Words and Rules D2 (Ch. 3, 4, 5) and Debriefing – D55

The day didn’t look to good after a discussion like the one on Euclid, until our dialogue of Words and Rules. We were a small group, I think 12, and we had a very good dialogue. We respected the rubrics, asked genuine questions, were profound with the text, and had a great interaction of ideas. I didn’t take notes, but I recorded it. One of the most important things we discussed was the distinction between the theory developed by Chomsky and Halle (generative phonology, rules rule, rationalist, rules), and the theory of Rumelhart and McClelland (there are no rules, empiricism, words). Another important point is what Steven Pinker and Prince proposes according to these two theories:

“Prince and I have proposed a hybrid in which Chomsky and Halle are basically right about regular inflection and Rumelhart and McClelland are basically right about irregular inflection. Our proposal is simply the traditional words-and-rules theory with a twist. Regular verbs are computed by a rule that combines a symbol for a verb stem with a symbol for the suffix. Irregular verbs are pairs of words retrieved from the mental dictionary, a part of memory. Here is the twist: Memory is not a list of unrelated slots, like RAM in a computer, but is associative, a bit like the Rumelhart-McClelland pattern associator memory. Not only are words linked to words, but bits of words are linked to bits of words.” Page 117-118.

Euclid? Big Discussion – D55

Everything appeared to be normal, just a regular Euclid class, until Ingrid mentioned a new standard calling for exact precision on our drawings, making them with previous propositions. She tried to make proposition 4, but didn’t succeed in doing so, showing that that exercise is not practical in the future propositions. We did agree that we would do them as precise as possible using our tools like the compass. The discussion evolved into finding a solution for a better learning process of Euclid. What we concluded is that we should divide the class into three groups, chosen by affinity, and to have standards for all of us for presenting and documenting the propositions, but each group will have its own rubrics and objectives, although the general objective for everyone is to finish up to proposition 30 for this semester. My group is Pablito, Alejo, Gabbi, Chacho, and Isa. This is our rubric:

We also talked about excuses and “getting real”, and how we have been interacting as a group and giving each other feedback. There were different views on the topic, some (Gabbi, Alejo, and some other I don’t remember) were saying we should have a third person, like a moderator or psychologist to mediate with each of us, and others (Carmen, Lucía, Kata, and some others) were saying we don’t need that and that it should be a personal approach with each other, that it has to be within us and not to wait for other person. I agreed with both sides by saying that the change and proactivity to solve problems comes within us, and that it could help having a workshop on how to work better as a group. I also tried to keep calm and mediate the opposite views, trying to reach an agreement on what should we do next as a group. I think I did a good job doing this and proposing solutions to these problems. At the end, we advanced in our organization and I take something positive of the discussion.

Morning Meeting by Alejo – D55

This morning I woke up with a terrible lower back pain that I assume it was because of yesterday’s physical activity. Bad call on my behalf. I was almost decided to stay in bed and rest, but I couldn’t forgive myself to loose the battle for punctuality with Pablito like that, so I woke up and came to the MPC.

Alejo’s morning meeting was a reference to Sarah Kay’s TEDTalk, If I Should Have a Daughter. The activity consisted on writing ten things we know are true. Here are my ten things I consider as true. Here and here are the links to Alejo’s blog were you can find what the other wrote.

10 Things I Know To Be True

Having some fun and “Workshop” – D54

After performing arts, we had some individual work and just before we had the workshop Bert planned for us at 4 p.m. we played some football and have fun at the Jardín Ayau. I was a team with Isa (we won of course), and Carmen, Pablito, and Franz were the other team.

For the workshop, first Bert showed us what we had to do for next week in order to deliver successfully our portfolio. The instructions were as follows:

•         Put yourself on the map
• List the readings and commentary you still have to complete.
• Write a guide to your documentation, highlighting for the reader certain features and content that represents your learning this term.
• Make a daily plan to recover and complete any work by February 4^th, 2013.
• Choose a chapter of one of our books that is particularly meaningful to you to present to the group on Thursday, December 13, 2012.
• Friday celebration at Kyle’s Library Project.

