This is a very thoughtful piece, and focuses around a lot of what is buzzing around my own head at the moment. I'm trying to tease out my own understanding through writing too. My thoughts bump up against The Law of Conformity, with education (down to the very definition of learning) being the predominant and foundational way we establish group-think in a society. And it's not necessary specific to the content being taught (though that is a thing too), but moreso how the whole process of schooling shapes our thoughts and implicit values on knowledge and knowing as a whole (their personal epistemology). This somewhat relates to Sowell's concept of increased intelligence being a necessary component of changing societal actions for the better... Except actual intelligence doesn't matter as much as groups rigidity or flexibility their beliefs about how knowledge is generated, authorities in knowledge creation, the role of knowledge, and other such criteria. In this sense someone could be extremely intelligent but have limited and rigid epistemological views that create power dynamics and oppressive actions and continue to replicate the current systems just as likely as some could be "less intelligent" but believe everyone contributes to the collective knowledge of the world, that knowledge is contextual and depends on life experiences and thus knowledge changes based on need- and this person is more likely to engage in dialogue, work in cooperation with others, and being about change.
This is a very thoughtful piece, and focuses around a lot of what is buzzing around my own head at the moment. I'm trying to tease out my own understanding through writing too. My thoughts bump up against The Law of Conformity, with education (down to the very definition of learning) being the predominant and foundational way we establish group-think in a society. And it's not necessary specific to the content being taught (though that is a thing too), but moreso how the whole process of schooling shapes our thoughts and implicit values on knowledge and knowing as a whole (their personal epistemology). This somewhat relates to Sowell's concept of increased intelligence being a necessary component of changing societal actions for the better... Except actual intelligence doesn't matter as much as groups rigidity or flexibility their beliefs about how knowledge is generated, authorities in knowledge creation, the role of knowledge, and other such criteria. In this sense someone could be extremely intelligent but have limited and rigid epistemological views that create power dynamics and oppressive actions and continue to replicate the current systems just as likely as some could be "less intelligent" but believe everyone contributes to the collective knowledge of the world, that knowledge is contextual and depends on life experiences and thus knowledge changes based on need- and this person is more likely to engage in dialogue, work in cooperation with others, and being about change.