Five Minds for the Future - Howard Gardner

These 5 minds are not to confused with the multiple intelligences for which Gardner is famous. Different intelligences are needed to successfully apply these minds.




• The disciplinary mind - mastery of major schools of thought (including science, mathematics and history) and of at least one professional craft




• The synthesizing mind - ability to integrate ideas from different disciplines or spheres into a coherent whole and to communicate that integration to others




• The creating mind - capacity to uncover and clarify new problems, questions and phenomena




• The respectful mind - awareness of and appreciation for differences in human beings




• The ethical mind - fulfillment of one's responsibilities as a worker and a citizen

This is not a scholarly work, more of a manifesto or white paper. [Albeit a bit long. Read the first and last chapters to see if you want to read the rest.]

I did not find anything fundamentally new here, which I guess means that I agree with most of his premise. He does say that one could make other lists of minds, but these are the ones he has chosen and is willing to defend the choice. I am willing to defer to his expertise in the field in choosing these particular minds.

What was most striking is how little we seem to know about educating all but the first of the minds. But that is also likely an indication of my ignorance.

The respectful mind is something that really ought to be the province of education (as in, 'education broadens the mind'). But for exactly the same reasons that this mind may not be nurtured at done at home and in the ambient culture, it is also highly charged politically - making it difficult to do with public/tax-payers money.

I was not able to completely understand the difference between synthesis and creation. Even he agrees that they are closely linked. The main thing that I took away is that synthesis can be acknowledged by experts in the field immediately. Creation requires the passage of time, and looking back one can see the point at which the creative act changed the future. (But I think that is true for synthesis too, because not all synthesis live into the future.) Also synthesis works within the disciplinary tradition, creation often seeks to break out of those bonds.

I think Gardner delved too long on synthesis being inter-disciplinary. Yes, it does involve a meta level of thinking about the problem, but that does not necessarily require going out of the domain.

To me synthesis is more about integration, than being inter-disciplinary. It is creative, because it brings together seemingly disparate ideas. The key here is seemingly - because most people do not see the integration until it is pointed out to them. To see what no one else has seen is the creative act.

Anyway, it is not that clear how to teach synthesis, but his point about practising it as much as possible is well taken.

Creation continues to be a black box - we know what can hamper it, but not what fosters it. The best that Gardner could say is that 5 year-olds have it. And all that we can strive for is to keep that 5 year-old alive as long as possible. Sadly most formal education does exactly the opposite. The act of escaping 'schooling' (for those who do) usually leads to a traumatic childhood.

Of course the ethical mind is particularly relevant at present, as we collectively pay for an excess of gluttony (both on the part of individual debt holders and investors). Gardner rightly says that the formal education system comes low down in its influence (or at least ought to). The religious / spiritual framework of societies ought to be taking the lead here. And perhaps because I grew up in a deeply religious community, I have no trouble agreeing with most or all of what he says. Yet, at the same time I worry. Global society is becoming more secular, which in turn propels the organized religions to wraps their cloaks tighter around themselves, becoming more fundamentalist as a result - and with that the shrinking of the respectful mind.

In the context of the ethical mind, it strikes me that educators are fundamentally socialists at heart. (probably ties in in some way with the economics of education). Which raises an interesting tension - because contemporary US society clearly believes in market capitalism and a competitive landscape.

Some quotes:

Science... is not the only ... area of knowledge. ... Because
of its current societal hegemony, the aforementioned fix on science tends to squeeze out these other topics. p14-15.

[Favorite topic of mine] I think the school curriculum is packed as it is. To add anything else, either requires squeezing everything else, or removing something else. I feel the long-term way forward is to take out as much knowledge as is not critically important, and then spend the extra time going deep enough in the remaining topics to solidify the skills and develop the minds.

Quoting Plato, "Through education we need to help students
find pleasure in what they have to learn." p41

Interesting take there - it is not just about adapting to the learners perception of what is likable or fun, but leading the learner to finding the pleasure.

The most common form of synthesis is the narrative - a form
accessible to almost everyone. p53

I feel that there is something about our evolution as a civilized society that makes the narrative the most compelling form of transmitting what is important down through the generations. Teaching of math and science seems to ignore this. Not sure why.

.. an educational system is not worthy of its name unless
its representatives can clearly articulate what the system is striving to
achieve and what is seeks to avoid or curtail. p 166

He mentions this at least a couple of times, both at the very start and the very end. And I agree. As a parent I see too much discussion (at all levels) and energy on what is happening, or not happening, or should be happening, in the classroom. But, apart from the ubiquitous mission statement, next to nothing on what are the present goals at any given stage or level.