By: Cornel Slenters
As educators, teachers, trainers or coaches, no matter what age groups or subjects we cover, we know that students expect from us more than a mere transfer of knowledge and skills.
Sooner or later they come to us with questions that touch upon the deeper meanings of life.
Moreover, many of us are motivated to help them to develop their full potentials as unique individuals.
In these situations we have essentially two fundamental choices from which to operate:
- A mental model about the nature of reality which says something like: You are merely the latest model in the path of evolution, you have body and brain, your biological purpose is to prolong the species.
- Or a mental model about the nature of reality which says something like: You have body, brain, mind and soul. You are here to figure out your purpose, but you have potential access to resources that go beyond those that meet the eye.
The educator's dilemma
However, as educator in an institutional setting we are often faced with having to make that choice:
- The body/brain model might appear rational and safe within the institutional setting, but is limiting in the development of the individual's potential.
- The body/brain/mind/soul model offers greater potentials for the individuals, but is more difficult to communicate as a rational 'neutral' framework.
Appearance or reality?
I will argue that the appearance and reality are two different things:
The body/brain model is
based on a science policy called 'materialism', hence
only 'matter based' observations count. Then within that context,
mathematics is used as the logical foundation for our
observations. If the mathematics are suggesting
phenomena outside the frame of materialism these
predictions are then typically discarded.
Hence logic and rationality serve only within a prior policy defined limited framework and is often too limited for meaningful answers raised by students about the deeper questions of life.
Hence logic and rationality serve only within a prior policy defined limited framework and is often too limited for meaningful answers raised by students about the deeper questions of life.
How logical is the body/brain/mind/soul model and can it be taught in a rational 'neutral' way, decoupled from religion?
The most fundamental
mathematical force known to mankind is Creative-R. It is
the unifying cause behind everything observable about
the universe and without it: the universe would not
exist. For a brief description of Creative-R, click here.
The mathematical
structure driven by Creative-R leads to an architecture
of the universe that is similar to the model described
on this website as the Universe Grand Design. Thus a body/brain/mind/soul model
that is exclusively based on a mathematical framework
and its development can be followed and verified by
everyone.
Summarised in a graphic:
Hence from a logical perspective the dilemma has vanished since the body/brain/mind/soul model is the most logical alternative among the two and would provide the greatest benefits to students.
However you might be surrounded by ignorants and some of them might have an influence on your career. Since they do not walk around with red stickers on their head, you need a strategy. My suggestion:
1. Focus on Emotional
Intelligence.
2. Softly on the
Universe Grand Design, unless you are a truly
independent. (Yet learn about it for your personal
benefit.)
When students experience first hand the benefits
through Emotional Intelligence, you are well on your way
and you will know then that it rests on a solid
foundation. Your vision will become clear
when you can look inside your own heart.
Who looks outside, dreams;
who looks inside, awakes.
Carl G. Jung
A musician must make
music, an artist must paint, a poet must write, if he
is to be ultimately at peace with himself.
Abraham H. Maslow
Abraham H. Maslow
