Featured Education: Knowledge, Understanding, Wisdom

The student in your example should have just CLEP'd out of algebra.

 

Ask Steve Tassi if he did well against Dr. James White.

Yes, there’s no beating a better education.

 

Of course they are different. I really did not interact with wisdom, but pretty much left out the "triology" except for knowledge. Thought that if you got the proper alignment from that one, you would readily get the rest.

Wisdom is that which engages discernment as to judgment of what is correct, right, righteous, ...

Knowledge is not discernment but that which is acquired by acceptance of facts, understanding and skill.

You insist that you "teach knowledge" and I insist that you take from your knowledge and impart it as facts, understanding and skill that the student may or may not incorporate into their own knowledge.

The students do not come without prior knowledge and opinions as to what is of value and useful as a tool. They determine what is added, what is detrimental, does not fit, or whatever to their own parameters and schema.


Unlike God, who can and does manipulate the mind and heart, we may only present facts, opinions, views, of our understanding, and our own rational. but, we cannot teach knowledge. Each person has their own bucket of knowledge from which they may add what they determine is worthy.

Again, this is the very crux of my argument.

You don't teach knowledge at all.

You present FROM you knowledge such facts, skills, understanding, and bits of anecdotes that the students may add to their own knowledge.

There is no rational way to teach "knowledge" rather you teach the elements of knowledge (facts, skills, understanding, ...)

For example:

The teacher has a bucket filled with what they consider the wisdom of the ages. It comes in the facts learned, experiences, understanding, even the body languages of multi cultures, and other life lived items.

The student has their own bucket with an undetermined capacity. In some manner they have determined that they lack something that you may offer.

So as that teacher dips out of their bucket the elements OF knowledge (skills, facts, experiences, understanding, body language presentations (non-verbal cues), and other life lived items) , the students will select what is deposited into their own bucket.

Students are the determiner of the importance, and not the presenter.

So, one does not teach "knowledge." One may present, offer (as does the Proverbs) principles to live by that the student may both learn to discern (wisdom) and to properly apply what is acquired (specific knowledge pertaining to the subject).

Btw, lest you think that I am not staying within the framework of "knowledge" as it is presented in the Scriptures, look at Proverbs 18:15 which places the responsibility upon the student:

15The mind of the prudent acquires knowledge,
And the ear of the wise seeks knowledge.​

The Scriptures present knowledge as not just acquired learning, but also as displayed in character and reverence. It is connected to wisdom through practiced discernment such as expressed in Proverbs 8, and again, the focus is upon the learner, not the presenter:

8“All the utterances of my mouth are in righteousness;
There is nothing crooked or perverted in them.
9“They are all straightforward to him who understands,
And right to those who find knowledge.
10“Take my instruction and not silver,
And knowledge rather than choicest gold.​

True knowledge is reflected in a life of obedience in contrast with those who lack and reject knowledge. This is evidenced in Hosea 4:

6My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge.
Because you have rejected knowledge,
I also will reject you from being My priest.
Since you have forgotten the law of your God,
I also will forget your children.​

Did the people reject knowledge, or did they lack righteous instruction that conforms knowledge to righteousness? Did the priests reject their own knowledge, or did they not submit to the principles and standards of God found in His wisdom and His knowledge?

When Ephraim's captivity is promised by God through the prophet Isaiah, does not God state they rejected his knowledge? What form did that knowledge come?

9“To whom would He teach knowledge,
And to whom would He interpret the message?
Those just weaned from milk?
Those just taken from the breast?

10“For He says,
‘Order on order, order on order,
Line on line, line on line,
A little here, a little there.’”
​

Master teachers present "line upon line." They form the lessons with order. Present each concept a bit at a time as to not overwhelm.

One last verse from Psalm 139. Here the psalmist is attempting to comprehend God. He lists a number of elements in the psalm and in there makes this statement:

6Such knowledge is too wonderful for me;
It is too high, I cannot attain to it.
​

The psalmist is basically saying that the instruction is beyond his capacity to understand, comprehend, to fit into his bucket of knowledge.

 

Keeping an education in perspective is sometimes mistaken for anti-intellectualism.

1Co 13:2

And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing.​

Moses's education was ineffectual in convincing Pharoah. Paul's education didn't help him win the Jews, and though some here think there was knowledge that Christ lacked as a man (though they won't say it), His miracle-working didn't win their hearts either. There is one effectual element that contributes to the spread of the Gospel, and that is the will of the Father, and He chooses the weak and foolish things of the world to confound the mighty and the wise. The best pastor I ever knew was uneducated.

