Alan Cromer’s Connected Knowledge Essay -- Literature Science Debate E

Alan Cromers Connected KnowledgeA prospective reader nonchalantly thumbing through the pages of Alan Cromers Connected Knowledge Science, Philosophy, and Education, would in all(prenominal)(prenominal) likelihood expect the sustain to explore how science and the philosophy of science should inform educational practices and pedagogy. and then such an exploration takes place, but the reader might be strike to envision that it is in the form of a vehement crusade Cromer fight against constructivism with science and a scientific habit of mind as his make and shield. In battle like style, Cromer starts on the defensive, trying to debunk the postmodern interpretations of modern physics often used to declare science and thus all other academic pursuits subjective. After defending his own district (Cromer is a physics professor at Northeastern University), Cromer goes on the worthless against those he deems largely responsible for constructivist thought--the highly fragmente d sociological disciplines. low he sets out to demonstrate that by using a scientific habit of mind he can create a genial theory of human behavior valid across a childlike range of cultures and kindly contexts. In other words, even in the social sciences, e very(prenominal)thing is not relative. Then he aims to use the tools of psychologists, maze rats and intelligence testing, to dishonour constructivism in favor of standardized education. The DefenseThe amazing transformation the accept of physics underwent in the two decades following the turn of the 20th coke is a well-known story. Physicists, on the verge of declaring the physical world understood, discovered that existing theories failed to describe the behavior of the atom. In a very short time, a more fundamental theory of the ... ... and in-class performance mediates elbow grease between the groups. ResponseAs the tone of the above discussion probably made cause, I rather enjoyed the first part of Connected Knowledge, which challenges many a(prenominal) of the popular misinterpretations of modern physics. Cromers arguments are cogent even for the non-scientist, and it is clear that this is his field of expertise. But when Connected Knowledge ventured out of the realm of physics into that of social science, I found the discussion somewhat arrogant. In his begin to discredit constructivist thought, Cromer offers only one way of understanding the world. I find such a view too narrow and too restrictive. I am not a relativist in that I think all approaches are equally valid, but I dont hope that science provides the only route to understanding and should be the basis of every decision we make.