Later, we got into our groups of three and made two moral systems of some author Bert mentioned but I don’t quite remember. Here is the picture of how we divided the virtues and vices. We were close to made the two systems as the author made them, but here is the comparison for you to judge.

Finally, Bert gave us the Dialogue Rubric of the juniors (16-year-old students) at School of the Woods. It’s very interesting how many similarities we found with our rubric, and of course we would grab some ideas to incorporate to our rules. We talked about this rubric and our thoughts on it. Nothing really interesting happened to be honest. So far for today (now it’s 6:10 p.m.) Along with Alejo we stayed playing football-tenis at an improvised court in the individual work room. The match was close (51-47), but I lost. We left at 7 p.m. 

Singing Christmas Carols (P.A.) – D54

So, for Performing Arts we finally decided which song we are going to sing for the Christmas carol we are planning on doing. The final two choices were Silent Night and Deck the Halls. The latter won. It would be interesting to see if we managed to sing it well and have a good time as a group by the end of these couple of weeks left. One thing that bothered everyone was Lucia’s antipathy towards working as a group, because she decided to leave the activity and start “working” on her stuff but then came back. That kind of attitudes is what makes me don’t like her, for real. It makes me think she is not committed to the group and that she would be better off leaving the MPC, just like her sister. I really don’t want to be tough on her, but the truth is that she doesn’t help too much, although today she brought Hazella (Nutella) and won some points. She later lost them.

Plato’s “Apology” Dialogue 3 – D54

For the Epicycle 1 of this week on Classical Works, we continued reading Apology by Plato. It was very interesting and we discussed important parts of this work. The main questions were, Is Socrates atheist? If not, why and what does he believes? Is virtue a way to improve the soul? In what does he believes to be the ultimate end? Wisdom? Is it doing what’s right? Then, what is to be right? Is it to question and seek for the authentic quest for meaning?

Here are my notes of the dialogue:

Dialogue 3 (3/12/12)

• Of what is Socrates being prosecuted for?
• First charge: of being an atheist.
• Second charge: corrupting the young.

• Euthyphro: what is it that we revere that would be a guide to our action? And how do we know what should be revered?
• Euthyphro has no grounds on what to justify his reverence. That’s the main point of Socrates’ dialogue. 

• What is Socrates doing? (p. 5 - 10)
• Demonstrating Meletus’s contradiction: “He is not an atheist.”
• He is doing the right things.
• Conceit of knowledge
• He is doubting the legitimacy of the procedure, because the people charging him are ignorant at the charges.
• What is God according to Socrates?
• What is to have virtue? To be faithful and true to what they revere. For Socrates is that wisdom, doing the right thing?
• Who has no foundation of the truth, the real atheist?

• Did ever any man believe in horsemanship, and not in horses? or in flute-playing, and not in flute-players?
• He believes in cause and effect. I’m wise enough to realize that I don’t know the cause, and that what differentiates me from you. 

• Demonstrated preferences
• It’s your actions that defines you, not what you claim you do. Foundations of social science.
• Your actions reveal who you really are.
• “There you are mistaken: a man who is good for anything ought not to calculate the chance of living or dying; he ought only to consider whether in doing anything he is doing right or wrong - acting the part of a good man or of a bad.”

• Socrates knows that he doesn’t know, that’s his truth.
• The true, the beautiful, and the good.
• If we don’t cultivate the capacity to recognize it, we would not see it.

JavierP’s Morning Meeting and Sharing Linkage P4 – D54

Javier Parellada facilitated today’s morning meeting. We did two activities. The first one was that he would touch the shoulder of someone and he would be the “liar” and the rest of the group would have to guess who that person was. We did this two times and to our surprise, the first time no one was the liar and the second everyone was the liar. It was very ingenious and fun to see the different reaction and corporal language each of us had. The second activity was more of a prank to Bert. One person was supposed to go out and when he or she got back everyone would moo, but only one would moo louder and that person would have to guess whom it was. The prank didn’t go quite well but it was funny.

We took the Agora time to continue our activity of sharing linkage. Today, the ones who shared were Alejo, JavierT, Majo, Grace, Bert, and Chacho.