Mind Like Child

Gavel Time: Footnote 4 and US vs. Carolene Products

Guest Post by Dodge Grootemaat

Hi, everybody! Today we have our first guest post by a very dear friend of mine, Dodge Grootemaat. (Seriously, that's his name. It's like he walked straight out of a detective novel!) Dodge graduated from Baylor University magna cum laude, honors with distinction, then went on to graduate from University of Texas School of Law. These days he's Litigation Counsel for Hewlett-Packard. Enjoy! - Damon

You’ve probably seen a footnote before. It's a tiny little number that usually comes at the end of a sentence, like this.¹ After seeing the number, you can then look down at the bottom of the page (or at the end of the chapter) and find a more in-depth explanation of something. However, if you’re anything like most people, you pay no attention to footnotes. (It’s ok, I’m like most people too). After all, footnotes are in a small font and they’re down at the bottom and “ain’t nobody got time for that!” But did you know that a single footnote has helped to shape the course of America’s legal history? 

Footnote 4 from the case U.S. v. Carolene Products was the most important part of that entire case, and it has had a major impact on history as we know it. It was 1938, and America was still staggering through the Great Depression. In hopes of trying to increase profits, the Carolene Products Company started mixing coconut oil into their milk and selling it as a product called “Milnut.” Unfortunately for Carolene Products, the US Congress had previously passed a law called “The Filled Milk Act” which made it illegal for companies to mix any other types of fats into the milk they sold. The Filled Milk Act was intended to protect everyday people from drinking harmful substances mixed in with their milk. Consider if you will, The Simpsons' take on 'malk'.²

 

Book Review: You Can't Say You Can't Play by Vivian Paley

Posted by Damon O'Hanlon

Title: You Can't Say You Can't Play

Author: Vivian Gussin Paley

ISBN: 978-0674965904

Grade: A+

Vivian Gussin Paley is a kindergarten teacher with a simple problem, classroom exclusion. During activities led by a teacher, we would never allow one child to say to another, “You can’t play!” Yet during free time, Paley comes to realize that such harsh declarations are tolerated without much question. In her mind she begins to concoct a straightforward solution—a new rule posted on her classroom wall: “You can’t say you can’t play.” But can such a rule really work? 

You Can’t Say You Can’t Play is divided into four sections. First, Paley identifies and describes the problem: At play time, certain kids tend to become ‘the bosses’. They make up the game and get to decide who does and doesn’t get to play. Day after day (and eventually year after year), the same kids tend to become the bosses, and the same kids end up being excluded.

Share Time: Kids Can't Thrive Unless They're Fit

Posted by Damon O'Hanlon

As you might expect, most conversations about children's health tend to focus on the word "healthy". You’re probably thinking, "Well…. duh!" But follow me for a minute, and I'll show you how – especially when it comes to children’s health – 'healthy' is kind of a lame word.

Why so? At best, people have a vague understanding of what it means to be healthy. Healthy is often taken to be self-evident. It’s obvious, like being awake or not awake. No further thought or explanation needed.

Well, such non-explanations have never been satisfying to me. The things we take for granted are often the best things to question. (Or so my anthropology spidey-sense tells me.)

When pressed, most people reveal a shallow, dichotomous understanding of health. You're unhealthy if something is wrong with you—if your breathing is labored, or your joints ache, or if you have colitis. In the absence of such things, congratulations! You (or your kids) are healthy.

Four things really trouble me about this way of thinking:

1. First of all, it turns 'healthy' into the default state. If nothing is afflicting you, then you're healthy. So if you can just avoid the correct things, you'll stay in the normal healthy state. No 'doing' required — just not doing.

2. It makes the process of being healthy unnecessarily vague and abstract. If the process of being healthy is to simply stay away from all this bad stuff, how am I supposed to keep that miles-long-laundry-list of bad stuff in my head at all times?

3. It sets the bar pretty low. "As long as I'm not downright miserable, I must be healthy."

4. The "healthy is merely not unhealthy" line of thinking somewhat robs healthfulness of its point. You're not seeking health for any positive reasons.

Being healthy is not pointless, and it’s not about avoiding things and hoping to end up "normal" or even just not miserable. Also, being healthy takes a lot of doing, and we would see this more clearly if we actually paid less attention to the word ‘healthy’ and more attention to the word ‘fit’. I don't necessarily mean fit as in strong, or the British slang fit which means 'attractive'. I mean fit as in "fit for [fill in the blank]".

