FEI Blogpost 8
We Make the Road by Walking, Chapter 2
Factual Question:
What is the definition of aesthetic?
According to merriam-webster.com Aesthetic is of, relating
to, or dealing with aesthetics or the beautiful; artistic; pleasing in appearance;
appreciative of, responsive to, or zealous about the beautiful, responsive to
or appreciative of what is pleasurable to the senses.”
Evaluative Statement:
How do we make our lives balanced and aesthetic? A thought
that this question is brought up in many parts of our lives, is change good? We
are infinitely changing beings that go through changes on a daily basis. I
started off with this thought perplexing realization quote that Myles expresses
in the Formative Years in We Make the Road by Walking. “And the other thing I would hope to do would
be to make it clear that my ideas have changed and are constantly changing and
should change and that I’m as proud of my inconsistencies as I am my
consistencies.” We wouldn’t be here on earth without change, mistakes, and
successes, so I believe that most definitely change is a great thing. An open
mind is a receptive, intelligent, progressive mind that should be adopted in
more people’s lifestyles. This is relevant in our educational and critical
pedagogy to understand our teaching, learning, and changing school systems. Myles later states that “I can remember very
well that I never felt sorry for myself. I just accepted the fact that those
were the conditions and that I was a victim of those conditions, but I never
had any feelings of inferiority to other people. Because it was the system’s
fault and not the people’s.” Another concept that we need to be more receptive
and progressive about, how do we change the system? The two authors talk about
their experiences that helped change and mold their lives for the better. A
great educational learning process that led them to successful lives. Myles had
a realistic approach not looking at the different classes for rankings of
superiority and inferiority, but to the people for being the people and
dividing the system to be the rankings and unaware of the people. It is
relevant in the education and instruction in our society because it needs to be
divided when it comes to our students and the treatment that people are
receiving. We need equality in our world, and I think great ways to express
that is being balanced in ourselves. As Myles and Paulo were discussing their
early education and their common desire to read, Paulo expresses, “I think that
it’s very interesting, because sometimes we can fall into some mistakes, for
example, the mistake of denying the value of books, the value of reading or
denying the value of practice. I think we have to understand how books as
theory and practice as action must be constantly dialectically together, that
is, as a unity between practice and theory.” I thought it was interesting how
Paulo correlates imbalanced mistakes, to the value of practice and reading. As
a practicing yogi, I love incorporating the yin yang into balancing my life.
According to yin yang philosophy the universe, and everything in it, is both
constant and cyclical. One force dominates and then it is replaced by the opposing
force. This is exemplified in every part of life and death, night and day, dark
and light, the activities are endless. With every action there is a reaction, which
the authors exemplify in their actions of reading causes reactions of education
and desire to keep learning as well as teach. The authors convey how unfortunately
most students give reading negative connotations by being forced to read as
students. If we teach reading as an act of individuality and beauty, instead of
curriculum it can become more desired for students. An important concept
regardless is to have an unconditional appreciation for all humans, students
and teachers, in their endeavors of balance, independence, diversity, and
happiness.
Interpretive Question:
When the author Paulo states that “for
me the scientist who is not able to write beautifully minimizes his or her
science and falls into an ideological lie, according to which the scientists
have to escape from the beauty” I believe that he means that for it to be a
true science it needs to be expressed in not only the action of the process,
but the reaction of the response of the process. I’m not sure if that is what
he means though because he originally states that the thought of people is that
scientist are not obliged to grasp the aesthetical moment of language, but it
is beautiful when they do, right?
No comments:
Post a Comment