LOGO-L> Re: typing vs. clicking (was: Easy Logo for Grades K&1) 
Author Message
 LOGO-L> Re: typing vs. clicking (was: Easy Logo for Grades K&1)
Tom,
    I think what I had in mind was originality; your example makes my
point. The pictures of a collage may hold slightly different content for
each observer, but if they are at all familiar, most observers will likely
perceive a lot of the same meaning in the images, per se. Their meaning has
been created and somewhat fixed.
    How the pictures are used in the collage can easily make a somewhat
original statement that may have more semantic clarity than the
non-artistic creator could generate--but isn't the message still somewhat
fixed by the original art?
    Suppose, though, the creator had learned art foundations from a young
age, couldn't he/she generate something entirely original and perhaps more
true to what he/she thought or felt and wanted to express?
    Jim

Quote:

>>   I believe that three of the essential factors that
>>determine ability to think creatively and originally are creative
>>mentoring; wide-ranging experience; and a large repertoire of small meaning
>>units which can be combined--according to semantic and logical rules--to
>>construct something new.

>This is an interesting way to look at it. I would add another vital
>ingredient: a problem to be solved.

>>   If this line of reasoning is valid, programming in "macros" would seem
>>to limit the degree of subtlety with which creative thought forms can be
>>generated and communicated. This leads me to conclude that to the degree
>>that children are cultivated to make meaning with gross scale macros their
>>understanding of creativity and inclination to pursue serious creativity
>>(in writing, design, or any of the arts, sciences or manual skills) is
>>likely to be limited.

>This may not necessarily be true. Programming with macros, or assembling
>chunks of greater meaning, as opposed to assembling more fundamental units,
>just gives the creator something different to work with. I can think of an
>example in art. Is it more creative to draw a picture using a pencil, or to
>make a collage using clippings from a magazine?

>To me, the creative act is in the "making of meaning", not in the bits and
>chunks a person uses. It could be expressive like the examples you give, or
>it could be receptive in the way that meaning is created when reading a
>text, or viewing a scene, or listening to sounds or people talking.

>Tom

Jim Baker
Understanding begins with finding first principles.

---------------------------------------------------------------






Fri, 29 Jun 2001 03:00:00 GMT  
 LOGO-L> Re: typing vs. clicking (was: Easy Logo for Grades K&1)
I think a collage is both creative and original.

Gary

"Discovery consists of seeing what everybody has seen
and thinking what nobody has thought."
Albert von Szent-Gy{*filter*}i (Nobel prize for 'discovering' Vitamin C)

"Terse is good"

Quote:

> Tom,
>     I think what I had in mind was originality; your example makes my
> point. The pictures of a collage may hold slightly different content for
> each observer, but if they are at all familiar, most observers will likely
> perceive a lot of the same meaning in the images, per se. Their meaning has
> been created and somewhat fixed.
>     How the pictures are used in the collage can easily make a somewhat
> original statement that may have more semantic clarity than the
> non-artistic creator could generate--but isn't the message still somewhat
> fixed by the original art?
>     Suppose, though, the creator had learned art foundations from a young
> age, couldn't he/she generate something entirely original and perhaps more
> true to what he/she thought or felt and wanted to express?
>     Jim


> >>   I believe that three of the essential factors that
> >>determine ability to think creatively and originally are creative
> >>mentoring; wide-ranging experience; and a large repertoire of small meaning
> >>units which can be combined--according to semantic and logical rules--to
> >>construct something new.

> >This is an interesting way to look at it. I would add another vital
> >ingredient: a problem to be solved.

> >>   If this line of reasoning is valid, programming in "macros" would seem
> >>to limit the degree of subtlety with which creative thought forms can be
> >>generated and communicated. This leads me to conclude that to the degree
> >>that children are cultivated to make meaning with gross scale macros their
> >>understanding of creativity and inclination to pursue serious creativity
> >>(in writing, design, or any of the arts, sciences or manual skills) is
> >>likely to be limited.

> >This may not necessarily be true. Programming with macros, or assembling
> >chunks of greater meaning, as opposed to assembling more fundamental units,
> >just gives the creator something different to work with. I can think of an
> >example in art. Is it more creative to draw a picture using a pencil, or to
> >make a collage using clippings from a magazine?

> >To me, the creative act is in the "making of meaning", not in the bits and
> >chunks a person uses. It could be expressive like the examples you give, or
> >it could be receptive in the way that meaning is created when reading a
> >text, or viewing a scene, or listening to sounds or people talking.

> >Tom

> Jim Baker
> Understanding begins with finding first principles.

> ---------------------------------------------------------------




---------------------------------------------------------------





Fri, 29 Jun 2001 03:00:00 GMT  
 LOGO-L> Re: typing vs. clicking (was: Easy Logo for Grades K&1)
Well sometimes terse is not clear...