As an example, earlier in my life I suffered a minor back injury, from which I'm now glad to say I’ve recovered. But for a time, I had gotten sort of complacent about it. My back had gone from worse to a little better, and I sort of accepted this would be how things were for the rest of my life. Then one day, something struck me.

By teaching karate, I've proudly helped to raise many children. But, if things with my back remained as they were, when I finally did have children of my own, I wouldn’t be able to run and play with them. I was not "Fit enough to play with my own children." You can bet that I woke right up out of my complacency.

Book Review: Sofia's Dream

Posted by Karen O'Hanlon

Title: Sofia’s Dream

Author: Land Wilson

Illustrator: Sue Cornelison

ISBN: 978-0-9829938-1-1

Grade: A

When I first saw Sofia’s Dream sitting out on a table, I was immediately drawn to it. The cover scene is so alluring with its soft, dreamlike greens, whites and peaches. A little girl with wide, bright eyes sails head-first through the night-time sky, arms outstretched, palms open. She is angled across the cover in a way that suggests three-dimensions. Her large, round face is near, her feet small and distant. It exudes a sense of awe and mystery. What might the inside pages reveal?

You’ll not be disappointed. Such mysterious beauty extends throughout Sofia’s Dream. A subtle display of shimmers and shadows threads the story together, tying each page to the one before and the one after. Of course, the artwork is a treat, but a great children’s book must also offer an imaginative story and engaging language. Here, Sofia’s Dream also delights.

Little Sofia is fascinated by the moon. She watches it often and speaks to it as a friend. To her surprise, the moon begins to speak back. One evening the moon, blue and sad, beckons Sofia to visit. There is something she must see. In a dream, she travels to the moon’s side. With the moon as her guide, she gazes downward and begins to see just how delicate the earth is. It dangles like a small marble in the vastness of space. But the earth is not only blue, white, and green. It’s beginning to show some hues of brown. In conversing with the moon, Sofia realizes that the earth is afflicted with polluted lands, water and air. Her sense of responsibility grows, and Sofia sees that everyone has an obligation to be more sensitive to our shared home. On the final page Sofia is shown planting a delicate yet radiant tree, the sort which any arborist would be proud to have in their garden.

The text itself has a slow and rhythmic cadence, built of rhymes and unexpected sprinklings of vocabulary. Not many children’s books employ words like ‘awareness’, ‘opal’ and ‘crescent.’ Younger children will likely need some adult help to understand both the vocabulary and the story. However, the benefit of the story’s more complex concepts is that it will lend itself to multiple readings as children grow older and their comprehension develops.

Sofia’s Dream moves beyond the simple attraction of a beautifully written and engaging story. From a child’s perspective, and for that matter, the perspective of many adults, the earth is vast and unlimited. It seems that it can’t possibly be used up. But Sofia’s Dream uses its subtle beauty to encourage the contemplation of earth’s finite qualities. It fosters the sense of simultaneous wonder and responsibility we humans have—to take care of our only home. Sofia’s Dream is a great Earth Day read, or on any other day for that matter.

Related links:

• Sofia's Dream on Amazon
• Book Review: The Gunniwolf
• Book Review: Saint George and the Dragon

Is Eating Organic Snobby?

Posted by Damon O'Hanlon

Awhile back, Catherine McCord wrote a piece over at The Huffington Post discussing the public’s attitude toward organic food. Specifically, she mentions a teacher who was "talking to parents about the importance of serving organic food at school". The parents’ response? No way! Their reasoning? They didn’t want their kids to become snobs. 

If you haven't read McCord’s piece, it’s interesting and worth a quick read. Basically, McCord reiterates the benefits of organic food and takes issue with the idea that ‘organic is snobby’. While I found myself generally agreeing with McCord, something about her approach left me unsatisfied. Weeks later I finally realized what it was.

McCord begins her 'organic is not snobby' argument by citing income statistics. For instance, one poll found that people highly prefer organic, "regardless of income brackets". Another study showed people who earn $30,000 a year and have kids buy more organic food than richer folk and those without kids.

