Learning to be Free - Part III

Ever-changing knowledge — Or why to pursue understanding

“In a fight, there can be no flaw” is an old samurai saying illustrating the true belief that, when engaged in a performance, there is not a second to think about what to do next; no time to analyze and reflect. There is no time to understand — only to act.

We believe that all learning involves going from a Janus-like dichotomy of developing understanding and practical experimenting to the harmony of mastering a subject. The essence of true mastery however is fluid and masters understand that all knowledge evolves and morphs by being embodied in the minds of its bearers. This is the WuJi of Chinese philosophy, or Japanese Zen, which is equivalent to the Hegelian concept of essence.

For Hegel, all human agency was divided in two categories. Most of what we perceive and enact is our mere existence; we eat, sleep, wash etc. Existence is the mechanical, profane aspect of our lives. What really matters is understanding the non-perishable ideas that form the basis of the ideals we believe in, because it is these memes that really make up the essence for the ultimate reason of the world.

Hence, what seems important when proposing freedom as the motivation for learning is that hereby learning is not about possessing knowledge but about understanding and thereby being able to entrepreneurially select and live one’s essential opportunities. In other words, it is to create and identify the right opportunities for oneself by understanding the essential logic behind their existence, and to be able to realize them by contextualizing them with one’s life as a whole.

I learn what I want to learn

“… the human animal is a learning animal; we like to learn; we are good at it” - John Holt (1980)

We believe that once education is understood as learning to make life more wonderful (rather than to fulfill expectations, etc.), natural curiosity becomes an all-encompassing intrinsic motivation for self-directed learning. Subsequently, we believe it is the learner who knows best and ought to decide what to learn. Or in Holt’s words: “Since we cannot know what knowledge will be most needed in the future, it is senseless to try to teach it in advance. Instead, we should try to turn out people who love learning so much and learn so well that they will be able to learn whatever needs to be learned.” (Holt, 2007)

In this sense, 42 is in line with the de-schooling, unschooling, modern or free school movements.

Why teach for free?

At 42 all learning opportunities are for free. Learner share their knowledge as teachers. What motivates the teachers to dedicate their time and effort? There are two key motivations: It is hardly news that “by teaching we are learning” (stated by Seneca two thousand years ago) but possibly even more relevant as an “incentive” for teaching Martin defined gain in the three higher elements Maslow’s pyramid of needs (3: social love & belonging, 4: esteem & self-confidence, and 5: growth through self-actualization) as being substantially stimulated by teaching as the act of sharing knowledge and coaching learners.

More concretely, like a blogger, the teacher is building up a reputation. Individuals with excellent reputations will be offered opportunities based on the trust created by the multitude of evaluations and enacted knowledge activities.

Qualitative and Discrete Performance Measures

At 42 there are no exams to pass. We believe that what is understood brings one to the next level; hence, progress is reflected through further learning and teaching activities in particular. The peer learners and teachers are encouraged to share their impression of the level of understanding and give social feedback; both meant to be foremost a constructive recommendation for concrete improvements and referrals to additional learning resources. Because 42 collects all sorts of information about the learning efforts, an additional perspective is composed of the landscape of learning activities.

Creating our Future, 42 Style

“The future is not set. There is no fate but what we make for ourselves.” - The Terminator

We want 42 to become a fertile ground where future generations choose to team up, envision and engineer the knowledge that creates our future because we believe that it is up to each citizen to decide and create the values and ideals upon which our future is built. Durkheim felt that the great achievement of modernity is “the possibility to dynamically differentiate and elaborate values” (Welsch, 1998). It is in this spirit that we want to close our pamphlet.

Different from the natural laws of the physical world, the perceived life-world (Habermas) of the individual is constructed through their knowledge. It is thus in the hands of knowledge entrepreneurs to creatively deconstruct and recombine existing ideas about social reality in order to foster innovative enriching ways of living. These idea units that make up the building bricks of our culture have been conceptualized as memes. A meme, as originally defined by Richard Dawkins, is “a unit of cultural transmission, or a unit of imitation”.

Hence, what we see is a new kind of learner. One who does not consume knowledge but is used to perceive memes (or information) and then comment, edit and expand it. Thereby engaging with it, making it part of themselves, of their identity, by expressing and defining their relationship with the matter. As Tapscott and Williams put it: “this new generation of prosumers treats the world as a place for creation, not consumption. This new way of learning and interacting means they will treat the world as a stage for their own innovations” (Tapscott & Williams 2006).

