of working at a classical school is engaging with all who are curious about our pedagogy. We hosted a few Stanford undergrads in our classes and in a dialogue about classical education. The observers particularly enjoyed the Socratic seminar format and the depth of the student discussions in Philosophy.
By contrast, one of the undergrads shared that she felt tossed about in her Humanities survey class, being drawn to Existentialism one week, Third Wave Feminism in another, and Marxism after. (The latter idea was dispelled after a week of living at a commune.) Her college class experience was like eating at a philosophy buffet, taking a spoonful of this and of that and letting it fill her plate without the time or opportunity in class to wrestle vigorously with the ideas presented. That was what was so disconcerting to her.
ON: All these Stanford students were Humanities majors, we assume?
LR: We had some Humanities majors, but also Computer Science, Symbolic Systems, pre-Med, and pre-Law. One of the STEM majors was delighted to observe students proving theorems. That was not his high school Geometry experience.
ON: It's hard to imagine studying Math at such a high level without knowing the purpose, the underlying logic, of what one's doing.
It reminds me of a recent TV show “Severance,” in which the protagonist Mark works eight long hours a day sorting numbers into virtual bins. He isn't allowed to know what any of it means. It's rightfully depicted as a confusing, soulless endeavor—despite his colleagues' suggestions that perhaps there are noble purposes (e.g., maybe we're cleaning the world's oceans, somehow?).
The classical framework aims to counter this “knowledge sans wisdom” epidemic, so we're no longer alienated from our work. How so? And how would this play out in Silicon Valley?
LR: As a Catholic classical school, we hold a particular anthropology, which views the human being as a co-creator and not simply a data set, consumer or producer. Our students take 4 years of Fine Art, Music, and the Performing Arts, developing technical competencies and a deep appreciation for those arts.
As classical educators, we want to foster wonder and inquiry in our students. Wonder starts with being able to look at the world—whether that’s a consideration of an idea, person, or material reality—engaging it fully with our senses and allowing ourselves to marvel at the complexity and simplicity of things. That ability to apprehend and appreciate reality moves us to want to know more and inquire (or “wonder” in a different sense of the word). That inspires true creativity.
Creativity is crucial in critical thinking. True critical thinking is not reactionary criticism, which is this reflexive tendency that says, “I'm just going to be disruptive and different. I'll do the opposite of what I know, of what came before me.”
ON: Which gives the illusion of progress, but is it really much different from the contrarian teenager who revolts—mindlessly—against their parent's every belief?
LR: It is a lot like adolescent rebellion. It’s the progressivist fallacy that what’s new is always better. And it doesn’t make sense. If we consider this in terms of Geometry, we're making a 180 rotation, then the next generation makes a 180, and so on. Humanity would just go from one extreme to the other, repeating mistakes and learning nothing.
The truth is we always innovate “from”—we're always building on something, not creating in a vacuum. If we better understand the foundations and underpinnings of ideas, we can better evaluate and improve upon them.
The classical perspective sees critical thinking differently. G. K. Chesterton had a quote about fences and reformers that has often been summarized as, “Don’t remove a fence until you know why it was put up in the first place.” As critical thinkers, we shouldn’t be simple reactionary critics and instinctive fence-destroyers. As problem solvers, we should be able to take an idea, product or process, break it into components, analyze how each part functions and then assess it according to:
First, what question is it supposed to answer or solve? Second, do the parts work as intended, and do they fit together to solve the problem? Third, can it be reconfigured to serve its intended purpose better? And if not, fourth, how can we change it to better serve its purpose?
As thinkers, we should also consider whether we are asking the right questions in the first place—and if not, what questions should we be asking instead?
ON: As a former English major, I think of C.S. Lewis' admonition against hastily “using” literature for our own purposes (e.g., to make an argument or punctuate a criticism), without first “receiving” and humbly working to understand it. If we haven't asked and dug into the right questions, we can't move forward.
LR: Yes. We should innovate because there's an actual problem that needs to be solved, and we have a really good solution or set of solutions to propose. It shouldn’t be just about disruption or pushing boundaries, challenging the status quo or being first. That's how you get flash-in-the-pan ideas and products that don't stand the test of time. It might seem exciting; but in the end, it can be a massive waste of resources.
ON: Speaking of time, you've mentioned the dangers of 180'ing and 180'ing on repeat without learning from the past. What historical event would you suggest our Silicon Valley readers study further?
LR: I'd look back at the fall of the Roman empire—or any empire, for that matter.
