The Genre of the Information Report ~ Whose Science are we Representing?
The socially endorsed and ubiquitously circulated genre of report writing is introduced in primary schools usually after the more personalised writing styles of recount, narrative and persuasive texts. The initial emphasis is usually on constructing simple reports on creatures from the animal kingdom and later on, reporting on cultures and traditions in other countries in Social Studies.
Nonetheless, the initial introduction is unfailingly accomplished through presenting the animal kingdom through the lens of modern, conventional science.
Children learn to report on, or describe animals in terms of their name, their simple classification, (e.g., mammal, amphibian) and according to the Linnaean system, their physical appearance, diet, habitat, how they give birth to and raise their young, their life cycle in years, their distribution across the globe and the relative health of their population (vulnerable, endangered). The latter factor has students thoroughly engaged as the majority hold great affection for animals and relate to them in a way that does not always sustain into adulthood, as evidenced by the global endangered and extinct statistics.
A Valued Formalised Style
This formal, scientific mode of writing is greatly valued throughout society, and for anyone to amass any scientific or research based kudos, they have to demonstrate the capacity to write reports in the mode and tenor of ‘the expert’ addressing the apprentice, or, at best, an expert addressing an academic expert peer.
Thus, an emphasis on writing from a third party, impersonal, ‘objective’ and distant point of view forms a significant part of the instruction in schools. This is a completely different style of writing to the narrative, recount and persuasive texts that the children have experienced up to this time.
Children are assessed on their capacity to master this particular style of writing, so that they can communicate in a way that is referred to as being scientific and formal. That is to say, that there is allegedly nothing of themselves in what they write. They are writing ‘as a scientist’ does.
Quite aside from the fact that one cannot deliver anything without their own signature quality being an integral part of it, (a viewpoint that will be presented at another time), there arises the question of true intimacy, and also the theoretical foundation on which this genre rests.
Back to Linnaeus, Galton and Darwin
The information reports about animals are based on scientific descriptors, the Linnaean system of classification and the worldwide use of the science report. The Linnaean system of classification is very closely intertwined with Darwin's theories, and what became of those theories about genetic selection and the survival of the fittest under the scientifically endorsed mandates of Galton and those who followed him.
As presented in this previous article on this site, from the view of an ancient lineage of philosophies and teachings, what became the tenuous application of Darwin's theory is inaccurate or simply not true. Aligning to the ancient lineage, finds one in the embrace of a truth that presents that we are not merely human animals and equally, the view that animals are not merely animals in the mode of the current science diktat.
In the reductionism of the significance and purpose of the Animal Kingdom, we are also literally led to compress the true nature of what science refers to as ‘the human animal.’
In both instances, reducing our knowledge of both the human being and the animal to
physical appearance, diet, habitat and behavioural tendencies is reducing both species, or type of being, to only the 1% tip of the iceberg truth of them both.
When we exclusively instruct our children to write under the parameters of this compression, we are guaranteeing the ongoing longevity of an incredibly reductionist model that pays neither heed, nor even lip service, to the fact that physicality is only 1% of what we are.
This article questions the exclusive validity of this reductionist classification and the model upon which it is based. If that model is exposed as being flawed, untenable and fabricated on lies, half-truths, reinterpretations and misinterpretations, then everything that issues forth from it is also similarly tainted.
This includes what we instruct our children on in school.
An Ancient Lineage
The view posed by many of the great teachers of the past, including Hermes, Pythagoras, King Solomon, Patanjali, Plato, Socrates and many others, presents that the greater part of us, and the greater part of all life on this plane, goes beyond the physical. It is in fact multi-dimensional. Moreover, it is only on this plane of life that the contradiction to this truth exists.
It is a measure of the insidious infiltration by the corrupting model that so many of us question not the corruption, but rather question and attack the very truth that exposes it and presents the foundations of what we are.
There is no greater, nor more tragic, irony than this.
Currently in our world, the dominant model and its paradigms impose the factor of nothing beyond only human, with intent that the human being never realise the full capacity of what it is.
Similarly, a human being must never realise the multi dimensionality of any creature that resides here, very specifically in this instance, the animals. If a child were to connect with the multi-dimensional significance of an animal and what it reflects, it would instantly be connecting with its own multi dimensionality and, in doing so, the reductionist model is completely exposed for its suppressive compression and negation of the vibrational truth of what both we, and the animal kingdom, are in fact, and by fact.
Is it possible then, that this exclusive emphasis on instruction of information reports according to the Linnaean classification system, and the evolutionary theories of survival of the fittest, has brought nothing but ruinously based lies and hardship to humanity?
We are perpetuating a scientific momentum that we are in ignorance of; a momentum that undermines the truth of what we are.
What then do we put in the place of this manner of report genre?
Love, in Education
There may well be no change until there is a call for the re-introduction of love, in its true meaning and vibrational integrity, into education. This would mean that we as teachers would have, as part of our purpose and our job description, the reigniting, and / or the confirming of the inner essence that resides within us, and within every child that we teach. This is the aspect of the being that is multi-dimensional.