This is our motivation at 42: Liberating people from the dogma of consuming knowledge and promote deep “big picture” learning (Lombardo, 2000) that encourages the individual to take responsibility for their life, create their dream and be creative and pragmatic in pursuing it.

Living and learning the 42 style means creative learning that empowers individuals to know more about themselves, how to relate to others, and how to make a living.

Living and learning the 42 style means pursuing positive personal liberty and entrepreneurially embracing life’s journey as a series of learning opportunities.

Do you want to read the article in full? You can read the entire article on Medium here.

Note: This article is based on my experience and writing during my work on Supercool School in 2008.

References used in Part I, II & III of Learning to be Free

Benkler, Y. (2006). The Wealth of Networks: How Social Production Transforms Markets and Freedom. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Berlin, I. (1969). Four Essays on Liberty. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Bourdieu, P. (1988). Homo academicus. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Dawkins, R. (1976). The Selfish Gene. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Delanty, G. (2001). Challenging Knowledge: The University in the Knowledge Society. Buckingham [England]; Philadelphia, PA: Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.

Foucault, M. (1983). The Culture of the Self. Berkeley Language Center — Speech Archive SA 1456, retrieved March 12, 2008 from https://www.lib.berkeley.edu/MRC/audiofiles.html#foucault

Gandhi. (1944). Hind Swaraj or Indian Home Rule. Ahmedabad: Navajivan Pub. House.

Habermas, J. (1978). Knowledge and Human Interests (2nd [English] ed.). London [etc.]: Heinemann Educational.

Harvey, L., & Knight, P. (1996). Transforming Higher Education. Buckingham [England]; Bristol, PA: Society for Research into Higher Education: Open University Press.

Herrigel, E. (1989). Zen in the Art of Archery. New York: Vintage Books.

Hippel, E. v., & Sloan School of Management. (1999). Toolkits for User Innovation: The Design Side of Mass Customization. Cambridge, MA: Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Holt, J. (1977). Growing Without Schooling (pp. v.). Boston: Holt Associates.

Holt, J. (1980). A Conversation with John Holt; Interview by Marlene Bumgarner. Retrieved March 12, 2008 from https://www.naturalchild.org/guest/marlene_bumgarner.html

Illich, I. (1971). Deschooling Society ([1st ed.). New York: Harper & Row.

Lessig, L. (2004). Creativity Always Builds on the Past. Retrieved March 10, 2008 from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0xQplM4Tn0

Lombardo, T. (2007). The Pursuit of Wisdom and the Future of Education [Electronic Version]. Retrieved May 28, 2007 from https://www.mcli.dist.maricopa.edu/dd/wisdom05/pursuit_of_wisdom.pdf.

Martin, J.-P. (1985). Vorschlag eines anthropologisch fundierten Curriculums für den Fremdsprachenunterricht. Tübingen: Narr.

McLuhan, M. (1964). Understanding Media: The Extension of Man. Canada: McGraw-Hill.

Rosenberg, M. B. (2003). Life-Enriching Education: Nonviolent Communication Helps Schools Improve Performance, Reduce Conflict, and Enhance Relationships (1st ed.). Encinitas, CA: PuddleDancer Press.

Rousseau, J.-J. (1954). The Social Contract. Chicago: H. Regnery Co.

Seneca, L. A., & Motto, A. L. (1985). Seneca, Moral epistles. Chico, CA: Scholars Press.

Senges, M. (2007). Knowledge Entrepreneurship in Universities: Practice and Strategy in the Case of Internet-based Innovation Appropriation. UOC, Barcelona.

Sloterdijk, P. (1999). ?dipus oder Das zweite Orakel: Wyk auf F?hr: Supposé.

Spinosa, C., Flores, F., & Dreyfus, H. L. (1997). Disclosing New Worlds: Entrepreneurship, Democratic Action, and the Cultivation of Solidarity. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Tapscott, D., & Williams, A. D. (2006). Wikinomics: How Mass Collaboration Changes Everything. New York: Portfolio.

Thoreau, H. D. (1910). Thoreau’s Walden. New York [etc.]: Longmans, Green, and Co.

1 As long as they find peers to team up with. For subjects that cannot be taught via a computer 42 will provide the possibility to meet up with peers offline.

2 By social we mean that it depends on you to co-create a team of learners interested in the same subject or to enter and learn with an existing group.

3 The current players have made only limited attempts to empower learners to use the Internet to become conscious participants and contributors of the noossphere.

4 In Hegel’s terms the holy essence.