Can you learn from a video?

This is a short video of the argument for the existence of God. I am curious as to whether you think it is effective. With the popularity of YouTube, can we really learn from video instruction?
Watch it and see what you think.

Leibinz Contingency Argument

You may have come to a quick answer, "yes" or "no". On the other hand my question may have raised more questions for you, like

what do you mean by effective?
what is it the presenter wants from me?
would some people get what he is saying better than others?

Obviously, the sponsor of this YouTube video wanted you to learn something. But what is learning anyway? Is it obtaining new knowledge? or is it being transformed by new knowledge?

The science of teaching is called pedagogy. Educators know that teaching must stimulate learning. Animation in the video presentation is pretty good. Learning involves inquiry and the presenter uses questions to answer questions. The points being made are concise and thoughtful, rational and orderly.

So, the proof is in the pudding, so to speak. Did you obtain new knowledge? Are you different? What is the likelihood that people you know would learn anything from the video? be transformed by it? If you feel that they would, then adherence to good pedagogy is effective. If you feel that the video was interesting, but I am not sure I am smarter or different as a result of it, then what might we learn about learning? I'm not sure i know many people who would be smarter or transformed by the video.

Let's explore this issue by linking pedagogy (effective teaching) to some of my more recent blogs. First, knowledge has two meanings. One is from Greek word "eido" which means knowledge I gain though my physical senses. This is mainly a cognitive activity. The other word is "gnosis." This knowledge is what we get through experience that doesn't rely on our physical senses. This kind of knowledge is more affective or based on emotions.

Let me illustrate.

If you have a friend you know is smart, how do you know? You may know that he graduated from college and made really good grades. You may know his IQ is very high. He may win the trivia games at parties. This is "eido" knowledge that your friend is smart. You have information that you acquired through your mind.

However, you have been with this friend many times when choices needed to be made. You benefited from his right choices. He had answers to your questions that made your life work better. You could feel comfortable that he is smart. You could depend on him to know what to do. This is "gnosis" knowledge that he is smart. You have experienced him being smart and so you "gnosis" know. You trust him for direction in your life and you feel good about acting on his advice.

To gain more "eido" knowledge and learn how smart he is, you must receive information though your senses that connects with your mind. At some level you have knowledge, but you are not likely to act on that knowledge except in superficial ways. You are not likely to trust him with important decisions that affect you. Through your experiences of being involved with him when he exercised his smartness, your emotions were affected. This provided you with "gnosis" knowledge of your friend. You become different or transformed as your "eido" and your "gnosis" knowledge work together to gain knowledge of how smart you friend really is.

Now, back to the video, was it effective? Well, it might have been effective at providing you with a rational for why God exists ("eido" knowledge), depending on whether your mind is capable of handling the information. Further, if the question is not salient to you or relevant to you, if it makes no difference in your life that this argument provides a rationale for the existence of God, then you likely would not attend to the information in the video enough to learn what is being presented. So, to gain "eido" knowledge about the existence of God, you would have to have the mental ability and the motivation to learn what is being presented.

However, even if you are able and motivated to learn (gain "eido" knowledge) what the presenter wishes you to know, what must happen for you to be transformed by the knowledge. That is, what would cause new knowledge to make you different? Based on the knowledge of knowledge, you would need "gnosis" knowledge, an experience of rationale for the existence of God. Emotionally experiencing the argument makes you trust the knowledge gained by the argument. This is the key to good pedagogy.

Wait, I am not sure that all educators accept that teaching is more than giving someone information or "eido" knowledge. In fact, while educators speak about "experiential learning", my "gnosis" knowledge of teachers leads me to believe that most see pedagogy as obtaining information through cognitive processes. For clarity purposes, maybe we should call instructing in a way that the student obtains both "eido" and "gnosis" knowledge TRANSFORMATIVE PEDAGOGY?

Certainly worth pondering, for some of you anyway ....