On the other hand, the commandment to us is to pursue wisdom and knowledge, and Christ commands us to learn of Him, but some like to wear their spirituality to cover their slothfulness and disobedience in this respect. Learn. Get knowledge and wisdom (and wisdom also means the ability to discern the difference between knowledge and hogwash) but keep it in perspective. Your knowledge will pass away.

Faith, hope and love abide. And the greatest of these is love. And there is one source of love. It is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit.

 

I am not willing for you to become too exercised in the matter. The understanding will come to you as you continue as an educator. Not because I transferred such knowledge, but your own awareness will cause acceptance.

You will teach what you know - the skills, facts, rationale,behaviors.... Students will acquire what they consider worthy and conform it to their own knowing.

That you want to call what you teach, knowledge, is not worth the further striving.

I predict that you will awaken to this thread’s discussion, again considering the distinctions, and be more agreeable as to the accuracy of my statements.

Not now, but you will, if only in your own private acknowledgement.

You teach what you know.

You teach what you know in skills, ideas, rationale, displays of body language, understandings in comparison and contrast, ...

As for the Scripture you offered

Did I not acknowledge that God can, did, and does manipulate the heart and mind according to His desires? Is this not the statement of those Scriptures?

Do you have such ability?

Nope.

So, you must rely upon teaching: skills, ideas, rationale, understanding, techniques, modeling each and conforming to presenting each orderly.

It remains the student who determines what and often when what you have offered will be absorbed into their own knowledge

No doubt, you will one day become agreeable.

Until then, would you like to recall your statement concerning teaching wisdom?

Do you actually teach wisdom, or do you teach the elements of wisdom (such as discernment) that the student’s wisdom be enlarged, and more acute?

Same principle applies as that of knowledge.

 

Readers,

This is an important lesson and am reminded of a pastors child attending college.

After class they called home. The conversation went something like this.

Dad: “Hello”

Child: “Papa, I wanted to share what I learned in class, today! (Child goes on and on at discovering something important)

Dad: “Did you not remember I taught you that years ago?”

Child: “You did?” “When?” “Maybe I wasn’t listening.”

 

If a student comes to your classroom, in which you teach knowledge and wisdom, why might they not be successful?

You gave out knowledge and wisdom.

Why did the student not acquire knowledge and wisdom?

Don’t pretend (as beginning teachers might) to post, “Well, I taught it, they just didn’t receive it.” Your offering of Scripture won’t support that type statement or even thinking.

You are the teacher! Do all students learn equally?

Or do you present and conform to the skills and parameters that student brings as they darken your door that they (and you) succeed in transferring - skill, understanding, rationale, attitudes, ...

What did you lack of your own ability that the Scriptures you shared would be valid?

Btw, Elihu wasn’t all that wise in his presentation to Job then the other three had been.
God said:

2“Who is this that obscures my plans
with words without knowledge?​

 

Ecclesiastes 12:

9In addition to being a wise man, the Preacher also taught the people knowledge; and he pondered, searched out and arranged many proverbs. 10The Preacher sought to find delightful words and to write words of truth correctly.

11The words of wise men are like goads, and masters of these collections are like well-driven nails; they are given by one Shepherd. 12But beyond this, my son, be warned: the writing of many books is endless, and excessive devotion to books is wearying to the body.
​

The underlined words are significant into “how” the Preacher taught.

The wise Preacher (as any worthy and wise teacher) presented without regard to station, creed, or custom, to the people equally (without favoritism) knowledge (the principle application is the teaching of discernment, understanding).

He developed his lesson plans very carefully, consulted many resources, arranged the teaching in order, even carefully chose what words to speak and write and that it be done correctly (grammatically accurate), with that principle of clarity - truth.

 

I can't say I have followed the whole thread - nor have I read it the private arguments. I think you are very patient.

I would say that as a teacher you can teach knowledge, apply that knowledge to give understanding & teach how applied knowledge & understanding lead to wisdom. In a Christian context, you & the students have the Holy Spirit.

However your basic knowledge & understanding may be flawed - as we have argued in many threads. I won't go into detail, but as we seek to understand the Scriptures we make certain assumptions:

literal/historical/grammatical for all Scripture;
or
literal/historical/grammatical for the New Covenant Scriptures which show the fulfilment & spiritual understanding of the Old.

 

When you were in school, were you taught knowledge or were you taught the elements that are contained within the knowledge of the instructor, which as you incorporated into your own schema (pattern of thought/behavior) enlarged your own knowledge that you already had?

