Reply to comment

Paul wrote this above and I thought it was pretty compelling:

Education is a changing the brain, according to one or another particular story about how/why it should be changed, so knowing something about the brain must be relevant for education?

There is certainly something intuitive about this: the more we know about the brain and the better we understand the ways that it works, the more we can tailor the way we teach to the contingencies of our anatomy. But it also presupposes a certain structure of knowledge and education: what does it mean to "know something" about the brain? It seems reasonable to assume that we need education to discover anything about the brain, so we must first have education to know things about the brain. And the things we know about the brain are, in turn, shaped by the frameworks we have acquired through our education. So the relationship, it seems, is potentially more complex than subjective knowledge about an object ("the brain") -- a scheme which only operates in one direction. We can only know things about the brain that we are prepared and capable to know, in one way or another, which presupposes some kind of education. Or do I have it wrong?