Writing is Thinking

It is often said that you don’t truly understand something until you have to explain it to someone else. This is true, I think, for two reasons. The first is simply self-awareness. Clearly, it is difficult to understand what you don’t know, and it is difficult to be aware of your own level of ignorance until your “student” asks a question that you cannot even begin to answer. This self-awareness is generated not only by the inquiries of others, but through your own preparation. Planning for a presentation, anticipating the questions that others will ask and preparing to answer them in a way that they will understand requires you to automatically focus your own studying on the most confusing parts of the material.

The more fundamental reason that true understanding comes through teaching is that you cannot fully understand an idea until you can fully articulate it. Indeed, the articulation of thoughts is the only process by which thoughts are actually completed. Stuck in your head, the concepts you grapple with and the conclusions you come to, along with the intervening analysis, is loose and sloppy and incomplete. To expose these thoughts to the real world, to draw them out and have them stand on their own requires much refinement and supporting elaboration, a process that doesn’t occur without the necessity for it, such as when the thoughts are allowed to remain in your mind.

We think that we know what we think. But, in fact, we really only think the first part of our thoughts. The rest is left incomplete. We don’t realize this until we need to complete the thought. We don’t realize that we never finish our thoughts in our own head until the thought leaves our head. To complete every thought would be too cumbersome, too time-consuming. And, for most thoughts, completion isn’t necessary. It’s much easier for us to let the thought trail off into a general assumption that we know what we think. We do this for all of our thoughts; in the safety and comfort of our own minds, we never bother completing them.

Consider, for example, a mathematical proof. We are, all of us, capable of amazing mathematical calculations in our heads. These calculations seem simple, fast, even obvious. But, when required by our geometry teachers to write out every step of the process that led from the problem presented to us to our offered solution, it becomes clear that quite a bit of thinking went into forming our answer. We don’t realize this when doing the math in our heads because our brain speeds through the intervening steps; it barely begins a thought before moving onto the next one. Again, the full articulation of one’s thinking process is not always necessary. But, as I’m sure your math teachers have explained, the mathematical proof is inquantifiably more defensible and respected than a simple assertion that the answer is X. Moreover, if there is an error in your thinking, only the proof can reveal the mistake; the formless mass of your mental processes is not subject to critical evaluation. But mathematical proofs are useful for more than comparing your answer with a colleague’s. They’re important because it is only by writing out the proof that you become aware of the thinking that actually went into your intuition. We know a line is crooked because we know what’s straight. But it’s not until you are forced to explain yourself that you come to understand what straight really is.

This is why I stress the importance of writing. Writing is thinking. There will be opportunities during this program to present your findings and teach others what you have learned. These will be opportunities to solidify your own understanding of the problem you face, the information you find, and the solution you come to. However, you shouldn’t wait for such a moment. Playing with your problem, recording your findings, and crafting a solution, when done through writing, requires you to fully articulate your thinking on the topic and forces you to understand what you’re saying just as effectively as teaching the material to another person would. 

This project is about thinking and, more specifically, developing your thinking faculties. The best way to do this is to write. A certain number of journals will be required of you; there’s no need to limit yourself to that number. Every piece of writing you do will help your thinking progress and reinforce your understanding of what you’re learning. Moreover, you will be able to discover things and develop your ideas in ways that wouldn’t be possible if your thoughts were contained in the formless soup of your cranium. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve actually realized (learned) something about a topic while writing about it. Actually, I can: every time. Writing is the greatest tool available to you in your studies, and you will be amazed at what a tool it can be.

How The Free Market Provides Better Solutions Than The Government, With Special Reference To Education

*Originally written 09/08/2016*

In discussions of the educational system, libertarians fervently and consistently call for privatization. By this we do not mean marginal steps toward privatization, such as the commissioning of more charter schools or the institution of a voucher system, but rather the complete eradication of government influence from the education process. Indeed, this is the libertarian position on most, if not all, government functions. Now, upon hearing us repeat our standard line, “Let the free market handle it,” our opponents often accuse us of having no real plan or of being naive to believe that the free-market-way is always the best way. Of course, privatization is a plan, unless by “plan” they actually mean “policy-proposal,” in which case they would be absolutely correct. However, the charge of naivete, at least, is radically misplaced. The free market will always provide a better solution to any social issue than the government ever would.

I will freely admit that I do not know, with absolute certainty, what the best way of organizing our education system would be. I can, with some confidence, however, predict a few changes from our current system that would characterize a free market in education. For example, the government’s emphasis on treating all children alike and, more significantly, attempting to make all children alike would be completely abandoned. It is obvious that all children are different, with different abilities, interests, aptitudes, and rates of comprehension. However, the government operates under the assumption that, if all children are taught in the same way, they will all learn at the same pace and end up at the same place. The government also assumes that its standardized curriculum is equally relevant and useful to all students. In contrast, in a free market the focus would be on the individual child. With no higher motive but to serve the consumer, I foresee education firms specializing to an incredible degree. I believe that different schools would be available to children depending on their academic abilities, interests, learning styles, and life goals. More importantly, enrollment at any particular school would be completely voluntary, incentivizing schools to constantly improve themselves in an effort to attract students away from their competition.

In truth, however, I don’t know exactly what a free market in education would look like, nor do I have any comprehensive vision of what it should look like. This does not, however, make my support of privatization an act of naivete or blind faith. On the contrary, it makes my support of privatization an act of wisdom and humility. You see, to support the free market is not to support a specific plan; it is to support the freedom of every individual to try his own plan.

Despite rhetoric to the contrary, the market cannot magically solve all of our problems. Only people can. The market is simply a process through which millions of people with different knowledge and abilities can contribute their ideas and efforts toward solving any social problem. To support the market is to support a system that allows for many competing experiments and then, through profit and loss, naturally discovers the solutions appropriate to every set of circumstances. To support the market is actually an acknowledgement of one’s inability to solve society’s problems by oneself. It is a call for all members of society to try every possible solution and discover the best solution together. As my friend Louis Rouanet puts it, “Markets are the solution to the problem of finding solutions.”

In light of this exposition, it should be evident that the government, which can only attempt one possible solution at a time and, without economic calculation, cannot even rationally evaluate the results of its attempt, can not hope to compete with the free market in finding ways to improve our school system. This also applies to all other areas of our life that are subject to government intervention. When libertarians advocate for privatization, we are not claiming to know a better method of educating children than the government or other reformers. Rather, we are simply asserting that there is a better method, and that it can only be found if we have the freedom to search for it.

J3 - Beginning the Research

Since I plan on focusing a large part of my project on providing a proper elucidation of economic concepts, I’ve decided to begin my research my making sure that I have a solid grasp of these concepts myself. I have a degree in economics, but any monkey could get one of those. I’ve taught economics on the college level, which is something that a monkey would probably not be able to do, but that doesn’t unreservedly qualify me as an expert in economic matters. I know a lot, but there’s always more to learn. For example, while preparing to deliver a lecture on the business cycle to some high school classes, I learned that the price of consumer goods is what is imputed backwards and determines the price of the producer goods, rather than the value of the consumer goods, as I had believed. Upon discovering this new information, I found that it made perfect sense to me; nevertheless, I had been mistaken about the process by which producer goods are appraised. Moreover, I’ve just spent a year in law school, which force-fed me so much information that quite a bit of what I once knew has been pushed out of my head. A refresher course is in order.

Therefore, I’m beginning my project by reading Human Action by Ludwig von Mises, a brilliant treatise on economics. To be honest, this is a little cheating on my part; I’m actually reading Human Action in preparation for an economics symposium I’m participating in next week. Still, this reading will be not only useful but critical to the success of my project. Mises was perhaps the greatest economist the world has ever seen, and Human Action is his magnum opus. There are more complete treatments of economics available (for example, Rothbard’s Man, Economy, and State), but none of them focus on the parts I’d like to focus on for my project: the solid grounding and unbelievably thorough explanation of the most fundamental principles. Therefore, I think it’s fortunate that I’m already reading this book, as it is the most appropriate choice for a solid foundation for further research and for the project as a whole.