When a preacher presents, from where do they draw the wisdom and knowledge? Certainly (as the preacher in Ecclesiastes) from multiple resources - schooling, reading outside materials, encounters, ... The pattern is that the "multitude of counselors" are used to form a plan of action, a teaching, a principle of application,...

What does the preacher hope to communicate? What is necessary for the lesson to be a success?

The same with the teacher.

The presentation is not knowledge, wisdom, but the elements of such. That the listeners respond appropriately.

There is another matter that I pointed to in a recent post.

I ask, if the student isn't successful, who is at fault.

You responded,

"In spite of my warnings, several students were not diligent enough in their studies. I taught, but they did not listen. The fact that they were not as diligent as they could be does not negate the fact that I taught."​

So, you acknowledge that the burden of learning is upon the student. That despite you pouring out all wisdom and knowledge, they ultimately are responsible to acquire the skills, and understanding.

This may seem very agreeable to most teachers, and presents an escape when a student is not successful. It is also consistent with the warnings of the watchman on the wall presented in Scriptures.

However, there is more. As you state, the Holy Spirit must be involved. (beginning of wisdom).

But, what if the standard were even higher?

What if the standard was, "All students can learn equally," and that the teacher was ultimately the determination of the equal success of all students?

 

A great gift a teacher may bestow upon the student is not what is contained in books, but all the skills that are necessary to discern the truth of what is contained in the books.

 

John, you said, "The presentation is not knowledge, wisdom, but the elements of such. That the listeners respond appropriately."

THANK YOU!

See, what you present is not knowledge or wisdom. That is exactly a summery of what I posted at the first response in the thread (if I recall correctly).

It is about time you agreed.


About the thinking that "All students cal learn equally:"

The philosophy "All students can learn equally" was a statement and policy by the superintendent of one of Texas' larger school districts quite a number of years ago.

Basic to his thinking was the consideration that ultimately the teachers were directly responsible for student success, irregardless of any intellectual, emotional, and character the students presented. That was reflective of the public demand of the education systems.

Accordingly he determined that, because the teachers have no actual control over any influence impacting the students, except that which takes place in their own classrooms, and even that is somewhat controlled by the demands of the assigned curricula, no matter how the students presented, they are to be taught, and not just equal distribution of teaching information, but to be taught in such a way as to be equally successful. For ultimately the public view was shown to be that success was the reason a teacher was hired.

This thinking was alarming in quite a few in educational quarters, yet when one steps from the trenches of academia thereby removing their own bias and considerations of what excuses are acceptable for limited student achievement, the goal can be rationally set at such a standard.

John,

When dealing with students at your school, what character flaw most often hinders them?

What do consider is the greatest aid in diminishing or extinguishing the hindrance?

 

Not a bad goal.

It also reflects that basic divide between what the general public holds and what teachers actually witness.

For example, a young person even to their mid teens may be tried for a crime. A thoughtless crime arising out of emotional influences, or peer pressure.

Yet, few are the students at even the graduate level who have mature thinking.

Psychologically,

"The frontal lobes of the brain which are responsible for high level reasoning and decision making aren’t fully mature until the early 20s, according to Deborah Yurgelun-Todd, a neuroscientist at Harvard’s Brain Imaging Center." ( The Marks of Maturity)​

Yet, typically we expect the college student to think as an adult, make adult decisions, consider the ramifications of issues as an adult, give them great freedom as an adult ...

Because of the "pruning" of the brain by the brain (see article above) the 11 - mid 20 year old, the typical college learner can actually have less capacity to learn then they had as a child.

There is also that aspect of "resistance" involved. Because by the very nature of the process there is a resistance to reorder facts and recognize healthy benefits related to education.

"Pressfield sets the stage by describing Resistance and its allies: self-doubt, procrastination, timidity, perfectionism, narcissism, our own intelligence and even friends and family. These are the powerful forces that are arrayed against us with whether we’re trying to build a business, create a work of art or achieve any worthwhile goal." Book by Pressfield cited in this article (DO THE WORK: Overcoming Resistance | Management Psychology Group)
​

To me what is interesting in the article is the "allies" one may engage to press back against the resistance. These are listed as "stupidity, stubbornness, and blind faith."


Now the question then comes, how might a teacher use these allied against resistance, to bring education to that student?

Because, ultimately, every teacher above the 4th grade level encounters the resistance and often resort to unhealthy interactions that merely reinforce the behavior and codes of the enemy called "resistance."

Amazing to me was how smart my own father had become after I reached 30. Somewhere he had gained much wisdom and understanding that he just didn't have when I was younger.