Posted by: arieliondotcom | September 15, 2008

Connectivism in Biblical Terms (Part 2)

Forgot to post this last week.  :O

From “Intro to Connective Knowledge by Stephen Downes”

(NOTE:  Text in italics is from the Downes article.  The bold text (BIBLICAL APPLICATION) is my “take” on how Connectivism is really nothing new as stated in part 1 of “Connectivism in Biblical terms”).

“Consequently, it depends crucially on how that set is defined. But membership in a set, in turn, is (typically) based on the properties or qualities of the entities in question. So such membership is based on interpretation, and hence, so is counting. One might be tempted to say that even though applied instances of counting…”  BIBLICAL APPLICATION: JESUS warns those who have “talked the talk” but not “walked the walk” (though they appeared to on the outside) “I never knew you…not even for a moment.” (Matthew 7:21-23)

“…our understanding of the existence of connections, and the nature of the networks they form, is something we bring to the table, an interpretation of what we think is salient…”  BIBLICAL APPLICATION:  “The kingdom of GOD is within you.” (Matthew 17:21)

“…A scalefree network is (as people like Barabasi have shown) distinct from a random network in that some entities in the network have a much higher degree of connectedness than others. “  BIBLICAL APPLICATION:  The apostles were connected much more closely than other disciples were.  Peter, James and John were connected even more closely within the collection of apostles than the other apostles were, to each other and to JESUS, Who took them on special assignments with Him, such as at the healing of a little girl (Mark 5:37), the Transfiguration (Matthew 17:1) and in the Garden of Gethsemene (Mark 14:33).

“…But the mere communication of private knowledge in the public domain does not thereby convert it to public knowledge. It must be interpreted as such, recognized as such, in the public domain. In order for this to happen, the set of utterances (‘Paris is the capital of France’, say) must form a part of of the communications, of the interactions, in the social network as a whole. Then this pattern of communication must in turn be recognized by some perceiver (or group of perceivers) as constituting a relevant underlying organization of communication informaing (say) the
behaviour of a society as a whole. Merely saying ‘Paris is the capital of France’ doesn’t make it so; many other people must say it, and even then, the mere public utterance doesn;t make it so; it be recognized as a constituent element of the body of knowledge possessed by a society…” 
BIBLICAL APPLICATION:  Paul exemplified this in his sermon on Mars Hill in Acts 17.  He defined terms, explained relevant context to the listeners and how the new terms he was about to describe applied. 

Conversely, this backfired when he was mistaken as the god Hermes (Acts 14) when he failed to understand his audience did not perceive what he was talking about and tried to worship him instead of CHRIST.

“…This is why writers such as Wenger find such importance in communities of practice, and more, see such involvement as a process of (as he says) personal becoming. Interaction in a community of practice is to a significant degree an alignment of (certain parts of) one’s personal knowledge with public knowledge – immersion produces a salience of
certain utterances, certain practices, and thus promotes the developement of corresponding (but probably not isomorphic) structures in the mind…”
BIBLICAL APPLICATION:  “Do not forsake the assembly of Believers” (Hebrews 10:25)– it’s in the context of the assembly that one’s own ideas gathered alone and in prayer “in the prayer closet” (Matthew 6:6) are checked against the collective wisdom, teachings, creeds, etc.

“…Cascade phenomena occur when some
event or property sweeps through the network. Cascade phenomena are in one sense difficult to explain, and in another sense deceptively simple…”
BIBLICAL APPLICATION:  Revival.  Sweep of the Spirit in the beginning of Acts (Acts 2:47)

“…Such discussions are difficult to resolve because, as we have seen, what constitutes the ‘truth’ of the matter is very much a matter of interpretation. Truth, as commonly conceived, is said to be based on facts (and mediated through ‘truth-preserving’ inference), but if even the simplest observation depends to a great degree on interpretation, then the foundation of truth itself is equally suspect.  BIBLICAL APPLICATION:  Disagree.  There is Ultimate Truth.  JESUS is THE Truth, (John 14:6) regardless of our interpretation of Him as such, understanding of Him as such, or acceptance of Him as such.  “Let GOD be True, though every man a liar.” (Romans 3:4) His Truthfulness has nothing to do with our understanding of “facts”, but neither does it have to do with perception.  It is beyond human reflection or understanding but intrinsic to Himself.  He is the “really real reality”, whether or not we can comprehend what that means.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: