I like it. One might say I am predisposed to like it, based on a semi-Asperger-ish clinging to rigid definitions by my mind. Or one might say that it is easy to like, considering the clarity and confidence found in its obtainment.
Perhaps not everyone cares about an explicit or conscientious path toward discernment, but presumably most or all do care about it one way or another.
Does learning have an end? Is there a point at which a person knows all there is to know, or all they need to know, about something? On the one hand, everything is eventually connected to everything else, and the connections between everything can probably be generalized into finite, discrete views or categorizations of relevance. And so knowledge might be complete once all the relevant views upon a topic are understood. On the other hand, who knows? To know something, it turns out, is both a mental and an emotional state. Emotional states are usually fickle. Is reminding or remembering a part of learning? Only inasmuch as something is experienced by the individual that they have never experienced before.
But I think it's safe to say that in this short and limited life learning can always be continued, even for one simple thing like eating or addition. And discernment is necessary at a given level for learning to take place. We might even say that discernment is the eventual result of learning. (Discernment seems to imply an awareness of a perception, not just the perception itself. Perhaps all discernment is cognitive discernment.)
As mentioned, discernment occurs at different levels. Discernment at a given level can only be as useful as all the discernment obtained at levels below it.
Usually I perceive learning taking place (off the top of my head) as a combination of a process guided by another party, an exercise in intuition, and a subscription to a defined belief or heuristic. Learning can be planned strategically but complications arise when there are unknown unknowns (you don't know what you don't know).
It seems like a teacher is enabled via sensitivity to their students states and predispositions toward learning a given topic. Even self-teachers. Not all students are ready to have another person's entire discernment impressed directly upon them.
But there are teaching methods which either obstruct discernment from taking place or aid it's realization. Involving additional senses engages the individual more, while introducing distinction among the delivery in accord with the relevant inherent distinctions of the subject matter gives a built-in, reference-able truth that is non-distracting. It's part of the scenery. I've noticed this while white-boarding: the proper use of varying colors can speed understanding and protect clarity.
---
Came across this quote: "A young teacher teaches even what she does not know, a middle-aged teacher teaches only what she knows, and an old teacher teaches only what is necessary." Source: http://carmelnet.org/larkin/larkin093.pdf. I did not read this paper much; it feels very specific. Some young teachers teach what they know but don't yet know specifically why what they teach is true. Life has been designed such that this is possible, in the interest of those who have limited access to information and experience (which let's face it includes all of us).
Spiritual discernment is the most valuable knowledge. It is discernment at the highest level with all levels of worth below it.
Bit of a long lunch break but a refreshing one. :)
