Klarinet Archive - Posting 000136.txt from 2004/08

From: ormondtoby@-----.net (Ormondtoby Montoya)
Subj: Re: [kl] Different worlds....
Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 10:58:34 -0400

Joe Wakeling wrote:

> None of the really good ideas seem to come out
> of "quantification".

I wouldn't go *that* far, Joe. Physics has plenty of examples ---
including quanta & relativity & superstrings and astronomy --- where
important and brilliant discoveries were made precisely because certain
numbers 'didn't add up'.

However, I don't think any person who seriously participates in music
will accept, either consciously or subconsciously, the proposition that
"If you can't quantify it, you can't do it well" in all cases. In some
cases? Yes. Always? No. Probably it's closer to 50/50 in our daily
lives.

==========================

Klarinet has discussed music education many times. The usual 'pro'
arguments are that music contributes to mathematical understanding,
builds self-esteem via "This-is-me-I'm-unique" realizations, stimulates
team-playing and socialization and good citizenship, improves physical
dexterity, exercises more of the brain, and so forth.

While all of this is true, I cannot recall anyone at a PTA or school
board meeting ever saying that music education is worthwhile precisely
because it builds modes of thinking that do *not* yield to
quantification. This is a more explicit and meaningful statement than
simply "Artistic sensitivity is important" or "Children need art in
order to be complete human beings."

I'm going to remember this if I get involved again in a
pro-music-education effort.

"Hey folks, you can't solve a lot of problems if you can't think without
measuring first."

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Klarinet is a service of Woodwind.Org, Inc. http://www.woodwind.org