Forums: Discussions for entrepreneurs and small business.

I`ve been reading about the dumbing down of our kids, a book written in 1995 and carrying forward from "A Nation at Risk." I won`t go into modern-day outcome-based education (OBE), and all the insane details. But I do want to examine a fundamental principle being called to question: What is motivation?

Theoretical educators (a.k.a. educationists) have held from as far back as the early 1900s, and again in the 60s (through the present) that all people are naturally motivated. They also suppose that all people are motivated toward virtuous action.

In other words, if you begin with a toddler and leave them alone, the toddler will automatically grow up through adolescence into adulthood, always motivated to be a good person. This is a cross-connection to the belief that all people are basically good, all people can be rehabilitated, and all people deserve a second chance. It rests on the assumption that motivation is fundamental.

So what is motivation?

Where does it come from? How does it work?

All of us will say, from time to time, "I`m just not motivated to write a business plan." Or we might just as easily hear that a homeowner is "highly motivated" to sell their house.

How does motivation connect with instant gratification or postponed rewards?

I, being a philosopher, have all sorts of answers and more questions, but I thought I`d kick off a discussion to see if anyone is motivated to explain motivation. After all, so much of starting a business rests on so-called passion, right? And isn`t passion some sort of motivator? Aren`t incentives based on motive, and don`t we have people who are "motivational speakers?"

Do you believe America`s educators are correct to say that students will be better motivated to learn if they aren`t stressed about grades, classroom competition, and where they stand in the social structure of the school?

What`s interesting to me, reading this book, is that modern school administrators, theorists, teachers, and reformers, all "feel" (operative word) that it`s just unfair to have competition and rewards. It`s why an increasing number of schools are doing away with honors programs, valedictorians, and even grades.

The argument is that not everyone can be a star athlete or strong student. Therefore, to make things more equal, we should remove all "special" regard for those who excel.

I think the best sentence I`ve read so far is where the author states that today`s eductationists believe in "....equality of achievement, NOT equality of opportunity."

We, as small business owners, have to deal with the real world. And yet we also continually come face to face with a government attempting to equalize the entire world. Employment laws, taxes, and regulations all are designed to make it more fair for people who "aren`t motivated" to start a business.

At the root of all this, I think, is the concept of intrinsic human nature. Half the population believes that human beings are first animals, who then must be taught how to behave, socialize, and interact on a reasonable level. The other half seems to believe that human beings are automatically reasonable, rational, and benevolent.

Motivation definitely goes hand in hand with pain and pleasure, and the more sophisticated our mind becomes, the more we feel pleasure from intangibles such as validation, approval, and respect.

Even more important is that *competence* creates confidence. "Self esteem" doesn`t create anything! Self-esteem is a result, not a cause. To develop rational self-esteem we first have to demonstrate competence. And to do that, we have to have *some* sort of objective standard of measure and accomplishment.

Do you think if we remove all standards, all measures, and all competition in the name of fairness and equality of achievement, that we`ll increase motivation in people?

This is specifically addressed in the book. The great reform movement begins with the *observation* that throughout life we compete for better jobs, better houses, more money, better cars, and so forth, just as KJC has observed.

However!...the current hypothesis is that it all begins in First Grade, with the very first classroom grade. As soon as a child gets graded, "...a treadmill appears under their feet."

The belief, totally unproven despited decades of objective tests and analysis, is that it`s the grades that *cause* our desire to get a better residency, choice job, to be first, and so on. Ergo: remove the grading system in all schools.

It`s not enough to say "hogwash!" This is happening! It`s everywhere in schools, and now, 30 years later, people who graduated from high-school are running things---they`re the adults we see everywhere around us.

Kathy and I were in the store the other day. We bought something, and it came to $3.31. We gave the checkout girl, who looked to be about 18, $3.36 and I casually said, "we`ll get a nickel back."

The girl was horrified. She stopped, contemplated, ran the numbers through the cash register, pondered for awhile, and almost lost consciousness. At last she said, "You`re right," and handed us back a nickel.

Today`s schools believe it`s far more important for students to understand that they can look up information, and not be "bothered by" the agonizing pain of having to memorize anything by rote memory. So I suppose the basic principles of addition and subtraction cause pain? Good thing this girl could "look up" the answer on the cash register!

IMO... Immature people are motivated by fear - the fear of getting in trouble by their superiors.  But, then they usually aren`t THAT motivated and do only that which is minimally required.  Mature people are motivated by self-satisfaction and a desire to do the right thing.  They usually do at least a good job with whatever they are asked to do.   Stupid people aren`t motivated at all or are motivated by selfishness.  They don`t care what does or doesn`t happen as long as they don`t have to move their rears from a chair and actually be helpful.  Many of those people work for the government agencies we are sometimes forced to visit... in "customer service"... 

~Kim

So how about this:
I`ll propose that motivation is a decision point, and the evaluation of the values are emotions. It`s an analysis of one`s own emotions.

Craig you always come up with these interesting threads... you`re the man.

I think motivation happens when desire for something is combined with a sense of personal agency. If you don`t know you can do something (or worse, if you think you can`t) then it won`t occur to you to try. Seems to me like taking away measures of personal agency such as grades, honors programs and the like at a young age would retard a person`s ability to develop a sense of personal agency... the kids have no way of knowing whether they`ve accomplished anything. As adults these kids will not be motivated reach higher simply because they won`t know a "higher" exists for them. Heaven forbid circumstance calls upon them to rise above some obstacle or hardship.

—paula

I listen a lot to Dennis Prager! He`s an excellent philosopher, and is the first to come right out and say that we`re living in the Age of Stupidity.

And re: "...motivation happens when desire for something is combined with a sense of personal agency...." Would this be a decision to act? What Paula sees as "obvious," apparently the modern school system sees as a problem.

Rich`s thoughts that "...... motivation is different things to different people..." is a description of the main problem facing western culture today: that everything is relative, everyone`s personal sense of reality is equally valid, and that there are no objective standards to anything.

What`s bothering me more and more is that if everyone in a society comes to a consensus that`s wrong, deciding there are no objective standards, then who among them will even know they`re wrong?

In fact, the religion of Islam and its interpretations are ruled by consensus. Each sub-set within the overall religion makes a consensus decision as to what the religion "really" means. Then they either stay out of each other`s hair, or they fight about it with each other.

Wouldn`t that nicely describe the modern American culture war between liberal and conservative ideology?