Reply to comment

A connection between the Turing machine, discussed this morning, and education: The groups discussed the possibility of "working backwards" with the Turing machine and, from studying a certain output, discovering what kind of formal system created it.  There are "an infinite number of explanations for any output," and many less options for any one input.  This directly correlates with the problem in education of trying to decipher what kind of learner a child is, or diagnosing whether or not they have a learning disorder/other "disability."  When looking at a child and their learning/behavioral patterns ("outputs"), many explanations are possible.  If a teacher, parent or doctor chooses the wrong explanation to justify the child's actions, the child will almost certainly remain at a disadvantage for at least the duration of their learning career (for example, Donna Williams, an accomplished autistic author, was not diagnosed with this disease until late in her life and was treated accordingly: like a "psychopath").  Based on the decision of the adult taking care of the child of what is "wrong" with them or what "category" they should be placed into, the child will be brought up in an environment where certain influences will result in a specific type of behavior (certain "inputs" will result in certain "outputs")--this is a self-fulfilling prophecy waiting to happen.
The comparison above between children and formal systems such as the Turing machine is useful, but is it also dehumanizing these students?  Or is it natural to think of things and processes as "inhuman" in order to treat them objectively?