In the movie Mindwalk, the character Sonya advances a theory which moves away from the Cartesian mechanistic theory of the world. Instead of focusing on the individual parts of a greater whole as the Cartesians did, Sonya believes that it is important to look at the interrelations of everything and everyone. This "systems theory" encompasses the belief that, in Sonya's words, "ultimately, whether we like it or not, we are all part of one inseparable web of relationships." This way of looking at the world, in terms of universal interdependence, has interesting implications in terms of the Honor Code at Rice University. An examination of the theory and beliefs underlying the Honor Code seems to find them incongruent with the basic tenants of the systems theory. Ironically, however, successful implementation of the Rice Honor Code would fail without reliance on principles of that same theory.
"On my honor, I have neither given nor received any aid on this (examination, quiz or paper)." This pledge required on all written academic work of students at Rice University is one of the cornerstones of the Rice Honor Code. The very words of this pledge "neither given nor received any aid . . ." indicate that Rice University places a strong emphasis on the output and achievements of the individual. Indeed, the preamble to Honor Code Constitution states that the Honor Code's purpose is "...in order to conduct our examination system under high standards of individual responsibility, thereby promoting a high sense of personal honor and integrity" (emphasis added).
Such an emphasis on the individual is much more in line with the mechanistic viewpoint than the systems theory viewpoint. A systems theorist such as Sonya in Mindwalk would much more likely support the views expressed by Jerry B. Harvey in chapter 8 of 'The Abilene Paradox and Other Mediations on Management.' In this chapter entitled "Encouraging Future Managers to Cheat," Harvey expresses his belief that the discouragement of rendering and receiving aid in the academic setting is "educationally unsound" and furthermore will "virtually guarantee that our organizations will lack the unity and spirit of teamwork essential to compete in the world economy." Like Harvey, systems theorists would support an academic environment encouraging collaborative efforts in order to maximize the potential of all within the system versus the individualistic focus embodied by the philosophy of the Rice Honor Code.
Although the philosophy behind the Rice Honor Code is incongruent with some of the basic principles of the systems theory espoused by Sonya in Mindwalk, the implementation and the continued existence of the Honor Code rely on some of its central principles. In Part 3 of Article I, the Rice Honor Code states, "The Student Body is directly responsible for the effective working of the Honor System." Unlike the focus on the individual embodied in the reasoning for the Honor Code, the responsibility for the actual successful implementation resides with the student body as a whole. The same student body that enforces the Code is also the same group on which the Code is enforced. This relationship embodies the "self-maintaining" nature of systems referred to by Sonya in the movie. Furthermore, the working principles of the Honor Code at Rice University also exhibit the qualities of self-renewal and self-transcendence put forth in the movie. The Honor Code self-renews itself in the way that the system persists with an ever-changing student body group. Despite the fact that the student body constantly turns over, the Honor Code system itself continues. New students learn the system from students who are the caretakers of the system at that point in time. These new students both of the University and of the system move on to become the new caretakers of the system for the next generation of students. The system exhibits self-transcendence in its adaptation to changing technology and the growing emphasis on group work (an emphasis that both Harvey and Sonya would applaud) brought about by these technological advances. For example, the rules of the Code adapt by allowing the sharing of ideas and work through the medium of electronic mail and internet applications so long as this sharing is approved (or in fact encouraged) by the professor of the specific course.
Systems theorists, like Sonya, would likely reject the theory behind the Honor Code at Rice University as drawing from an outdated Cartesian view of the world. They would, however, find the implementation of the Code to reflect their new outlook on the world. Since the actual implementation of the Code draws so strongly on principles embodied in systems theory, perhaps, in accordance with the principle of self-transcendence, an examination of the reasons for having the Honor Code will occur. Such an examination into the motivation for having the Code may lead to a transcendence of its purpose to one more in line with the systems theorists' view of the world.
