Check out some of Christian's unique contributions to the MLC here

Christian's Bio here

Epilogue: History, Concepts and Terms

This was initially published in the epilogue to the 2005-06 Minnesota High School Music Listening Contest. It is a condensed version of my thoughts on the differences between Education and mere Training. These thoughts stem mostly from my own real world work and management experience and the daily application of methodologies learned during my undergraduate studies as a philosophy major. It also reflects the core liberal arts emphasis of my own education in rural Northeastern Iowa in the 1970s-1980s.
=-=-=-=
Epilogue: History, Concepts and Terms
History, like the other disciplines in the humanities, is primarily concerned with events, not facts. For example, the statement Beethoven was born in 1770 is a literal fact. It is something one can memorize and regurgitate on a multiple choice exam. Stating the fact alone however is insignificant because it does not in itself tell us about Beethoven or what influences and experiences shaped his life to lead him to write his music. As a factual statement alone, it does not urge one to critically inquire. Rather it is dependent upon the student to ask questions, for example: What were the cultural, political, geographical experiences for someone of the generation born in 1770...following from those questions, what concepts differentiate Romantic and Classical musical styles? How do those styles relate with the diversity of music in our own times.

- It is also good practice to critically examine what appears to be "factual statements" themselves. I am reminded of the quote by the German classical philologist, Friedrich Nietzsche (whom I am not usually in the habit of quoting), which concisely sums up the basic concern of philosophical inquiry since Socrates, Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies. Or to put this sentiment as my wife has so often stated, There is nothing so frustrating as someone who is both So Certain and yet So Wrong. It is difficult to seek understanding when one refuses to critically examine their own convictions and beliefs. -

I hope to have stressed enough that it is the concepts in this guide which matter the most. If you understand the concepts, you should be able to identify musical similarities and differences by ear. If you focus too much on rote memorization of terms without Listening to the music, you will most likely have a difficult time in the contest. It is ultimately up to YOU to listen to the music and to use the material in this guide to assist in making these connections.

Granted about 1/3rd of the contest is multiple-choice, but multiple-choice is a rather ineffective method of testing knowledge. Multiple-choice exams tend to demonstrate how well a student can guess the correct answer, not how well that student can apply the knowledge learned. When you embark on your career path, you will be expected to continually apply knowledge (this is why essay exams are stressed.) Those who can do so with ease are the ones who succeed.

To think of it another way, I would hate to go in for heart surgery with a surgeon who had only been tested with multiplechoice (and graded on a curve! -- "Wow, you got 68% on a terms based exam and Still earned an 4.00 GPA - yeah, that instills me with a lot of confidence, Doc!"). Would it not be more comforting to know that the surgeon understands the concepts of the heart, its relation to the workings of the human body as well as the emotional impact of surgery on the patient, so that if something unexpected happens, the surgeon can actively handle the situation?

In all aspects of life, if you are consistent with your application of knowledge rather than consistent with your strict adherence to the literal terms you will succeed.

Let me put this another way using a metaphor from architecture. While studying in England between 1990-1991, I visited Lincoln Cathedral, one of the oldest and largest examples of Gothic architecture in Europe, At this time the building was undergoing a renovation to correct the huge mistakes made by the renovators in the 1920s. In the 1920s, the architects were so transfixed on maintaining the appearance (term) of the Cathedral that they injected key structural points with concrete so that it would remain rigid and unbending. The problem was, they did not go back to study the methods used by the original masons (concepts).

Had they done so, they would have understood that the mortar used to build the Cathedral maintained the form of the structure by allowing it a certain degree of flexibility. Today the Cathedral has a full time staff dedicated to the art of the original Medieval builders in order to preserve the form. Had they stuck with the rigid, inflexible, uncompromising terms of the concrete, it is likely that the Cathedral would not be standing today.

This debate between terms and concepts extends into all facets of life. Take for instance the United States Constitution. The Framers made their intentions about the Constitution very clear in the supporting documents and letters they wrote to each other. They knew that society and traditions change (just as you have discovered in this guide) and that the immediate values of 1787 might not be the same as values in 1987. So they designed the Constitution with a certain degree of flexibility in order to effectively ensure freedom in all eras.

There are however those, like the Lincoln Cathedral renovators of the 1920s, who get so emotionally fixated upon the words (terms) of the Constitution that they neglect its original concept - to protect freedom. They attempt to pass amendments to shore-up the Constitution for the appearance of patriotic tradition, just as the 1920s renovators used concrete for the appearance of the Cathedral. What happens is that the slight degree of flexibility, represented by the third equal branch of government (Judicial - those educated in the history of the Constitutions concepts of freedom) is forced into an uncompromising form without a notion of historical perspective.

The result becomes an ineffectual structure, crumbling under the weight of its own rigidity. Eventually the rooms become unsafe and are condemned one by one. People are forced to move outside of its once protective refuge of universal freedom. The more concrete is injected, the less safe it becomes until the whole building comes crashing down.

I like to use metaphors and parables because they demonstrate exactly what I have been stating in this epilogue, that is Don't get so mired in the literal interpretation that you miss the point of the concept. Learning and listening for the concepts will provide you with a foundational context.

The Real World: Application of Knowledge History, Music, Philosophy etc.
In the real world, businesses are spending millions of dollars each year on diversity programs and on consultants to train their workers to think outside the box. What this means is that many of their employees have had such specialized training in one field that they had never learned to apply that knowledge to other facets of work. [-This has been the folly with the 20-30 year trend that one's degree field is specificially suited for a specific career or job type-] This becomes especially problematic when workers try to communicate with co-workers in other departments who are specialized in another field. - Imagine asking a group of accountants to engineer a nuclear sub, more realistically, the workers in each department should at least understand the basic issues that concern other departments in order to reach the common goal. Not doing so reminds me of the adage, Putting all of your eggs in one basket.

For this reason, employers find the need to hire consultants (who tend to have degrees in philosophy or cultural anthropology) to identify the concepts and teach them to do the same so that their business can progress instead of spinning wheels and going nowhere. If you stop to think about it, philosophy is the root of all disciplines. Philosophers are trained in the study of abstract concepts, to analyze problems, ask questions and then answer them. They can therefore be set to learn any task, be it analyzing profit margins, leadership, computers programming, construction, engineering, human relations, music...anything. What can't one do with a Philosophy degree?

If you ask critical questions and work through answers to solve problems, you are doing Philosophy.

No matter how you do in the contest, I hope that you take the concepts with you as you pursue your career and continue to further your education. Never close your mind off to free knowledge [-In this day and age with information so freely available, if you can't find what you are looking for, you aren't trying.-]. Always strive to seek out new ideas and what you can do to solve problems. Knowledge is the foundation of freedom; the cycle of continual learning is the source of American Ingenuity.