Schrödinger's Cat

At any given time, we carry around with us thousands of views, opinions, and beliefs, and often regard them as facts. Today I was reminded of the story of Schrödinger's Cat by an Apple Distinguished Educator who wore a T Shirt declaring Schrödinger' Cat is Not Dead.

Schrödinger's Cat: A cat, along with a flask containing a poison and a radioactive source, is placed in a sealed box shielded against environmentally induced quantum decoherence. If an internal Geiger counter detects radiation, the flask is shattered, releasing the poison that kills the cat. The Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics implies that after a while, the cat is simultaneously alive and dead. Yet, when we look in the box, we see the cat either alive or dead, not both alive and dead.

Part of the premise, as I (barely) understand it, is that reality is influenced by us observing it. If we were not observing, what would be happening would be different.

I guess what this says to me, is it is very hard to be very certain about anything. In fact, it's quite likely that the more certain I am, the less likely it is that I am fully informed.

This sounds somewhat esoteric and confused, but the point I am taking from it is that I find it increasingly important to be open-minded.

I used to think I knew so much. I am a passionate person and tend to be strongly opinionated. I still am when it comes to many things such as the importance of equality of opportunity, the importance of valuing the whole child in the learning process, and the aesthetic beauty and operational beauty (simplicity, effectiveness and efficiency of use) of all things Apple, the importance of family, the importance of preserving our beautiful world and so on.

I am becoming increasingly aware that in reality I know so little. Schrödinger''s cat is a very small example of a whole world of understanding that is completely beyond me in terms of physics. And what of politics, religion, science, art, literature, politics? I have so many small and imperfectly formed kernels of information, and yet even with such a small reserve to draw on, I find it all too easy to make sweeping statements, hold untested opinions and claim understanding that simply has no foundation of merit.

I have changed my thinking about parochialism and realised the need to see not just our ANZAC neighbours as whanau but all nations. The selfless acts of the workers at the Fukoshima Nuclear Plant, and the Japanese USAR volunteers who came to Christchurch and showed such reverance for human life, are just two examples of why we should see our world as a whanauhood.

I have changed my mind about thinking, realising that what we refer to as what 'we think' is actually often based on too little thinking and too little information. A truer phrase might well be, "I assume".

I have spent too long assuming too much, and must become more open minded. My action goal needs to be to listen more, and assume less. As a colleague once taught me, "When you assume, you make an ass out of u and me."

Discernment

The further we progress into the 21st century the more strongly I feel the need for us to teach discernment. In fact, if I had to settle on one skill as crucial for our children beyond the basics of literacy and numeracy, I think this would be it. It fits within the Key Competency of Thinking, and it is (should be) assuming ever greater importance. Before we had the sage on the stage teacher and the fireside chats from parents to help us know right from wrong, and more importantly, how to tell.

Now we have google in our pocket, we have constant access to, and are all but constantly immersed in, information. We live in a print saturated, image saturated, talk-back saturated, social connectivity saturated, sound saturated, video saturated, environment. The numbers for Facebook, Twitter, Flicker, You-Tube, and iTunes are mind boggling in the extreme.

On the face of it, google in our pocket seems to be such a boon. Access is not the purpose, understanding is. We need to look at how our children (parent community and teachers) are using google. The pattern tends to be that most searchers sample the first link or two, and very few go past the first page or two.

Our children tend to give credence to whatever they find on the internet - "if it's on the internet, it must be true."

Alan November has shared some thought provoking sessions on verifying what we find when we search on the web. whois.com is a useful tool recommended by Alan. He shares the search results from google on 'Doctor Martin Luther King'. On first look, the fourth entry on google's result page appears to be a considered, erudite review of the great man's life. However, the further into that site you go the more controversial and disparaging becomes the material until it eventually leads children to a set of flyers they can print out and distribute in their community. The source - the Ku Klux Klan. You can guess their motives.

Discernment:

When faced with challenges outside our knowledge, we need the right tools and dispositions.

It’s not knowing the answer anymore.

It’s not even being able to find the answer.

It’s knowing how to behave intelligently when I don’t know the answer.

Previously we sought answers - usually simple and factual, to finite questions. Now our students are beginning to realise there is a difference between Information and Knowledge.

One touches the surface - lands and sinks.

One involves understanding - lands and generates ripples.

Previously for information we had a handful of go-to-sources...

Britannica

Encarta

Atlas

Dictionary.

Now we still a handful of go-to-sources...

Google

Bing

Yahoo

Dictionary

The problem now is not access to information, nor is it the up-to-date-ness of information.

Instead the issue is

Veracity - Reliability ?

Usefulness ?

Source ?

Slant - Bias - Hidden Agenda ?

And it’s not just Google....

Fox News openly and deliberately and consistently presents a Right Wing, Conservative, Pro Republican, Pro Business, Pro Gun Lobby, Anti Gay, Anti Abortion, anti Minorities, WASP slant to almost all of its news.

Al Jazira, meanwhile is widely regarded as presenting a thoughtful, reasoned, considered and non partisan approach to presenting the News.

This of course could (and should) lead to discussions on...

What is News?

What is Newsworthy?

Who decides?

Is this right, fair, balanced, appropriate, useful, educational, promoting reasoned debate, edifying, elucidating etc.?

This could also lead to discussions on...

What is Infotainment?

Have we got the balance right?

What are the dangers of mass infotainment overwhelming mass debate and reasoned reflection and discussion?

So consider this.

If we don’t teach discernment to our children who will?

If we don’t teach discernment to our children what might the resultant outcomes be?

And finally - we need to ask questions that google doesn't know the answer to.