Let me do a short collage.

The Babylon 5 Deathwalker episode:

Talia          : ... these phrases that you keep speaking in, they don't make any
sense.
Kosh           : Ah, you seek meaning? Then listen to the music, not the song.

The song Franklin's Tower:

If you get confused just listen to the music play
  <http://arts.ucsc.edu/GDead/AGDL/franklin.html>

Then again...

"A new prisoner was going to sleep on his first night in jail. He heard someone
said "12" and a chuckle went around the cell block. Someone else said "37" and
there was another chuckle. This went on for days and he finally asked his cell
mate. It turns out that they had all been there so long that they gave numbers to
jokes and would say the number, instead of the joke. That evening he waited and
said "26". silence... He asked his cell mate and was told 'Some people just can't
tell jokes'"

-----
I took a chance. Not everyone has seen the tv program Babylon 5. So as not to be
cryptic I put in another snippet from a song and included a pointer so people can
get the gist of it. I have hopes that they will click around and find Robert
Hunter's response to Jurgen Fauth's essay. If they don't, such is life.

Read Tom's last two paragraphs below again and then consider...

We are talking about (one of the things we are talking about (-:) programming.
Some of us (because of learning style or because that's the tool we picked up
today) will build little pieces (Tom's macros) some of us will stick them into
big pieces (Microworlds and toontalk are just BIG collections of the little
pieces) and some of us will make a robot scoot across a room. All three
activities are creative.

The person that takes the robot and watches it cross the room may be engaging in
a creative activity. I don't want my daughter spending a lot of time playing with
video games. However, I don't know if that's because playing video games is bad
or if that's because I can't hear her music.

Gary

"Could it not be that art and science are the same efforts to
 understand the world around us. . .  Art  may not allow the
 construction of the space shuttle, but I wonder if it  hasn't
 often been the motivating force behind the drive to do so."

Quote:

> Tom,
>     I think what I had in mind was originality; your example makes my
> point. The pictures of a collage may hold slightly different content for
> each observer, but if they are at all familiar, most observers will likely
> perceive a lot of the same meaning in the images, per se. Their meaning has
> been created and somewhat fixed.
>     How the pictures are used in the collage can easily make a somewhat
> original statement that may have more semantic clarity than the
> non-artistic creator could generate--but isn't the message still somewhat
> fixed by the original art?
>     Suppose, though, the creator had learned art foundations from a young
> age, couldn't he/she generate something entirely original and perhaps more
> true to what he/she thought or felt and wanted to express?
>     Jim


> >>   I believe that three of the essential factors that
> >>determine ability to think creatively and originally are creative
> >>mentoring; wide-ranging experience; and a large repertoire of small meaning
> >>units which can be combined--according to semantic and logical rules--to
> >>construct something new.

> >This is an interesting way to look at it. I would add another vital
> >ingredient: a problem to be solved.

> >>   If this line of reasoning is valid, programming in "macros" would seem
> >>to limit the degree of subtlety with which creative thought forms can be
> >>generated and communicated. This leads me to conclude that to the degree
> >>that children are cultivated to make meaning with gross scale macros their
> >>understanding of creativity and inclination to pursue serious creativity
> >>(in writing, design, or any of the arts, sciences or manual skills) is
> >>likely to be limited.

> >This may not necessarily be true. Programming with macros, or assembling
> >chunks of greater meaning, as opposed to assembling more fundamental units,
> >just gives the creator something different to work with. I can think of an
> >example in art. Is it more creative to draw a picture using a pencil, or to
> >make a collage using clippings from a magazine?

> >To me, the creative act is in the "making of meaning", not in the bits and
> >chunks a person uses. It could be expressive like the examples you give, or
> >it could be receptive in the way that meaning is created when reading a
> >text, or viewing a scene, or listening to sounds or people talking.

> >Tom

> Jim Baker
> Understanding begins with finding first principles.

> ---------------------------------------------------------------




---------------------------------------------------------------





Fri, 29 Jun 2001 03:00:00 GMT  
 LOGO-L> Re: typing vs. clicking (was: Easy Logo for Grades K&1)

Quote:

>We are talking about (one of the things we are talking about (-:) programming.
>Some of us (because of learning style or because that's the tool we picked up
>today) will build little pieces (Tom's macros) some of us will stick them into
>big pieces (Microworlds and toontalk are just BIG collections of the little
>pieces) and some of us will make a robot scoot across a room. All three
>activities are creative.

This question of big vs. little building blocks is at the core of computer
science -- it's the idea of abstraction.  Using bigger building blocks
allows the programmer to handle much bigger (and therefore maybe more
interesting) problems.  The history of programming is a history of greater
and greater abstraction, i.e., bigger blocks.

And in any case there is no lowest level!  Even if you program in machine
language, with very small building blocks, even that is an abstraction over
the underlying circuitry; you could build your own computer out of
transistors instead of using a ready-made computer.  Or you could build
the transistors out of silicon, or build the silicon out of protons and
electrons etc, or build the protons out of quantum thingies...

In terms of creativity, I think what matters is that you take on a
challenge that's appropriate to the size of the building blocks.  So for
example if you're given a pile of Lego bricks, making a robot walk
across the room is a reasonable challenge.  But if you're given a robot,
making it walk across the room is too easy; instead maybe you want to teach
it to follow a maze.



Fri, 29 Jun 2001 03:00:00 GMT  
 LOGO-L> Re: typing vs. clicking (was: Easy Logo for Grades K&1)
In a message dated 1/11/99 7:36:38 PM Mountain Standard Time,

<< or build the silicon out of protons and
 electrons etc, or build the protons out of quantum thingies... >>

This made me giggle.  Thanks!  :)

Lori
---------------------------------------------------------------





Sat, 30 Jun 2001 03:00:00 GMT  
 LOGO-L> Re: typing vs. clicking (was: Easy Logo for Grades K&1)

Quote:

>    Suppose, though, the creator had learned art foundations from a young
>age, couldn't he/she generate something entirely original and perhaps more
>true to what he/she thought or felt and wanted to express?

I think I understand what you're saying... that using units containing more
complex meaning can put you in a mindset or paradigm that is extremely hard
to bust out of. For instance, if I asked students to use logo to draw a
house, and I gave them a procedure called "box," I'd see a lot of boxes for
houses. On the other hand, if all they had were fd, lt, rt, pu, and pd, I'd
see a lot more variation. It is probably true that our selection of medium
and tools directs our thinking and it could limit our solutions. But I would
suggest that it can open new pathways too. Perhaps a student would use the
boxes for bricks. The complexity of meaning issue is relative.

Maybe it's not an essential ingredient for creativity. Maybe creativity
comes about through looking at familiar items in new ways regardless of how
fundamental or complex they may be. If this is true, your creative mentor
would be doubly important.

Tom

---------------------------------------------------------------





Sat, 30 Jun 2001 03:00:00 GMT  
 LOGO-L> Re: typing vs. clicking (was: Easy Logo for Grades K&1)

Quote:
-----Original Message-----


Date: marted 12 gennaio 1999 4.32
Subject: LOGO-L> Re: typing vs. clicking (was: Easy Logo for Grades K&1)


>>We are talking about (one of the things we are talking about (-:)
programming.
>>Some of us (because of learning style or because that's the tool we picked
up
>>today) will build little pieces (Tom's macros) some of us will stick them
into
>>big pieces (Microworlds and toontalk are just BIG collections of the
little
>>pieces) and some of us will make a robot scoot across a room. All three
>>activities are creative.

>This question of big vs. little building blocks is at the core of computer
>science -- it's the idea of abstraction.  Using bigger building blocks
>allows the programmer to handle much bigger (and therefore maybe more
>interesting) problems.  The history of programming is a history of greater
>and greater abstraction, i.e., bigger blocks.

>And in any case there is no lowest level!  Even if you program in machine
>language, with very small building blocks, even that is an abstraction over
>the underlying circuitry; you could build your own computer out of
>transistors instead of using a ready-made computer.  Or you could build
>the transistors out of silicon, or build the silicon out of protons and
>electrons etc, or build the protons out of quantum thingies...

>In terms of creativity, I think what matters is that you take on a
>challenge that's appropriate to the size of the building blocks.  So for
>example if you're given a pile of Lego bricks, making a robot walk
>across the room is a reasonable challenge.  But if you're given a robot,
>making it walk across the room is too easy; instead maybe you want to teach
>it to follow a maze.

It's right, but I also owe to know what a maze is and as to build it.
Matilde

---------------------------------------------------------------





Sat, 30 Jun 2001 03:00:00 GMT  
 
 [ 7 post ] 

 Relevant Pages 

1. LOGO-L> Re: typing vs. clicking (was: Easy Logo for Grades K&1)

2. LOGO-L> typing vs. clicking (was: Easy Logo for Grades K&1)

3. LOGO-L> Easy Logo for Grades K&1

4. [Fwd: LOGO-L> Easy Logo for Grades K&1]

5. LOGO-L> TYPE in MSWLogo vs UCBLogo

6. LOGO-L> Apple logo/MSW Logo

7. LOGO-L> Reseach Machines Logo (RM LOGO)

8. LOGO-L> Welcome to logo-l

9. LOGO-L> Re: Dynamic scope in Logo

10. LOGO-L> INFO re SIG-LOGO

11. LOGO-L> Logo speed

12. LOGO-L> Logo foundation site

 

 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software