![[tmbchr]™](/journal/popocculture-blog-logo.jpg){kind=logo}
Is Self-Taught Better?
Another excellent idea spawned by a previous post. This one comes from Cory McCoy and it reads (in part):
I think autodidacts are better than those who proceed rank and file through whatever sanctioned system in order to validate their worth to society.
(Vocab note: autodidact means somebody who’s self-taught)
Anyway, I’ve found myself thinking exactly this same thing at many points. And since I’m in the mood to deconstruct my own assumptions, I’d like to come up with arguments both for and against this. I tend to think “this is just the way it is” so I’m having trouble articulating a good defense of it. So maybe I’ll try my hand at a critique. Well, this one’s almost too easy that I think it’s probably not a great argument. Would you want a self-taught brain surgeon? Probably not. When it comes to really specialized fields with high-level skill sets, more than likely you want somebody who’s been put through their paces by people who know better.
Where do you draw that line though? When is self-teaching good, and when does it fall apart as hopelessly outmoded? Are there any good examples besides specialized knowledge and skills? Or maybe somebody could put together a coherent argument for why they’d actually rather have a self-taught brain surgeon… I’m all ears. Also, I’d like to try to get into what character benefits both styles of education may or may not bestow on a person’s development.
For more on the topic of self-directed education, check out these two older posts on the topic. Self-directed education is one of the “big nuts” that I really want to find a way to crack. And by that I mean I want to be able to inspire it, teach it and use it as effectively as possible. And that may mean first understanding the limits of it.
- Secret taught by living Jesus:
- Teaching Classes
- Skilluminati Speaks!
- Great quote
- Being Taught That Learning Sucks
- Prev: Group Dynamics
- Next: The Nerd Outreach Program
July 20th, 2005 at 10:20 am
richard bandler, one of my teachers and co-developer of nlp said that one must develop one`s own field because then one can always be right. i see that as the meta-function of self-learning……. and the last hyphen in this post. i think we need to be specific about what type of self learning we are talking about. is it learning the same material on our own or synthesising available knowledge into something else?
July 20th, 2005 at 12:03 pm
In the IT department of my company, it’s a policy to ONLY hire those who have taught themselves computer languages, systems, and methodologies. I have an English degree, as an example.
We do hire Comp Sci graduates, but usually only ones who’ve been out interacting with the corporate world a bit. So, in our IT department, self-taught is better.
July 20th, 2005 at 12:58 pm
the limits of self learning is boundless for the individual. the employer still reflexes toward a scolastic measurement as a tool for evaluating ability. i read somewhere that around 4% of entrpreneurs have university degrees. it would make sense in that self employment needs flexibility in thinking, whereas traditional forms of education flog any sense of interpretation out of you by the end of day one. entrepreneurialism can be taught, but not by economists and english professors. it is learned in the trenches in real time with live ammo.
July 20th, 2005 at 1:03 pm
At some point in the past there would have been a self-taught brain surgeon, right? Someone had to start poking at the gray matter and saying, “Now what do you feel?” in order to figure out what each area of the brain did.
I think this topic is really situation sensitive. For instance, I taught myself to play the guitar, but I still mostly kind of suck at it. That doesn’t really matter, since I only play for fun and to impress girls. If I ever wanted to play professionally–start a band or something–I would probably go get some lessons.
Whether or not you should get training from an outside source depends on many different variables such as your goals, the degree of technicality involved, the amount of time and money you’re willing to invest, your own mental strengths and weaknesses..ect.
July 20th, 2005 at 1:37 pm
Heheh…. I actually wrote a short essay (almost a book) called “Everything I need to Know I Taught Myself.”
WIlliam Upski Wimsatt was a pretty big influence on me thinking about it enough to write at all on the subject. I recommend his writings in the book “No More Prisons”. No occult by any means, but powerful stuff, both inspiring and effective.
July 20th, 2005 at 2:50 pm
There’s a fine line between self-taught and self-deluded. A man I know called himself “self-educated” and was one of the most credulous people I know. His education was a mishmash of fact, outdated theories, wild speculations, and outright hoaxes, all of which he believed to be Truth. If it was written down, he’d believe it.
I wonder if the ability to measure the worth of a particular source is something that’s difficult to learn for oneself.
July 20th, 2005 at 4:45 pm
This is exactly what I was getting at in regards to the previous post on conspiracy theory usually reflecting self-directed education by people who aren’t especially great at it, and dont fully understand the techniques. How do we “reach” people like that and teach them how to self-educate?
Jack, is that available online?
Alistair, I didn’t see anybody else doing what I’m doing when I got started, and that’s precisely why I did this site. This site is me carving out my own niche and self-educating along the way. The awesome thing about self-education is that you can leave paths and records for other people to do the same.
Scott, that’s incredible and brilliant. I used to have to interview people for tech instructor positions at my old company. The college comp sci kids were some of the worst possible candidates. Everybody else there taught themselves.
July 20th, 2005 at 5:05 pm
Yeah, I was thinking about that as well. Plus doesn’t Thomas Kuhn say in that book that often the most significant advances in a field come from someone who’s not really in that field?
July 20th, 2005 at 5:42 pm
I don’t think where one learned or how means that much on a general level. AFAIK, it’s your motivations that count, especially in religion. Is one “self taught” because one doesn’t accept any particular dogma as stated, or because he or she isn’t bothered to learn?
I’m realy of two minds on this, but I think it takes a really extraordinary thinker to proceed without any teachers, whether they’re human or ancient books. On the other hand, working within a system may close off other avenues of exploration. Our fundamentalist can’t, for example, explore alternate ideas about lucifer, if he belongs to a church.
There’s an old adage in magick that addresses the issue: keep silent. For years I roled my eyes at that, thinking it was a silly superstition, but after seeing one “occult society” after another go down in flames, I realized it’s really the only innoculation against group think and accumulating dogma.
In the end, it’s the group and not the theology that’s the problem.
July 20th, 2005 at 5:44 pm
Yeah I’m starting to get what you’re saying about the whole keep silent dictum…
July 20th, 2005 at 5:51 pm
I may or may not be the Devil’s advocate here, but doesn’t that sound a bit like someone caving in to terrorists?
Furthermore, with each witchburning, seeds of martyrdom were scattered for a stronger phoenix to rise from, and hence, we are stronger today, by numbers if not by works (and that has yet to be determined, being in the cornfield still and all) than ever before.
Also (and this is not D’s Advocate by any means), think on the fact that the World Wide Web is just now cranking out it’s first real full-grown batch of fresh adepts. It’s taken about 10 years to generate this immense and powerfully interconnected wave that is just now emerging, and I wonder if there were ever a time when this many folks started glowing all at the same time, and were at least aware of each other, if not in direct contact.
It’s still nascent. Let’s see what happens with this many metahackers nailing the system, right?
July 20th, 2005 at 5:56 pm
Ah, I never get tired of comparing things to terrorists. But yeah, you’re right, it does seem like just taking your ball and going home in one respect. But in other respects, sometimes I feel like the more I say, the less right it really is. But fuck it, that’s life. I’m just sorting it out, and where would I be if I didn’t have anybody else to share it with or knock out a few teeth occasionally. I personally don’t plan on shutting up any time soon (even if I do see the wisdom in it).
July 20th, 2005 at 6:11 pm
yet another aspect of the ’self-taught’ thing– someone who is truly *self*-taught would have to be like some completely illiterate hermit who learns all this stuff via cosmic waves & solo meditation, right? i mean, to teach one’s self in this context stull requires interaction with ‘teachers’ in the form of books, etc. on the other hand, you have people teaching out there who are misleading & duping seekers who would do better on their own.
as to the whole ‘keep silent’ dictum, i never took that to mean ’shut up about this stuff.’ rather, i see it more as an admonition to be careful what you say and to whom. but, i also see it as a call for humility, an admission that even the adept doesn’t know everything there is to know.
July 20th, 2005 at 6:27 pm
I also think it’s about words lacking meaning in themselves. You can circle around and around with concepts, but it’s a very different thing from reality. What I’m looking for is the way to balance the poles.
July 20th, 2005 at 9:00 pm
terence mckenna was asked, one time, why tim leary was arrested and he wasn`t. his answer was that he used big words and the cops didn`t understand what he was talking about. it is important to keep on asking questions and getting people stirred up on occasion, but there is a balance. there is a movement afoot, a challenge to the spiritual status quo on many levels. the problem arises when the guage for success is equated to responses to postings. too many times the larger exegis emerges from hostile comments, whereas a consensus provides few replies. the deeper knowing comes from time spent exposing one`s consciousness to different angles to the same problem. the precipitant comes in the form of dreams, intuitive writing and recognising the flashes of insight from others. i believe that`s what is going on here.this is self-learning in it`s purest form. community.
July 21st, 2005 at 4:31 am
I’m not talking about the ‘broom closet’ here, I’m talking about the tendency for groups of people coming together to share/debate.form opinions, and get involved socially. Social ties are restraints, and its hard to have honest practice if one’s ego is involved, as happens time after time after time. I’m not saying, don’t tell people you’re a magician, I’m saying, don’t risk creating a church. The more that happens, the more it tends to be about people’s pride, people are misled by ridiculous dogmatic arguments about technique, etc.
July 21st, 2005 at 11:13 am
I know what aspect of the “organize” debate bugs me personally… it’s calling it a “church”. It may just be a little thing, but I would envision something less organized, but at the same time, still a network of people that were able to support each other’s spiritual growth, offer community when needed (as here) and so forth.
It need not be one big building that everybody goes to on Sunday or Moonday and reads from one unified bible and sings some songs and let some old Pagan windbag go on and on about how we are here to honor the mother.
I think a more modern approach would not be far from what we are doing right here right now - we’ve got community and support and like mindedness, and we obviously were able to put aside differences and agree on a few things.
What else is lacking?
July 21st, 2005 at 11:14 am
Sorry for shifting back to that conversation again, btw. It just seemed appropriate in context.
July 21st, 2005 at 12:22 pm
[…] page!
What else is lacking?
Jack added some useful thoughts to continue the debate over organizing disparate […]