The Law of Diversity

I like what he has to say here about diversity more than what he said about it in the first part of the book.  This is, in part, because he avoided the concept of entropy.  That is both good and bad.  It is bad because I think entropy in society and culture is something that needs to be dealt with-- and in the schools.  The more society changes in a short period of time, the more it tends towards chaos, dysfunction and its own demise.  But it is good that he put forward this narrative the way he did, because it is a strong narrative.  He splits it into four parts:  language, religion, culture and art.

There is a saying I hear often (I think is comes from Russian) that says, the more languages you know the more people you are.  Languages give you a different perspective on the world, that is true.  I think in the US it should be mandatory to learn a second language in elementary school.   Aside from the problem of funding those programs, I see the biggest issues in the way is the question of what language should be taught.  It is somewhat impractical to have different students in the same class take different languages, or at least more difficult.  But if they are all going to take the same language, how is that language chosen?  In some countries the default second language is that of the nearest big neighbor, or the language of the biggest ally or trading partner.  That makes sense.  However, as Postman points out, most places in the US are isolated from other languages, there is no second language that is needed on a daily basis.  In any case, I think that the choice of the language is not nearly as important as the fact that it is there.  The younger one learns a second language the easier it is for them to learn a third...  So even if German is chosen and the student never uses German, at least they have the experience and knowledge of another language, and that will (some experts say, and my experience tells me) make it easier to learn a language of their choice later. The point should be to learn a second language, any language in elementary school.

Religion is very important, and so are old religions.  Religion does (or should do) for society what Postman wants the narratives to do for education: give it a why.   I agree with what he says here and have always thought that a Humanities course should be required for all high school graduates.  This class could do comparative religion, philosophy, etc.  I think that is the way that schools could deal with the Creationism issue; teach evolution in science class because it is science and teach creationism in Humanities class, because it does not belong in science.  Islamaphobia could be dealt with in this class as well.  I have often slipped these things in to history classes I have taught because they are issues that students need to hear about and reflect upon.  In terms of myth, I think that those things need to be taught as well.  I usually teach myth and legends by pointing out that they are origin stories, as are religious stories.  Believe the stories or not (and really the difference for me between a myth and a religious story is that the former is no longer believed by people around us while the latter is) they are about how things started or came to be.  They give insight into the logic and organization of a people, and they should be taught and reflected upon.  They give us a view of how diverse human thought and culture can be.

His issue with how culture is usually dealt with (a culture fair that is about dress and food) is a good point.  An emphasis on the meaning   and reasons for traditions is needed.  I guess I don't have much more to say about that. 

It seems to me that Postman exaggerates the importance of museums.  I not against studying museums as he lays it out, but I am not sure that the idea of a museum is as much about defining humanity as he thinks.  I am big on tradition (because I think that is all we really have as a foundation in society) and museums show us our tradition and other traditions that we can learn or borrow from.   I think art is the language of feelings and that we need to expose students to as much old art as we can: literature, myth, painting, music, theater, etc.  These things shape feelings, thoughts and individuals and then society.  Pop art often just reproduces, mindlessly and unquestioningly, everyday things.  Exceptional artists do more, they critique or add to common culture and/or inspire people.  The great artists of the past are considered great and are still around because they did that.  Exposure to as many of those great artists as possible should be a goal of education, especially exposing students to ones that they might not other wise come into contact with.  Along with exposure, school should put those artist and works into context in terms of why they were important then and why they are still valuable today. 

I liked his chapter more than I thought I would.