Once this is ignited, or simply confirmed, the being of the child is then free to report on what an animal represents according to the true vibrationally received realisation of what the animal is in its true nature and purpose. This is based on intimacy through vibrational resonance and is a very far cry from how it is depicted by the reductionist scientific model.
How Might This Look?
This view presents that every animal was Divinely created to offer a reflection to humanity so that they could evolve out of the creation generated, wayward mess by receiving reflection.
Take as an example the cheetah. I see and receive not only its physical characteristics, but what it reflects to me in terms of it being the fastest land animal. Its speed is also an aspect of my beingness in terms of my capacity to access what nourishes me ~ true intelligence. I see the grace with which it moves and realise this is also part of my being. I witness its honouring of cycles, how it never abuses its body; how after it has chased and hunted down its food, it necessarily rests and goes into a movement of repose. Am I not also to honour these cycles of activity followed by deep rest? Am I to nourish my body with the foods that my body calls for me to eat instead of what bludgeons my body into an insensate un-responsiveness?
Expanding further, I could ask what type of animal does the cheetah seek out as its prey? Is it the strongest in the group or is it the weakest? Is it, in effect, releasing the occupant of that body to disengage from the specific form in which it is enhoused in order to enter another form? Moreover, the harm that could well have come to the rest of the species through whatever the inherent imperfection or disease that was in that particular animal is released with grace and removed for all. No other member of that group need be infected in the same way. I learn the truth of self - less – ness, of being a part of group, and the movements of expansion that serve all in that group; that form is for a purpose and when that purpose has been served and is complete, we then move onto another form.
Contrast this with the belief that the animal is hunted down mercilessly, or as the reductionist model purveys it, due to the construct of ‘nature red in tooth and claw’.
This one example indicates very clearly how even a very simple information report taught at primary school can bring the grace of the Grandness of all that we are surrounded by; all that is there to reflect to us our divine beingness.
Alternatively, it can make us the compliant puppets of a model that serves naught but its own self preserving agenda.
The Language of Truth
There will always be a place for expressing the language of Truth. This does not, however, equate to the language of distance and separation. It is one thing to bring attention to minimising the look at me, it’s all about me casual use of language where ‘I and me’ exclusively hold centre stage. It is a different matter entirely to suppress the expression of intimacy with both Nature and among ourselves.
The way language is deployed in the above example of the cheetah is, essentially, to represent the vibrational intimacy between the writer (child or adult) and the Animal Kingdom. The realisation of the multidimensional significance of the animal is because of this vibrational intimacy, or the vibrational at one ment, that the writer feels within themselves, in regard to the animal.
There is no distance, separation or formality. Rather, there is the embrace of the vibrational correspondence.
The Sabotaging of Intimacy
Is this why the prevailing model insists upon the vigorous instruction of third party depersonalisation? If so, this is a chilling indictment of what underpins this paradigm ~ the sabotaging of the intimacy that naturally calls forth the realisations of truth. More specifically, the realisations of the vibrational truth of all beings and creatures that reside on this realm and that every inhabitant is more than their physicality alone indicates or appears to be.
This natural intimacy is stymied not only by the scientific model but also by the cute-sy, emotionally laden depiction of animals within picture books and film media, like cartoons. The latter anthropomorphise the animals and layer them with the denser, humanised traits that bear no relationship to the actual truth of what we, or they, are.
It is a curious pairing of science and film media entertainment that undermines the purpose and truth of our relationship with the Animal Kingdom.
These are, alas, the concealed aspects of ourselves the lower mind; the spirit that would rather slam the door on, and shut down, this intimacy, preventing our young from connecting with what is totally innate within them. There is within us all, as children, a register that, when we see an animal, we sense it within in accord with our inner senses. We feel what that animal is vibrationally reflecting to, or confirming within, us, as well as its true purpose on this plane of life. We sense the nature of its true evolution, as well as the illimitable service that it is offering to humanity. It is the suppression of this that causes the statistics of endangered and extinct animals as we destroy a very significant source of the vibrational truth that is laid out in front of us, as we simultaneously sabotage and suppress our own nature.
Instead, those lower, contrived aspects of us pour contempt on what would naturally expose their own corrupted nature.
Whose Science?
‘Ah…but this is science!’ some, or many, might retort.
But whose science is it and is there a yet vaster Divine Science? And was this Divine Science corrupted beyond recognition so that another source could deliver the changeling usurper that we today hawk as evidence based science, the science that would reduce us all to a compressed world of materiala in lieu of the Science that for aeons prior to this, presented the truths of all our origins, our purpose and our actual evolution?
Is it possible that the instruction of our young into a form of language that consistently deprives them of their divinely intimate birthright with both themselves and Nature, also equates the theft of any realisation of this Divine Science that speaks, not from the instructed lower mind, but directly into the physical body and all of its moving parts, thereby constituting a normalised, even respectable, daylight robbery of the most heinous kind?
We ‘cannot serve two masters,’ as another great teacher once proclaimed.
We can be in the Divine Intimacy with one, or in the corrupted dysfunctionality of superior distancing and separation with the other.
Which of these two sciences holds both the true lineage of our past and the grandness of our unfolding future?
Which will we align with because it represents truth? We can lay the foundations of true science or continue to insist on the momentum of its corruption.