Texas. When this state is mentioned few people have neutral impressions. For people that were born here I’m sure they imagine positive things like friendly people, bbq’s, wholesome farm living, and sweet, sweet baby Jesus. For those of us that grew up far from this mystical land we generally imagine negative things such as rednecks, over-consumption (of both food and petroleum products), religious fundamentalism, chewing tobacco, racism, and bigotry. In my short time here (4 days) since Friday I have already experienced most items from both lists. This isn’t particularly surprising because like most places, Texas has both the good, the bad, and the ugly.
Rather than focus on the negative I’d like to share a positive experience I had at a mega-walmart–everything IS bigger in Texas–from which I gained the insight that maybe I can be somewhat of a bigot too (gasp!)
After an exasperating encounter with the student housing office of U of H which made Japanese bureaucracy seem intelligible, I resigned myself to the fact that I will not be able to move into my residence until Wednesday. Of course the apt. was empty but don’t get me started! My plan was to go camping in Sam Houston National Forest until Wednesday. The forest is only about 1.5 hours outside of Houston and I could spend some quality time alone in the wilderness before the madness of studying and TAing started.
I had my camping gear with me as I had camped on the drive from Vegas to Houston but I needed to pick up some food and more propane and propane accessories. I also thought that since I’d be camping near a lake I might buy an inflatable kayak if I could find one for a reasonable price. When driving from Houston to the campground there is a town called Conroe through which you must pass. I figured I’d stop at the Walmart there, since it was just off the freeway (I’d seen it on the way in) to pick up food and see if Walmart had a boat.
|The parking lot is ONLY for Walmart|
|Walmart in Conroe, TX|
Walmart had the paddles but had sold out of the boat. As I was contemplating what I might do instead I noticed the fishing poles one row over. I have a vague recollection of having fished when I was ten or something but I am by no means a seasoned fisherman. “Hmmm…” I thought, “well, I’ll be there for 5 days, if I can catch my own dinner it’ll save me from having to make food runs and what’s better that fresh fish? How hard can fishing be?”
The guy working the sports and outdoors section was a big ol’ Texas country boy. I told him I was going camping for a few days and wanted to fish, could he advise me on what gear I should buy. Well, let me tell you, if you think fishing is a simple matter of attaching a hook to a line on a pole you are wrong! Depending where you are fishing and what you are fishing for you need to select the correct weights, lures, bait, floats, line, pole, cleaning kit, and net.
Stop for a moment. I am about to have my moment of insight. I realize now that I was feeling pretty smug about myself ever since I got accepted into several schools with scholarship. I don’t think that smugness ever reached the point of arrogance but it was smugness nonetheless. It wouldn’t surprise me if most college grads feel a slight superiority over those who never finished, just as I’m sure many who finished high school might feel the same toward those who never finished. Perhaps it’s a normal feeling–those with a higher level of formal education feel, to varying degrees, superior to those below them. Or maybe I’m just an asshole.
Anyway, I asked this Texas country boy to help me “gear up” for fishing. I explained to him that I was a total beginner and didn’t have any idea what I was doing. He was so excited to show me and explain to me all the intricacies of fishing. He asked me my budget, what type of fish I wanted to catch, gave me technical advice, demonstrated how to tie the knots. It was plainly obvious that if there were a graduate degree in fishing, this guy would have one. But he did not take his position of superior knowledge to talk over my head, to condescend, or to show off his encyclopedic knowledge of fishing. He answered my questions with kindness and with enthusiasm. He never made me feel small for not knowing what is practically innate to him. Particularly endearing was after completing every explanation he’d interject, “I love fishing….I really love fishing”.
I drew two main lessons from this exchange. The first is obvious, that it is much more pleasant to learn from someone who doesn’t speak down to you. The second is that I should be more humble. Perhaps I have more formal education than some but it does not mean I have more knowledge. Perhaps the guy at Walmart’s depth and breadth of knowledge of fishing far outstrips mine in philosophy–actually, I’m quite sure it does. The knowledge I pursue just happens to be disseminated primarily in formal institutions. His–not so much. It is doubtful that where knowledge is obtained is relevant in ascribing value to it, provided we are defining knowledge as “true justified belief”.
This brings up a philosophical issue: Can we ascribe different values to different types of knowledge? Is my knowledge of philosophy more valuable than his knowledge of fishing, or vice versa? Is an MBA more valuable than an MA? That is to say, is practical knowledge more valuable that theoretical knowledge?
I’m not sure what the answer is but I think it might have something to do with the type of life one wants to lead and the degree to which that knowledge helps you pursue that life. He enjoys a life of fishing and knowledge of fishing helps him successfully pursue this life. I’m trying to pursue a life of a philosophy instructor, obviously studying philosophy helps me achieve success in this aim.