Everything is interconnected. The actions of an individual have an effect on countless other beings. There are many stakeholders in all situations beyond those considered in a mechanistic view. These are some of the tenants of Systems Theory. 'Mindwalk: A film for passionate thinkers,' is a movie about Systems Theory and the interconnectivity of life in our world. There are several implications associated with the movie that can be related to the Rice University Honor Code and its implementation: individual freedom is gained at the expense of a sense of oneness, the interconnectivity of all entities, and mechanistic views stifle enlightened thought and synergy. It is the objective of this essay to explore how these implications apply to the Honor Code at Rice University.Systems Theory, as explained in 'Mindwalk: A film for passionate thinkers,' can easily be applied to the Rice University Honor Code. The Honor Code requires students to swear they have not given nor received assistance from another on assignments. The touted benefits of operating under the Honor Code are self-scheduled and take-home assignments, unsupervised exams, and the integrity of a Rice degree. These freedoms are allowed because the student explicitly states he or she will work as an individual. This is analogous to gaining individual freedom at the expense of a sense of oneness. At the surface, the freedoms allowed the student are enticing and exciting. A deeper look shows the individual freedom gained is contrary to the premise of contemporary education. Students are drilled regularly on the benefits of collaboration and teamwork. The Honor Code provides for freedom, but eliminates collective problem solving and community in education.
Another implication of the movie and Systems Theory is the interconnectivity of all entities. This belief is not supported by the Honor Code at Rice University. The Honor Code reinforces the ideals of individuals and the mechanistic view. Students are prohibited from giving or receiving help on assigned projects and exams. This perpetuates the perception of the `real world' as being a composition of individual units or beings. It is ineffective to lecture to students about the benefits of working together and at the same time evaluate students based on individual work.
Educational institutions have a reputation of being places of enlightened thought. The synergy created when ideas are freely exchanged in the educational setting fuels innovation and discovery. This flow of ideas in education is similar to one of the implications in the movie -- 'Mindwalk: A film for passionate thinkers.' The movie suggested that the mechanistic view and individualism stifle transcendental thought and enlightenment. The Honor Code, as indicated by its pledge, assures that students are essentially separate units and may not contribute to another by giving assistance on assignments. Compliance with the Honor Code is inconsistent with the reputation of the modern educational institution.
This essay is my interpretation of the implications of the Systems Theory and the movie and their association with the Rice University Honor Code. I believe the Honor Code, in spirit, attempts to ensure that all students earn an education and knowledge. I agree with the objective of the Honor Code, but see that in many instances, in accordance with Systems Theory, it would be beneficial to incorporate the views expressed in 'Mindwalk: A film for passionate thinkers,' in the Rice education process.
Mindwalk offers some interesting implications for both the principle and implementation of the Rice Honor Code. According to the Honor Code, a Rice student should be able to state that, "on my honor, I have neither given or received aid on this assignment." In principle, the Rice Honor Code describes a world in which separate players exist: person A, here; person B, over there. The Honor Code implies a division of labor--or working in parallel versus synergistically. It's almost as if people were the steel wheels on a train that must be kept on track by maintaining the proper spacing. Within this metaphor, the Rice Honor Code does not seem to concern itself with lateral movement in the opposite direction: instead of the wheels coming closer together, the possibility that the wheels might separate further. From the perspective of this metaphor, progress along the tracks depends upon a number of relationships being held constant: the relationship of one track to the other, the relationship of the wheels to one another, the relationship of the wheels as a system to the tracks as a system. To the extent this metaphor of the railroad tracks produces useful insights into the principles of the Rice Honor Code, this metaphor unveils an Honor Code born of mechanistic thinking. In principle, the Honor Code seems to state that outcomes are more important than people and, therefore, to break up a unified reality into pieces (either/or, task/relationship). Getting down the established tracks is the number one priority--everything else (or everyone else) must mind their place in the system. If one wheel were to decide to hop to the other track, in order to run directly behind its 'opposite' wheel and enjoy the warmth of a preheated rail, the wheel would be considered aberrant. A railroad is a finished work--creativity is neither sought nor accepted. In human life creativity is essential. Mindwalk raises questions concerning whether the Honor Code is most useful for a people system or an engineered product.Mindwalk talks in terms of systems