Skip to main content

What If We Addressed Problems Holistically


What If…

We treated problems holistically instead of individually?

              One of the things I realized early on in my adult education was the relationship between seemingly disparate ideas. My bachelor’s degree focused on the relationship between biological equilibrium, environmental factors, and the mental reaction of individuals. From the beginning, I knew that it was folly to think that any of these categories could be studied in a vacuum. It did not take long for me to realize that it was not only in my own specialty that this was true, but in many other aspects of life. Yet, the compartmentalized view of the world is how the general populace perceives its environment, and social problems in particular.

              As an educator, I found myself unable to teach only the subject with which I was tasked. I found the need for students to be able to express themselves in written and verbal form necessary to master the scientific concepts I was mandated to teach. I also knew that a comfort level with basic algebra was required in order to see the patterns and relationships between scientific phenomena. I am fortunate enough to be able to teach and develop these related skills in my classroom, but have come across far too many colleagues who are either unable or unwilling to do the same. The difficulty of this task increases with age, as the ability gap increases and the assumptions of understanding are greater.

              This trend is present in all other aspects of human life, whether it be poverty or climate change, income inequality or crime rates, xenophobia or individuality. Even though all of these factors are related and impact each other, whether for good or ill, lawmakers and the wealthy choose to deal with them as though they can be fixed independent of one another. While some relationships are more direct and obvious, such as those in physical science, the more pernicious ones resemble the relationships in life sciences, which are multivariate and contain an almost infinite amount of possible outcomes. It is here that trends and statistics inform what the most effective solutions can be to these complex problems.

              All of these problems can be alleviated, if not solved, if we as social creatures acted in concert for the benefit of everyone. This can only be done well if we develop complex solutions implemented with surgical precision at the sources of the problems. Band-aids are no longer acceptable to treat bullet wounds that have become, in many aspects, infected by the secondary infection of problems only created by neglect of the original injury.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Viral Candidate - Housing

Am I actually running for president? Not now. I am reasonable enough to know that an idea borne of frustration at lacking a candidate that represents me and my family is not going to change the world. But an idea can change the world, and these generations are the ones most capable of doing so. I am going to dream of a world where no one is hungry, thirsty, or at the mercy of the elements. If I was running for president, I would need to explain my platform, get feedback, and adapt it to the needs of each community. The problem is most people focus on one or two issues and try to solve them independently. What I have learned as a science teacher and a student of the social sciences is that many issues are intertwined and need to be addressed as a whole, instead of in parts, if they are going to be any good for the average American.               For example, I want to tackle homelessness. That is a doozy and requires so...

Musing on the News - Book Bans

                 Time published an article on 4/20 titled “New Report Finds That Book Bans Have Reached Their Highest Levels Yet.” As an avid reader I am immediately bothered by this, but I think it is worth explaining why.               First, over half the country is functionally illiterate, and even more don’t like to read, so who are we banning books for, anyway? It’s not like online ads that subliminally change your thinking. If you want to read a book, you have to physically get it, let someone else know what you’re reading (checking it out of a library or buying it in a store), and spend hours reading the material, depending on how fast you read. Reading is also self-selecting, as you can figure out by the book cover and back if you want to spend the time to decipher its contents. Reading social media and news is anonymous (except for the data points being collected on ...