[stbullard]

RE 3: as an SJC alum, I found my reading speed slowed drastically both during and after four years spent reading and discussing these books. I found myself thinking while reading more often, making more connections within and between works.

That said, reading alone misses the meat of “The Program” (always capitalized!) - it’s the searching, pointed, urgent discussion of a work with others who share a common language (from all having read and discussed the earlier works in the Program) that provoked deep thought and reflection, held me to account for intellectual rigor, and built up my faculty for critical thinking.

[dabiged]

It was extremely disappointing to finish a book which truly altered the way you saw the world, and not have a cohort of people to share it with.

[voisin]

> That said, reading alone misses the meat of “The Program” (always capitalized!) - it’s the searching, pointed, urgent discussion of a work with others who share a common language (from all having read and discussed the earlier works in the Program) that provoked deep thought and reflection, held me to account for intellectual rigor, and built up my faculty for critical thinking.

Is there anywhere online that achieves anything close to this for this curriculum for people who can’t attend full time in person? An HN for SJC curriculum?

[gtfoutttt]

Someone below posted about the Catherine project. It sounds like something like that, although the reading list is certainly not as thorough.

https://catherineproject.org/

[adamsmith143]

>Is there anywhere online that achieves anything close to this for this curriculum for people who can’t attend full time in person? An HN for SJC curriculum?

St. John's recently expanded their part-time Graduate program to be online.

[ianai]

Is it usually a value-add or how often does the push for intellectual rigor slide to something else? Had a notoriously argumentative coworker from nearby SJ in SF. He’d always swear he was just asking questions or wanted to know why “they chose this way over another” but not so secretly just wanted the world to burn.

[stbullard]

Lol. At SJC? Almost always a value-add. That said, what people are like once they’re out very much depends on the person.

Think of it like the light and dark sides of the force: skill in rhetoric can just as easily be used to derail conversations or slide into sophistry as it can to explore the foundations of an idea, argument, or position in search of insight.

Intellectual honesty tends to require a certain restraint from the practitioner, whereas resentment and anger can feed into deliberate conversational malice.

The forms of discourse at St. John’s contribute greatly to earnest inquiry in the classroom setting: the system of formal address, for instance, in which other students are addressed as, say, “Ms. Klein” or “Mr. Armstrong” in class creates an incredible separation between daily life and the classroom - enabling you to treat someone’s statements and arguments at face value.

My experience with St. John’s was that the Tutors (called professors anywhere else) generally managed to guide and keep conversations on track with a light, deft hand on such occasions as intervention was called for - this was increasingly rarely over the course of the Program, however, as keeping things directed and on track was primarily enforced by one’s fellow students, whose urgent pursuit of truth and understanding brooked no interference, and suffered very little foolishness.

My guess is your former coworker was probably just as argumentative before he came to St. John’s as when you met him. The school isn’t formative in the sense of changing your nature; it’s formative in the sense of giving you the tools to better understand the world around you. Most people left with the same personalities and political views they came in with.