theory. Mindwalk talks in terms of interconnections and the web of life-- how everyone and everything is related. Mindwalk, therefore, calls into question the perspective of the Rice Honor Code which basically states that everyone and everything are not related-- or, at least, shouldn't be relating in certain circumstances. Mindwalk implies that Rice's Honor Code is dysfunctional from a life systems point of view. People are related, and they relate across multiple conscious and unconscious dynamics. To bring greater specificity to this discussion of "giving and receiving aid," one might ask whether "giving and receiving aid" would include the reassurance and feeling of solidarity of seeing a fellow student pouring over a textbook in the library? Does the Honor Code regulate the attitudes that a student communicates within the learning system by way of body language? Is giving a smile considered a violation of the Honor Code? Or would it depend upon when the smile was given--smiling at a fellow student when they don't 'need' it is ok, but forbidden during the duress of an examination. Mindwalk implies that the Honor Code dissects a reality which exists in totality and, therefore, makes distinctions which range from being not particularly useful to poisonous. In the face of the complexity and totality of human experience, the Honor Code carves off a piece, labels it ("academic work"), and leaves "giving and receiving aid" unspecified given the larger dynamics of human interaction. The process of examining a very small part of something larger can be extremely useful and worthy--in scuba diving, they call it "micro diving"--it offers an opportunity to redirect the awareness to the almost magical depth of life patterns existing within life patterns. Mindwalk--in referencing systems thinking--says that one must balance out "microdiving" with an attention to and awareness of the larger system in an attempt to appreciate the totality. To the extent that the Rice Honor Code holds out its perspective of reality as Reality itself, it does human life a disservice by confusing a map with the territory.
The recurring theme in the movie Mindwalk was the idea that mankind needed to view the world from a different perspective. The movie implied that the mechanistic viewpoint, one that differentiates the integral parts to examine the whole, was no longer valid. Furthermore, an ecological view is required which recognizes that the whole cannot be analyzed by dividing it into the individual parts. Everything is interconnected and made up of relationships, thus one cannot examine a part without examining the whole. The movie implied that this `systems science' resulted in individuals having a firmer grasp on reality than their mechanistic colleagues. This film has implications for the principle and implementation of the Rice Honor code. In evaluating these implications and applications, the scale at which one examines this concept has a direct impact on the final conclusions.If indeed the world must be examined using an ecological view rather than a Cartesian view, then Rice University would have to transform the Honor Code to accommodate this perspective. Students and faculty would make up the whole, rather than individual pieces making up a larger piece. Evaluating one student's actions is incongruent with this new way of thinking. If a student violates the notion of integrity, then the whole system has committed a violation. Placing blame or fixing one part of the system would no longer be possible without reevaluating the entire system. Student and faculty would still retain the individual responsibility to maintain an ethical standard; however, the school could not isolate a violation to an individual. The school would have to discipline itself. This new paradigm would result in a loss of individualism for the benefit of the `group'.
On a larger scale, a violation of the honor code would not be possible, and the principle behind its use would no longer be valid. If we were all part of a single system, then property rights would not exist. The world's material objects, as well as its ideas, would not be separated into individual possessions. One person would not own more than another would, and in contrast to a popular utopian view, we would not own equal amounts. Everybody would have the rights to use everything for the benefit of the whole. If property rights do not exist, how can a person steal or plagiarize from another? All ideas and information would be public property and interconnected with everything else. The emphasis would be on the contribution, not on whom contributed. Though this view might appeal to one's sense of fairness, it is hardly realistic in any form.
However, as the character Sonya pointed out, all things `must change together.' Implementing this change, on either scale, would not be possible unless everything in the world changed with it. Though the thought process of formulating this paradigm may be beneficial to society, its actual application is unrealistic. Though the Rice Honor Code is an institutional concept, its application to the real world is quite different from Sonya's new paradigm. The Honor Code depends on individuals not only to maintain ethical standards, but also to report when those standards have been violated. This dependence is the backbone of the Honor Code. Individualism may result in complicated problems in society, but its inherent nature ultimately motivates people to address those issues and find rational solutions.
Return to Professor Dunn's home page.