Aristotle's quote: > “It is the mark of an educated mind to entertain a thought without accepting it” can be negated to form: > It is the mark of an uneducated mind to accept or refute a thought without entertaining it. This gives two different overall attitudes to information: building and refining The one we refer to as 'building' constitutes accepting narratives completely whenever they are consistent with one's worldview. The other, we refer to as refinement, is about creating a single coherent and realistic worldview out of the original building blocks. The Worldview Masterclass focuses on the transition from building to refining. # How do people develop and improve their worldview? Your worldview is the context in which you interpret all your information. Hence it is the context that gives meaning to whatever you perceive. But at the same time your worldview needs to be bootstrapped and constructed while you use it. It seems that we first adopt whole explanatory narratives as building blocks that are assumed to be completely true. But when we apply these and they do not work well or when different narratives lead to inconsistent results, we discover that parts of the narrative can be improved on, which allows us to refine them. The combination of selecting suitable building blocks and consecutive refinement seems to be the way we all build our worldview. ![[the-mark-of-an-educated-mind.png]] The purpose of Liberal Arts & Sciences is, in the first place to allow one to educate one's mind by providing the tools to build a realistic worldview. William Perry studied this development in Harvard students (end of the 1960s to 1990s). This let to the following defining description:[^1] > "An educated mind has learned to think about even his own thoughts, > it examines the way it orders his data and the assumptions it is making, > it compares these with other thoughts that other people might have >and adopts whatever this scrutiny of data, ideas, and opinions decides on as most reliable and productive. > In doing so the educated mind learned to think in accordance with reality > from which position he can take responsibility for his own stand > and negotiate – with respect – with others."" This definition is all is about improving beliefs. Where beliefs are defined as data, ideas, and opinions, one gradually brings more in accordance with reality. These beliefs are to be continually updated, and hence one is in search of information that either contradicts or complements the own beliefs. Contradicting information suggests an opportunity for improvement of the own ideas. While complementing information, offers an opportunity to extend one's worldview. Hence "It is the mark of an educated mind to entertain a thought without accepting it" (attributed to Aristotle). Key is that **the focus is on refining the own thoughts and beliefs**. The opposite of this is "to accept or refute a thought without entertaining it". Here the focus is not on how to improve existing beliefs but on what to include and what to exclude in your worldview. This is about building a worldview. **Here the focus is on deciding to adopt acceptable narratives — a coherent set of beliefs — and refuting unacceptable narratives.** These narratives are more or less consistent and comprehensive stories to be adopted as a whole "block of beliefs" to fill a void in existing knowledge. This narrative — a block of beliefs — can only be integrated with the already present body of knowledge when it does not conflict. Apparent conflict poisons the existing worldview and should be avoided at all costs. In a similar vein, conveyers of conflicting information are a threat to the seamless integration of the worldview. In case of conflict, it is priority to make the conflicts in the building block disappear or to select a non-conflicting narrative. ![[School-of-understanding/Course-content/Self-development/attachments/worldview-construction-steps.png]] Building precedes refining: on any knowledge domain, you must build a decently stable, reasonably complete, and productive worldview before you have anything to refine. While you still build your worldviews into a strong foundation, you do not yet have the tools to appreciate the nuances of new information. Yet, the more realistic and internally consistent the original building blocks, the easier it is to refine and integrate all in a consistent worldview. It makes sense to speak about the **building mode** and the **refinement mode**. The building mode, in any domain of knowledge, comes first. You have to adopt a body of knowledge that you use as foundational. You do that by carefully adopting comprehensive in-group narratives — blocks of beliefs — that fill the void. When this basis is sufficiently developed and comprehensive, you have a stable and productive basis for the improvement mode. Now conflicting information is no longer "poisonous" but a welcome (or at least interesting) source of refinement. The building mode 'building blocks' will often stem from in-group bubbles (often from mainstream/in-group discourse) because these can be integrated with the least tension. High tension — clear violations of expectations or apparent disrespect of in-group authority or in-group consensus [^2] — increase intolerance to (further) diversity and the need to restore order in the worldview. Hence, depending on the topic, you can expect adolescents to either develop their worldview or (just start to) refine it. These processes are essential, and there is no value judgment in being in one mode or another. The only sensible value judgments are associated with whether one executes the current mode sloppily or seriously. ### Defining properties of the building and the refinement mode | **Building mode** | **Issue** | **Refinement mode** | | --- |:---:| --- | | "to accept or refute a narrative without entertaining its details" | **General strategy** | "to entertain a thought without accepting it" | | To decide what narrative to accept as a foundational part of one's worldview | **Main purpose** | To decide how existing beliefs can be improved. | | Large block of knowledge (narratives) to be adopted as foundational | **Unit size** | Little bits of information that improve or extend one's existing worldview | | Is the whole narrative compatibility with own beliefs? | **Activation of mode** | Are elements novel, complementary, or contradictory with own beliefs? | | Compatible of whole narrative with existing beliefs (ingroup compatible) | **Inclusion criterion** | Improves some existing beliefs | | Narrative components incompatible with own beliefs (ingroup incompatible) | **Exclusion criterion** | Information doesn't improve aspects of the own beliefs or worldview | | Obvious acceptance/rejection pattern (high need for cognitive closure). | **Certainty** | At ease with the inconsistencies in one's understanding of the world | | High reliance on external authorities to judge the validity of new narratives | **Authority** | High reliance on self to make micro-decisions on countless bits of info | | Typically ingroup mainstream sources | **Sources** | Typically other thinkers in the refinement mode | | Ridiculed, treated as worldview "poison" and its conveyer as a poisoner.<br> Coming up with an outer narrative that is acceptable. | **Response to conflicting information** | Treated as a learning opportunity. The smarter the conveyer, the better. | # Attitudes to information ![[Attitudes-to-information.png]] [^1]: William G Perry, J. (1998). Forms of Ethical and Intellectual Development in the College Years. Jossey-Bass. [^2]: These are the 'normative threats' described by Stenner (2005)