Understanding

Trying to understand
Beckett's Watt

Understanding: Can There Be a Consensus?

Anyone reading this has probably been in a school environment. So you know: the decision of whether the student understands the math is up to the teacher, not the student: or the student's parents. The test doesn't go:"Bobby, do you know the sum of two and two?"
"Yes, Ma'am, I do."
"Fine, Bobby. Your word is good enough for me. There's no need to demonstrate."
No. It goes"Bobby, show me your calculation for the sum of two and two."
"2 + 2 = 4."
"Very good, Bobby. That's correct."

Whether or not Bobby understands arithmetic, the teacher takes that answer as a demonstration that Bobby "knows" at least that
formula.

Now: Is that pattern generally true throughout the society? Not at all. Certainly not in my experience. In our version of kleptocracy it's the certified "expert" who decides what you understand and also what he understands. The relationship is not symmetrical. The testing is never two way. The sergeant can "make" you understand him;
there's no way for you to make the sergeant understand
you.

The sergeant can "make" you understand him; there's no way for you to make the sergeant understand
you.

---

Notes

Bobby & Math Teacher:
Neither does the test go, "Bobby, do you know the sum of two and two?" with Bobby's parents interrupting, "Yes, he does." Neither would the teacher say, "Oh, thank you Bobby's father and Bobby's mother: I'll take your word for it too." No: public education assigns ignorance to the parents: the parents' ignorance no more verified than the teacher's expertise: or the state's to judge either.

Make the sergeant understand you:
Unless you carry your own nuclear deterrent: another area where the state monopolies remain unbroken. We now have that private-nuclear-deterent concept however thanks to novelist Ken MacLeod.