📘 Part 3: Learning and young children

Rory, why do children like learning songs and poems?

Well, I'm not actually sure it's a human universal, but most of them seem to. They probably like the rhythm and rhyme and they're quite catchy and memorable. So that helps them a lot when they have to, well, when everything else seems so abstract or unconnected to reality, that can be very useful, can't it?

What can people learn from songs and poems?

I imagine just about anything, to be honest. Lots of political and social commentary runs through music. You can recall different kinds of information. So it's a useful tool for memorization. And of course, there are various musical skills you can pick up. And I suppose you could learn if you're good with music or completely tone-deaf like me.

Do you think it's easier for children to learn a song or a poem than for adults?

Well, that's probably a matter of the complexity of the content and the time that you have to learn it. For example, when you're a child, usually you have more free time and focus in classes. You can get it faster. Though adults are more capable of nuance, so more complex meaning can only be conveyed by them.

Do you think that learning songs and poems is a waste of time?

I used to think it was, but now I'm increasingly coming to the conclusion that it might actually be crucial for teaching, which is actually bad news for me because I can't sing.

Let's talk about learning in school, how useful is it for school children to learn facts about the world like dates and history?

I think some key dates and events help people reference their cultural touchstones more effectively, though, memorizing your entire national history in some sort of, I don't know, rote learning format probably isn't very useful. That's what you have an encyclopedia for.

What are the ways which can help schoolchildren remember new information?

Well, we already talked about songs, but there are abbreviations and other mnemonic devices. Probably novelty in terms of information and media that would play a part too. For example, new information, and if it's presented in a new format, it's easier. It's more memorable.

Is it important to teach schoolchildren how to find or check information for themselves?

Oh, it's essential. I mean, you can't do all the thinking for them and they have to grow up at some point. It doesn't have to be as abrupt as saying now you find out everything for yourself, but like some small projects can be a useful starting point and then just expand from there.

Let's not talk about the value of knowledge. Should public money be used to fund museums today?

I didn't used to think so, but now probably, generally, yes, at least in part. If you think about it, like museums preserve part of a nation's culture and a nation is its culture, then it seems logical to do so. It's like self-preservation, really. Though there are obviously some drawbacks to this because you have to decide which things should be funded, in which things shouldn't. You can't give money to everything.

Do you agree that each generation depends on the knowledge acquired by previous generations?

Well, it doesn't come from nowhere, does it? Similarly, it's not the be all and end all. I mean, this gives them a foundation to move from, but they can't just sit on what's known. They need to push further.

Does society need more people with broad general knowledge or more people with specialist knowledge?

Well, I'm not sure it's helpful to phrase it in such black and white terms. It depends on the level at which we are asked to operate. I mean, for example, we all need a general understanding of the culture we're in to relate to each other effectively. But to fix specific problems in the world requires some specialist knowledge and a corresponding general awareness to understand what's happening. Vaguely, if not specifically. So the short answer is it depends on what you're talking about. And the long answer is you need both in order to have a functioning society. -