In many ways, California is sitting on top of the world. Our gross state product is larger than most countries'. Our population is also larger than many countries'. We are so rich in human and natural resources.
Yet we know from history, whether it's the Roman, Persian or another mighty empire, that these don’t last forever. Often, it is at the apex of the empires that the seeds of destruction are planted. It’s been said, “Pride goeth before destruction.” Hubris is a very human fault, and it is magnified in human institutions. I'd recommend studying these past civilizations and considering: What are the built-in elements that make a place or institution work, and how does it start to break down? What can we learn from their great falls? Christian thought posits a relationship among virtue, service, and leadership. Interestingly, Plato in the West and Confucius arrive at the same conclusions.
ON: Moving beyond history, what books could help our Opp Now community apply classical learning to our fast-paced, tech-heavy lives?
LR: We can never get away from reading; it's so important. There are myriad options, too, such as taking a class, following with a podcast, or studying on your own. Here’s three selections to start:
First, “Meditations” by Marcus Aurelius. You’d think this emperor would write obsessively about politics and wars, but instead he discusses gratitude. He also talks about rationality and how that helps one lead a harmonious life. He believes a man can be harmed by others only when he allows his reactions to overpower him.
ON: Self-control—what a lesson for our local political sphere!
LR: Isn’t it so easy to log on to social media and lose our cool criticizing or being criticized by someone else? We all need better self-control. We also can be “stoically” less concerned about what others say or think and be more honest with our self-assessment.
This is also important in an age where mental health is a big issue. A different perspective, one that is more aligned with what you'll read in “Meditations,” says, “Yes, emotions are important, but we also have reason to draw upon.” Emotion and reason have to work together. We too often emphasize the former to the detriment of the latter. Marcus Aurelius reminds us that reason should be in control.
ON: As said Jefferson, “When angry, count to ten before you speak. If very angry, count to one hundred.”
LR: Exactly! Second selection: Aristotle’s “Nicomachaean Ethics.” It's not simply a book about philosophical ideas like the “good,” “friendship,” or “happiness.” It’s meant to be a practical guide to living the good life.
Aristotle suggests that you can help people become good through the maintenance of certain social institutions. These are not about forcing goodness, but creating environments by which someone can discover what is good and then choose it. He says virtue leads to lasting happiness. Building on that, St. Thomas Aquinas discusses virtue as the habitual practice of choosing and doing good. The pursuit of virtue is a big component of classical education. It’s not just about “values” or having good aspirations and ideals. It is about knowing the “good,” wanting it, pursuing it, and developing the faculties and skills to live it out.
I’ve seen public school students vigorously discussing the themes in the "Nicomachean Ethics" when given the chance. Sadly, it’s not a common conversation outside of a classical school or a Greek Philosophy class.
ON: In my experience as an educator, high schoolers enjoy most discussions where they're expected not to passively regurgitate information but to build and defend an argument using supporting evidence. We tend to underestimate today's youth. They're often eager to have these deep, complex conversations.
What's your third book recommendation?
LR: C.S. Lewis’ “The Screwtape Letters” is a masterpiece in psychology and the nature of evil. For example, Screwtape tells his nephew Wormwood: “Indeed the safest road to Hell is the gradual one—the gentle slope, soft underfoot, without sudden turnings, without milestones, without signposts.” Brilliant observation! If we're not intentional in what we're doing and are mindlessly floating by in life, everything eventually degrades.
ON: A sobering warning, indeed. And here we get back, again, to asking more—and better—questions.
LR: Yes, back to wonder and inquiry! There are better questions, and we’re not asking them often enough. As we engage with reality and observe it from all perspectives with all our senses, we ought to allow ourselves to be amazed and grateful for what exists. Let’s be open to the idea that the material world is not the sum of reality. Let’s seek the reasons and purposes of things, consider the meaning of life in general, and our life in particular. We ought to think about virtue, that habit of knowing and pursuing the good.
That's the classical mindset, and that’s what the Chesterton Academy of St. James is hoping to foster with our presence here in the Silicon Valley.
Follow Opportunity Now on Twitter @svopportunity
Related:
Opp Now enthusiastically welcomes smart, thoughtful, fair-minded, well-written comments from our readers. But be advised: we have zero interest in posting rants, ad hominems, poorly-argued screeds, transparently partisan yack, or the hateful name-calling often seen on other local websites. So if you've got a great idea that will add to the conversation, please send it in. If you're trolling or shilling for a candidate or initiative, forget it.