But are there areas of knowledge that are universally beneficial, and if so, should we not ascribe more value to knowledge that has universal benefit? I’d like to think that studying some philosophy can enrich everyone’s life. It is not domain specific. Learning to think critically is an asset no matter what our specific field of interest. On the other hand, I’m not sure everyone’s life will be enriched if they learn the fundamentals of fishing.
So where does this leave us? It seems that there certainly are knowledge domains that universally improve our life quality, some practical, some theoretical. For example, the practical knowledge of how to manage one’s money will universally improve the quality of anyone’s life. Turning to theoretical knowledge, understanding something about ethics and concepts of justice, for example, can also universally improve people’s lives. Finally, there is the more specific type of knowledge, such as that which applies to fishing. It is doubtful that this knowledge will universally enrich people’s lives and so in a sense, is not equal to the aforementioned types of knowledge.
Doh! This is the problem with philosophy is no matter what I say, there is usually a counter-arguent. So if I may play devil’s advocate to my incoherent ramblings…: “So, what you’re saying is we should ascribe value to types of knowledge based on the degree to which they have universal utility. Can you provide an argument for this naked assumption? What’s wrong with knowledge for knowledge sake? Why does it have to be useful? Why not measure instead how much pleasure the knowledge brings?”
My reply: “Don’t make me go all Carnap on your ass, cuz you know I will…Let us ascribe value to knowledge based on its fruitfulness in achieving the purpose for which it is intended; that is to say, if a particular area of knowledge is meant to bring about universal pleasure, we should value it to the degree to which it does so. Conversely, if a branch of knowledge is meant to have utility, e.g. how to maintain basic hygiene, then let us measure it on those terms.”
Carnap, I love you!
Ok, I’m rambling too much. Time for bed. Thanks for reading guys and lemmi know what you think about how we should ascribe value to different types of knowledge.
4 thoughts on “Ramblings From "Texas, Yeah Texas" to Carnap”
I am amazed to see such an amazing post. Keep up the good work.best mba college
Very good post. Again– the answer comes down to priorities/values. Society puts a higher esteem to formal education. You can learn from books or experience or both. Malcolm Gladwell's book \”outliers\” talks about the fact that if you want to be world class at anything– you need to spend 10 thousand hours doing it to achieve mastery. Whether it's fishing or philosophy….I can argue that we \”should\” be taught fundamentals about money management, nutrition, physical education, personal and dental hygiene, self esteem, emotional fitness/dealing with adversity classes in school as a FUNDAMENTAL…. but then again, any time you use the word \”should\”– we are projecting our values onto other people. Mastery can be learned in any field– as long as you are dedicated to it. His love for fishing is no better or worse than your love for talking critical shit out of your ass. What's more interesting to me is what DRIVES our values and motivates our behavior– it's the perceived \”voids\” in our life (what we perceive is missing most). If you perceive a lack of money at some point in your life, you value money and will delve into mastering how to manage and multiply your money. If you have a void in health because of an illness you have experienced, you'll pour your heart and soul into health/wellness/nutrition. If you feel guilty for the bad stuff you have done in your life, then you'll seek out salvation with SBJ. If you sit in a lecture or read a book that makes you feel like you are missing truth, logic, purpose, and reasoning in your life– then you'll study philosophy 🙂 Not only that, but you'll seek out a PhD in it so you won't feel so stupid. Only to realize that we're all the same in that we are seeking that which we perceive is missing, and that everyone and everything in our life is all about teaching us to attain a sense of fulfillment and love within ourselves.P.S. You ARE an asshole. But a hilarious one. Keep up the great work bro.
An interesting thing for us to do is to look at what we're dedicated to doing, then ask ourselves \”what void did you experience in that realm that is driving your high value of it?\”- me being told by my father that I was gonna end up a lazy bum on the street (drives my need for success)-ugly duckling as a teen becomes supermodel (cindy crawford)- getting cut from highschool basketball team (michael jordan)- not getting laid in high school (Tiger woods).
When I lived up north, the local farmers, who were the children or grandchildren of the original homesteaders, openly disdained \”college kids\”, of which we were some. They were always kind and enthusiastic about teaching us useful skills, however, and always did it with a twinkle in the eye. Pleased as punch, ya know? But they thought we were pretty stupid, at least until we learned stuff. I wouldn't be surprised if your good ole boy told the story, too, at the end of his day. Pleased as punch.Meanwhile, to respond to your question about ascribing value, isn't it all a kind of interdependent web? Why would either philosophy or fishing have more value, one over the other? You say all lives may be enriched by philosophy, but if it were to come down to the crunch, it'd probably be a good idea to fish first, then tear apart arguments on a full stomach.Take a look at Maslow's hierarchy of needs, if you haven't already.