Schulz's Theme Of Utility Of Error
A hunter unwraps his new scope and firmly attaches it to his rifle. He takes aim through the scope at a bullseye down the range, fires three shots, and checks the accuracy. All three shots are a little high and to the left, he adjusts the scope a click right and a click down. Three more shots are fired and again the scope is adjusted accordingly. This process is repeated as many times as necessary for the margin of error to be eliminated. Schulz explains this process of shoot, analyze, revise instead in terms of the Utility of Error. The idea that by being wrong and recognizing it, one can make changes to become better. Throughout all walks of life Schulz’s theme of Utility of Error is demonstrated. A few important examples are during schooling
…show more content…
More likely is that these experts have made so many mistakes on their journey to become an expert that they make mistakes much less commonly. As stated above, it would be hard to prove that Jane Tompkins improved her grammar and style over time. Much easier to prove would be that Jane Tompkins initially thought of violence as purely unethical and later found that there may be reason for brutality as it may be described. In the beginning Tompkins analyzes “big-game hunters”(Jane Tompkins 419) which leads her down the path of noticing the club whose entrants must have the “achievement of killing ‘in fair chase’ trophy specimens from several species”(Tompkins 419) which by simply her putting the quotes around “in fair chase” shows her opinion and dislike for the sport. On the last page of her composition, Tompkins says “There was never a time where it was possible to say, there, there you were wrong, Buffalo Bill, you should not have killed that Indian… you should have quit the army”(Tompkins 430) expressing that although killing and violence are still not something she is in any way in favor of, she accepts that it may have necessary implications. Although at no time in the opinionated paper could Tompkins have been objectively wrong, but at some point she decided to change her views. She changed her views, found utility from her error, and developed her thoughts and opinions over time as opposed to simply assuming her original thoughts were correct and standing stuck in the mud that is not recognizing a
More likely is that these experts have made so many mistakes on their journey to become an expert that they make mistakes much less commonly. As stated above, it would be hard to prove that Jane Tompkins improved her grammar and style over time. Much easier to prove would be that Jane Tompkins initially thought of violence as purely unethical and later found that there may be reason for brutality as it may be described. In the beginning Tompkins analyzes “big-game hunters”(Jane Tompkins 419) which leads her down the path of noticing the club whose entrants must have the “achievement of killing ‘in fair chase’ trophy specimens from several species”(Tompkins 419) which by simply her putting the quotes around “in fair chase” shows her opinion and dislike for the sport. On the last page of her composition, Tompkins says “There was never a time where it was possible to say, there, there you were wrong, Buffalo Bill, you should not have killed that Indian… you should have quit the army”(Tompkins 430) expressing that although killing and violence are still not something she is in any way in favor of, she accepts that it may have necessary implications. Although at no time in the opinionated paper could Tompkins have been objectively wrong, but at some point she decided to change her views. She changed her views, found utility from her error, and developed her thoughts and opinions over time as opposed to simply assuming her original thoughts were correct and standing stuck in the mud that is not recognizing a