I understand McCord’s point – that organics aren’t just for wealthy, excessive types. I wonder, though... Is that really the kind of "snobby" most often associated with organics? Maybe my perspective has become skewed from living in Santa Cruz for so long, but it seems to me that the kind of snobbery usually (not necessarily fairly) associated with organics is of another variety. The ‘look at that hipster who has an extra buck for organic avocados because he thinks he knows so much better than the rest of us’ variety.

The hit show Portlandia bases some of its humor on satirizing people with this extreme avant-garde demeanor. I'm not saying that I think this portrayal gives a more accurate impression of the people buying organic—just that McCord seems to be lending too much attention to the wrong stereotype. After all, snobbery isn't really restricted by social status or income, is it? Snobbery is an attitude, an attitude that anybody could possess. There are caviar snobs, and then there are fast food snobs.

In her article, McCord also takes the farm corporations to task. She accuses agribusiness of fighting food transparency, and trying to portray organics as "part of an elitist, liberal agenda". She even infers that, in their greed, these companies may be causing early puberty! (Which, based on the evidence, may well be accurate.) 

With all these criticisms of Big Agribusiness, I'm surprised McCord does not mention their spurious co-opting of the term ‘organic’. By now it's well-covered that labeling food as organic is a lucrative business for the the farming industry. While watering down (polluting?) the quality of their so-called organics, Big Food companies have slapped a higher price tag on organics and made them available at most every store I’ve ever seen in California (and on my recent trip to Oregon). If indeed there is a perception that ‘organics are for rich folk’, isn’t it because these companies made organics pervasively available, but always at a premium price? It’s kind of like a first-class versus coach grocery shopping experience. McCord paints a picture of ‘organic against the food industry’, when in fact by now the term “organic” has also been largely borrowed and stolen by the food industry.

Lastly, McCord’s entire article focuses on the health of you and your family — a matter of great importance. So why then was it necessary, at the very end of her article, to sneak in a reference to "the health of our planet"? In my view, this is the greatest of all McCord’s misstep. I mean, for the purpose of making a good argument, was our health (and the health of our children) not strong enough to stand on its own? Making a last-second appeal for the survival of the entire earth positions McCord as something of a savior figure. What’s more, because earthly survival went previously unmentioned and unsubstantiated, she comes off as the type of savior whose advice we’re supposed to follow because, you know, it’s so obviously correct. It doesn’t bear the need for evidence or explanation.

I’m not sure whether McCord did this knowingly or unknowingly – she seems nice, so I like to give her the benefit of the doubt – but I do know that it could easily perpetuate the idea that ‘those organic eaters just think they know so much better than the rest of us.’

Related links:

• What is Anthropology?
• Karen's Classroom: Coffee Can Ice Cream
• Damon's Blacktop: Suruchin Game

Welcome, Ultimate Blog Partyers!

My name is Karen.

When I was a child my favorite game was to gather up the neighborhood kids and ‘play school’ (much to my parents' amusement). Lots of kids play school, but my school was serious! It was invitation only, and I only invited the kids who actually needed learning help. I would provide chalkboards, paper, pencils, and books. Then I’d get my little 10-year-old self up in front of everybody and teach numbers, basic letters, and reading. And you know what? I never put ‘school’ away with my other toys as I grew older. After decades of teaching, I finally retired. Or did I? Nowadays, I pour that passion into Mind Like Child. I'm very pleased to meet you!

 

And my name is Damon.

I felt like I’d been round-kicked in the chest. The air went right out of me. All the kids were pointing and laughing at Caleb. And all I’d asked was, “Anybody have fun Halloween plans?” All he’d said was, “My family doesn’t celebrate Halloween.” I didn’t choose (or even know) Caleb’s family values, but I still felt responsible for his sudden ridicule. That was my first classroom failure, one of many. I was 17 years old. But just as a black belt is a white belt that never gave up, I learned from my mistakes. These days, I humbly consider myself to be 'a black belt at working with kids’, in addition to being a black belt karate instructor. I co-author this parenting and teaching blog to share all that I’ve learned. Thankfully, I have the best partner imaginable. My mom, and hero, Karen. はじめまして (Nice to meet you!)

But hang on a sec! There's more. And by more, we mean prizes....

Do you appreciate good children's books? Like, really, really, really good children's books? Then you're in luck! So do we, and for the Ultimate Blog Party we're giving away four to one lucky winner. These are award-winning books from the outstanding Little Pickle Press. So head on over to the prize page and enter for your chance to win.

