That's true. When I apply this to higher education (humanities in general) the feeling behind the current sentiment that higher education is useless and indoctrinates you into a woke mentality came around because people who don't understand the point of studying the liberal arts automatically label all universities as being out of touch and engaging in "mere intellectual play" as Kant writes. What they miss, however, is that engaging the theory IS the experience that studying the humanities cultivates. The same thing happens in physical and social sciences too: when people scoff at a theory that describes a particular objective phenomenon they find incomprehensible and dismiss further inquiry with a phrase like "it's only a theory," they inadvertently confuse and discourage those who overhear them with the misconception that scientific inquiry STOPS at the theory and once the theory is proved, the matter is completely settled and nothing more needs to be discussed. But if you apply the process of the scientific method to this, you'll see that theory is only the beginning; it actually functions as a hypothesis that serves as the catalyst for the rest of the process. I've seen online in social media networks that discuss work that the phrase "experience eats theory for lunch" is prevalent and to me, misguided. They only think of experience as a posteriori, as being only what they see in front of them, and discount the theories of business and networking that they can't see, but that allow their workplace to function.
That's a perfect quote you raised here! I first saw it in a small philosophy book, which was actually a collection of excerpts around the idea of knowledge. It was very enlightening and still influences my learning and teaching. Thank you for reminding me!
The pleasure's mine. This statement has become a guiding light in my work, both theoretical and practical. Matter of fact, I had also recently made some more observations around this idea, and hopefully I'll be putting out a substack Post soon :)
I love Byung Chul Han (Vita Contemplativa, The Burnout Society). I refuse to stumble headfirst into an early grave of populist frenzy. I am choosing to slow down and let negative space highlight and amplify the world. I’m 66, it took me a while to figure some of these things out. But it feels like I’m on the right track.
"We will begin to feel isolated from the world if we fail to communicate our ideas in a shared language. And any idea, however brilliant, is ultimately useless if it doesn’t align with the world’s concerns."
According to Aristotle, "the mean" is the essence of virtue. The ancient sages were failures in their lives. Socrates was executed by Athenians. Confucius endured exile, wandering from one state to another. Yet, the fruits of their Vita Contemplativa inspired their students and lasted long beyond their earthly times.
As mere mortals in a contemporary world defined by utility, we are a juggler between Vita Activa and Vita Contemplativa. Perhaps this makes one conscious and present.
If you pursue balance in and of itself, then yes, it is fleeting, because you have no concrete goals behind it. I recommend pursuing balance indirectly and in tangible ways.
I think that there's perhaps a false dichotomy here. Coming from a Buddhist perspective, thinking is just mental action. When we divide thinking and acting into two totally separate categories, we overlook the fact that our thoughts have real effects — if we repeatedly think in a certain way, it influences our mood, and our mood influences our actions. Choosing to think deeply about a problem is a very intentional action in itself. So it seems the better question is: how should we act? By body, speech, or mind?
Brilliant article! This got me thinking about the contrast between theories and practices in psychology area, because there is a lot, but it is important to show different perspectives and results, and that is why we have a many therapeutic approaches that can suit wich person. I think this is an example in history of a perfect balance of theory and action to prove the point and contribute to the world.
I believe that Kant said it best:
"Experience without theory is blind, but theory without experience is mere intellectual play."
That's true. When I apply this to higher education (humanities in general) the feeling behind the current sentiment that higher education is useless and indoctrinates you into a woke mentality came around because people who don't understand the point of studying the liberal arts automatically label all universities as being out of touch and engaging in "mere intellectual play" as Kant writes. What they miss, however, is that engaging the theory IS the experience that studying the humanities cultivates. The same thing happens in physical and social sciences too: when people scoff at a theory that describes a particular objective phenomenon they find incomprehensible and dismiss further inquiry with a phrase like "it's only a theory," they inadvertently confuse and discourage those who overhear them with the misconception that scientific inquiry STOPS at the theory and once the theory is proved, the matter is completely settled and nothing more needs to be discussed. But if you apply the process of the scientific method to this, you'll see that theory is only the beginning; it actually functions as a hypothesis that serves as the catalyst for the rest of the process. I've seen online in social media networks that discuss work that the phrase "experience eats theory for lunch" is prevalent and to me, misguided. They only think of experience as a posteriori, as being only what they see in front of them, and discount the theories of business and networking that they can't see, but that allow their workplace to function.
That's a perfect quote you raised here! I first saw it in a small philosophy book, which was actually a collection of excerpts around the idea of knowledge. It was very enlightening and still influences my learning and teaching. Thank you for reminding me!
The pleasure's mine. This statement has become a guiding light in my work, both theoretical and practical. Matter of fact, I had also recently made some more observations around this idea, and hopefully I'll be putting out a substack Post soon :)
I love Byung Chul Han (Vita Contemplativa, The Burnout Society). I refuse to stumble headfirst into an early grave of populist frenzy. I am choosing to slow down and let negative space highlight and amplify the world. I’m 66, it took me a while to figure some of these things out. But it feels like I’m on the right track.
"We will begin to feel isolated from the world if we fail to communicate our ideas in a shared language. And any idea, however brilliant, is ultimately useless if it doesn’t align with the world’s concerns."
✍🏽✍🏽✍🏽
According to Aristotle, "the mean" is the essence of virtue. The ancient sages were failures in their lives. Socrates was executed by Athenians. Confucius endured exile, wandering from one state to another. Yet, the fruits of their Vita Contemplativa inspired their students and lasted long beyond their earthly times.
As mere mortals in a contemporary world defined by utility, we are a juggler between Vita Activa and Vita Contemplativa. Perhaps this makes one conscious and present.
Like Diogenes. It is about the search.
Balance is an ever fleeting goal but it’s pursuit is worth it. Loved the article! May I quote it in an article I am working on?
Go ahead!
If you pursue balance in and of itself, then yes, it is fleeting, because you have no concrete goals behind it. I recommend pursuing balance indirectly and in tangible ways.
I think that there's perhaps a false dichotomy here. Coming from a Buddhist perspective, thinking is just mental action. When we divide thinking and acting into two totally separate categories, we overlook the fact that our thoughts have real effects — if we repeatedly think in a certain way, it influences our mood, and our mood influences our actions. Choosing to think deeply about a problem is a very intentional action in itself. So it seems the better question is: how should we act? By body, speech, or mind?
Brilliant article! This got me thinking about the contrast between theories and practices in psychology area, because there is a lot, but it is important to show different perspectives and results, and that is why we have a many therapeutic approaches that can suit wich person. I think this is an example in history of a perfect balance of theory and action to prove the point and contribute to the world.