The Challenge of Distance Learning

This essay explores the sudden shift from residential higher education to remote learning in the United States, a consequence of the novel coronavirus. It is a personal account of experiences as a professor at a Midwestern university. Many instructors had no training in online teaching. For university faculty, Covid-19 meant having to transform courses from in-person instruction to a remote platform practically overnight. Among the student comments I received were that I managed the online transition well. Over the next academic year, 2020-21, universities face challenges in resuming on-campus teaching, and the possibility that a new outbreak of the virus might bring a repeat of the Spring 2020 semester. Although that possibility sounds dire, there is hope that the shift to remote learning may offer a silver lining in the form of expanding course offerings beyond geographic areas and reaching a wider audience. For liberal arts institutions that are struggling financially, a rise in the use of remote learning and online education may offer a new beginning, and for public universities, potential new revenue given declining state support, a silver lining.

Isaac Asimov’s Rules for Humans

With the varied learning formats found in education, one constant that has remained is keeping the students on an honest path regarding how they obtain their degrees. This essay probes how students have developed creative cheating styles to coincide with the advancement in technology. The core of the issue is student integrity, and one way to address it is on the very ground of the problem. Along with the creativity of technology and the ability to cheat, Isaac Asimov’s “Rules for Robots” may be rewritten as rules for humans. How machines are programmed is the equivalent of how students are educated, that instead of pursuing a grade unfairly through technology, students may be taught the positive points of the rules that Asimov developed, the outcome being not to use technology for selfish ends. Rather, the desired outcome is to educate students to value technology as the aid that it is for a properly earned grade.

The Paradox of Kurt Gödel: A Response

Miloš Dokulil’s dissection of Kurt Godel’s religious worldview generates questions among his conclusions. In part, the reader’s understanding is challenged by the turgid translation from the Czech language. Yet, the meaning still can be extricated. Because Gödel’s ontological argument for God’s existence was not published in his lifetime, there is doubt that he was satisfied by its method. Truly, since virtually all of Gödel’s writings on philosophy were unpublished, his rational Platonism leaves considerable room for speculation concerning his metaphysical system. Hence, Dokulil seeks alternative explanations for what seems to have been Gödel’s real faith in God. Framed by semantic-philosophical musings, Dokulil concludes that it was the influence of Gödel’s childhood exposure to the Bible mainly through his mother. Indeed, it seems at times that Dokulil is examining his own belief in God as well as Godel’s. In the event, there are several aspects of Göddel’s life and work which elucidate his religious belief through his pursuit of mathematical reasoning in a more intellectually engaging way than simply the maternal influence that is often most profound and Godly. These include his philosophy of Platonism, great contributions to metamathematics, and the relation of intellect and will.