A special thanks to Janice and Susan of 5 Minutes for Mom. They're the gracious hosts of the Ultimate Blog Party, allowing us to connect with our fellow bloggers. If you'd like to connect with us, leave a comment below, like our facebook page, and follow us on twitter.

Book Review: Brain Bugs by Dean Buonomano

Posted by Damon O'Hanlon

Title: Brain Bugs: How The Brain's Flaws Shape Our Lives

Author: Dean Buonomano

ISBN: 978-0393076028

Grade: B

There was something immediately appealing about Brain Bugs as it sat on the local library’s shelf. It was not the bright yellow jacket. Actually, I've come across numerous brain books sporting a certain jaundiced vibrancy. (Are they all relying on the same study revealing yellow’s neurological attractiveness in order to sell their books?) Instead it was simply the title. Ours is an era of amazing new brain discoveries, which have in turn led to some pretty hagiographic accounts of the human brain’s abilities. An exploration of the brain, framed in terms of its weaknesses, seemed to promise a welcome relief from the typical self-aggrandized monotony, and Brain Bugs certainly delivers. 

For much of Brain Bugs, neurologist Dean Buonomano does not use or rely upon overly scientific language. While perhaps a touch dry for the casual reader, it’s certainly leagues more accessible than a typical academic work (the way it explains involved ideas with such a limited number of graphics is a tribute to just how well-written it is). From a technical standpoint, the beginning actually proves to be the most difficult part of the entire book. The first few pages are littered with terms like "synapse", "node" and "action potential". Since the first chapter's focus is on the basic working pieces of the brain, I’m not sure Buonomano has much choice. If you are without a biochem or neuroscience background, it might be a modest struggle. But if you can get through these early ideas, you'll be rewarded. The stage is being set for a host of thought-provoking observations and explanations.

Chris' SAT Questions: Permutations, Combinations, Oh My! (Part 1)

Guest Post by Chris Seymour

Some math problems on the SAT ask you to count the number of possible ways to do something. Now, you might be thinking, “Come on, Chris, everyone already knows how to count!” But counting problems on the SAT are not as simple as counting on your fingers and toes. Take the following example question: 

In order to solve this particular kind of problem, we'll have to tackle two concepts, permutations and combinations. Sound intimidating? You're not alone. Permutation and combination problems are a unique sort of problem on the SAT. To make matters worse, most math classes will tell you to solve these problems using exotic-looking formulas, such as:

24 Tips for an Awesome Presentation

Posted by Damon O'Hanlon

The dreaded ‘slideshow presentation’. We’ve all sat through some terrible ones. Which is tragic, considering that a few simple tips could save the world from hours and hours of mind-numbing boredom. But in truth, most people were never taught how to do a presentation the right way. It's never too late, though, so don’t be a murderer of fun and clarity. Learn these tips, and wow everyone at your next presentation.

1. Pre-write before you begin making any slides

Before you even fire up your presentation-making-software, sit down and make an outline or draw a flowchart.

You’re telling a story here. In most cases, your presentation should have a hook, a beginning, a middle, and an end. Maybe you introduce a problem, discuss its facets, and conclude with a solution. Maybe you ask a question, which gets explored, and ultimately leads to an answer.

Get the story of your presentation hammered out, and then shape your slides to help you tell that story.

 

2. Start with a blank or ‘title’ slide

What is a Theory?

Posted by Damon O'Hanlon

For many people, ‘theory’ is an intimidating word. After all, it's often put alongside other words that sound intimidating like ‘quantum’, or ‘epistemological’. 

But what if I told you theory was actually very simple. So simple, in fact, that anybody could understand theory, and use it to their advantage all the time?

Read this post from top to bottom and you'll understand all of the following:

• What is a theory? How is a theory different from an ‘idea’ or ‘concept’?
• How do people use theories to understand the world?
• Why are some disagreements resolvable while others seem to be irresolvable?
• How can you use theory to better understand the thinking of others?
• And more…

Ready to jump in? Remember, have no fear. Absolutely everyone can understand theory. First though, we’ll need to clarify a common misconception.

Isn't a theory just an idea? Isn't any idea a theory?

In casual speech, the word ‘theory’ is often used interchangeably with the word ‘idea’. Now, this association can be hard to sort out because of the broad way that ‘idea’ is usually defined and used. For instance, an idea can refer to any of the following: