09 Jul 07
Originally posted by scottishinnzWhen someone is too thick to see an obvious fallacy in his argument after it has been pointed out to him by more than one person, his attention must be drawn to that fact.
Attacking me, rather than debating the issue. I really worry about the sick fetish thing you got going on with me man, see someone.
His postion is no longer debatable.
09 Jul 07
Originally posted by AlcibiadesThere WAS no fallacy.
When someone is too thick to see an obvious fallacy in his argument after it has been pointed out to him by more than one person, his attention must be drawn to that fact.
His postion is no longer debatable.
Get counciling Nargaguna. Seriously, how many times do you have to get banned before you come to terms with the fact that no sane person agrees with anything you say.
You are a nasty, homophobic, xenophobic bigot with, it appears, so little in his life that ad hom attacks on other posters is all that you can come up with. Come, Narg, stop chasing me around the forums, it's getting tiring - and I like girls, you're flat out of luck.
09 Jul 07
Originally posted by scottishinnzYou appear to be suffering from paranoia. Nobody is chasing you around, you poor fool, with your halucinations.
There WAS no fallacy.
Get counciling Nargaguna. Seriously, how many times do you have to get banned before you come to terms with the fact that no sane person agrees with anything you say.
You are a nasty, homophobic, xenophobic bigot with, it appears, so little in his life that ad hom attacks on other posters is all that you can come up with. Co ...[text shortened]... chasing me around the forums, it's getting tiring - and I like girls, you're flat out of luck.
09 Jul 07
Originally posted by AlcibiadesYeah, sure. Strangely, whatever thread I start debating on, within about 10 posts you always show up - and it's ALWAYS my comments that you direct the full force of your "wit" on first.
You appear to be suffering from paranoia. Nobody is chasing you around, you poor fool, with your halucinations.
09 Jul 07
1 edit
Originally posted by pawnhandlerI am responding to the real challenges presenting themselves to educators, who at a Uni level find themselves with a class full of students who have been filled with so much information for so long, that there is hardly any room left for any critical or lateral thinking.
No, no, I didn't mean you when I said "the young" -- I'm talking about a trend in education. You're like a senior in high school or somewhere around there ... just graduated or something. Sorry.
Edit: Wait -- you're the one who said "the young" and so I repeated it. Never mind.
Because of competition for places at Uni, students often are forced to ingest vast volumes of information such that come exam times they are able to regurgitate that data, appropriately formatted of course, just so that can get into the courses of their choice.
The result is that you find a lot of Uni students quite adept at the technique of learning the required texts, learning how to solve the varieties of problems that will be examined, and in a paint by numbers exercise end up with brilliant results with sometimes an embarrassing inability to connect some of the fundamental aspects of what is being taught. Typically students will prep themselves for exams by learning to recognize the type of problem being asked, and the attendant technique to generate a solution. Its a bit like pattern recognition.
If done often enough, little or nothing in terms of the meaning of what is being asked is ever required to be understood by the person learning through this process. People will finish their exams and say I'm glad thats over, do what they call a memory dump on the subject and then move on.
I have met some very bright students( by their results anyway) who literally could not tell you anything about the subject being examined, even on the day of that examination. Because everyone has access to previous exams, students who want to really do well go back and slog their way through the past 5years of exam papers and usually will ace whatever exam they sit. Just don't ask them a question in a format that is slightly outside of the way they are expecting to be asked a particular question, or you will suddenly be confronted with the curious spectacle of someone who has learnt the process of doing well without learning any understanding of the information being taught.
09 Jul 07
Originally posted by kmax87Ah, I remember writing some incredibly BS papers with points of view I totally disagreed with because I knew how the teacher thought (what her opinions and world view were) and how to get an A. Yep, I've done lots of memory dumping. I have a friend who says a college degree simply means you had time and money. I'm not sure I've figured out the purpose of a university education, aside from those pragmatic courses that actually aid you in your chosen field.
I am responding to the real challenges presenting themselves to educators, who at a Uni level find themselves with a class full of students who have been filled with so much information for so long, that there is hardly any room left for any critical or lateral thinking.
Because of competition for places at Uni, students often are forced to ingest vast vo ...[text shortened]... the process of doing well without learning any understanding of the information being taught.
09 Jul 07
Originally posted by pawnhandlerI agree with both you guys. My opinion is that a university degree is not too much more than a memory exercise. For sure, you can dump the knowledge right after the exam, but if you keep it around, even just a percentage of it, it can often be used in other classes around the same subject area.
Ah, I remember writing some incredibly BS papers with points of view I totally disagreed with because I knew how the teacher thought (what her opinions and world view were) and how to get an A. Yep, I've done lots of memory dumping. I have a friend who says a college degree simply means you had time and money. I'm not sure I've figured out the purpose ...[text shortened]... ity education, aside from those pragmatic courses that actually aid you in your chosen field.
Honours years, Masters and Doctorates are really where the "thinking around a subject" should be happening.
09 Jul 07
Originally posted by mancityboyI feel that the purposes of education are:
What do people think the purpose of education should be?
1) To better enable you to be enriched by the world around you;
2) To better allow you to make an informed decision about pursuing an
occupation you enjoy; and
3) To foster senses of personal autonomy and social responsibility.
It's my opinion that anything else education does is personal, not general.
Nemesio
10 Jul 07
I don't know about where you live, but here in the USA, "higher education" is mostly about avoiding personal responsibilty .. delaying maturity at any cost.
I'd estamate that 60-70% never even choose a major .. or change it 4-5 times over the course of a 6-10 year college career.
That's the rich kids.
The poor kids (unless they're white) are indoctrinated into liberal thought .. for free.
The purpose of education here is to provide jobs for all the failures of higher education.
Those that can .. do. Those that can't .. teach.
10 Jul 07
Originally posted by jammerThat's not what I think the purpose of education should be .. but what it actually is IMO.
I don't know about where you live, but here in the USA, "higher education" is mostly about avoiding personal responsibilty .. delaying maturity at any cost.
I'd estamate that 60-70% never even choose a major .. or change it 4-5 times over the course of a 6-10 year college career.
That's the rich kids.
The poor kids (unless they're white) are indoctrinat ...[text shortened]... r all the failures of higher education.
Those that can .. do. Those that can't .. teach.