Great professors that didn't foster open discussion and critical thought?I had some great profs. You're still painting in broad strokes. I'm guessing your suppositions are better received in the teacher's lounge.
Great professors that didn't foster open discussion and critical thought?I had some great profs. You're still painting in broad strokes. I'm guessing your suppositions are better received in the teacher's lounge.
Better still, if you have nothing to offer to the conversation, just keep your mouth shut. Seems some have to attempt to get into a discussion although they have nothing to contribute. Most college profs can detect the depth of knowledge one has on the subject. They will encourage or discourage participation. Take the opportunity to shut up.Totally disagree, Mr. Wide Brush. Imo, many (certainly not all) who don't hold a sheep skin assume had they been able to attend college, they would have been encouraged to learn facts and to learn how to process knowledge with logic. False assumption. On the other hand, many who completed college KNOW that openly expressing a point of view counter to a professor can cost one or more letter grades. My advice to aspiring students is to mostly keep your head down or nod in agreement. If one cannot stoop to appearing to agree when put on the spot, they should offer up language such as " You've really given me something to think about." Stroke the prof while keeping a modicum of integrity; everybody wins.
Those weren't the great ones. I said "some."Great professors that didn't foster open discussion and critical thought?
Better still, if you have nothing to offer to the conversation, just keep your mouth shut. Seems some have to attempt to get into a discussion although they have nothing to contribute. Take the opportunity to shut up.
Cuntry has not learned just a hell of a lot.
Really? No idea what the suggestion was.I have no idea what the hell you are suggesting.
There are always going to be bad ones. Hopefully they get weeded out. Education is a good thing for as many people that can afford it. Even in courses dedicated to subjects like Sociology, most of my professors were eager to hear ALL opinions and encouraged multiple perspectives in order to truly understand topics and concepts. To begin a narrative that tries to degrade higher education as a negative, that's just crazy. Please don't.Those weren't the great ones. I said "some."
I didn't.To begin a narrative that tries to degrade higher education as a negative, that's just crazy. Please don't.
Nobody cares what you do. You are clearly an idiot. But for you to call someone out like you did devildog considering I live in your head rent free is comical.Again, I'm living in your head rent free. I know that's not original but it is a fact. You wrote a whole paragraph attempting to denigrate me and you have no clue who I am, what I do for a living and what my degrees are.
If attacking me makes you feel more important, knock yourself out. You're a sad little man.
Oh.....well.....then let's consider that a preemptive strike then.I didn't.
I always found the profs that i had "in depth" discussions with, and there were more than a couple would grade my work better than what it was. I know when I do B or C work and that was sometimes the case, but after articulating disagreement in a respectful manner or facilitating debate within the class, that B or C work would usually turn into an A. Obviously this isn't a 100% but typically revolved around things I had direct knowledge about and was interested in. If the subject entertained me, I'd often just play devil's advocate to see what I could posture as acceptable opinion.Totally disagree, Mr. Wide Brush. Imo, many (certainly not all) who don't hold a sheep skin assume had they been able to attend college, they would have been encouraged to learn facts and to learn how to process knowledge with logic. False assumption. On the other hand, many who completed college KNOW that openly expressing a point of view counter to a professor can cost one or more letter grades. My advice to aspiring students is to mostly keep your head down or nod in agreement. If one cannot stoop to appearing to agree when put on the spot, they should offer up language such as " You've really given me something to think about." Stroke the prof while keeping a modicum of integrity; everybody wins.
Oh.....well.....then let's consider that a preemptive strike then.
So, you are the one he got "live in head" from. Plainly it is above him as an original thought.Nobody cares what you do. You are clearly an idiot. But for you to call someone out like you did devildog considering I live in your head rent free is comical.
Ignorance is blissHigher education in America is a farce these days. STEM is the only marginally worthy avenue for studies.
I'm just a big dumb old sponge wanting to absorb some knowledge.Ignorance is bliss
Ignorance is bliss
I believe people benefit from a thorough education in many areas. Arts, history, humanities, sociology, civics, etc.... Higher education seeks to establish a learning in fields outside of ones chosen professional track. STEM focus, although not bad education by any means, seeks to narrow educations focus into a limited number of fields. We all benefit from the understanding of art and history. Once these areas of focus are pushed out of the educational process successfully, it becomes easier for people to be manipulated by an ideology founded in ignorance.I'm just a big dumb old sponge wanting to absorb some knowledge.
How is STEM ignorance? Explain the ignorance please <link
I believe people benefit from a thorough education in many areas. Arts, history, humanities, sociology, civics, etc.... Higher education seeks to establish a learning in fields outside of ones chosen professional track. STEM focus, although not bad education by any means, seeks to narrow educations focus into a limited number of fields. We all benefit from the understanding of art and history. Once these areas of focus are pushed out of the educational process successfully, it becomes easier for people to be manipulated by an ideology founded in ignorance.
For example, Bushy Beaver seeks a more regimented focus on STEM education, but he also believes women shouldn't have been given the right to vote. IQ ratings in Africa are a result of "science" and not socioeconomic conditions. And anyone opposed to his own conservative political views hate America. I'd argue that a comprehensive understanding of art and history would help rid us of minds like his. Conservative or liberal, denying women the right to vote, or not recognizing the effects of socioeconomic status on learning, is just ignorant. Hence my post.
Oh I'm sure you are....a true American like youI'm for removing your right to vote as well. Also, why do you have verifiable scientific data?
I see now you were focusing on Brushy's use of 'only' but I'll go ahead and point out that most top shelf jobs in the US are STEM related. There is a limit to how much money a free society will spend on philosophers. Not enough return on investment if you have to many thinkers of thought on the collective payroll.I believe people benefit from a thorough education in many areas. Arts, history, humanities, sociology, civics, etc.... Higher education seeks to establish a learning in fields outside of ones chosen professional track. STEM focus, although not bad education by any means, seeks to narrow educations focus into a limited number of fields. We all benefit from the understanding of art and history. Once these areas of focus are pushed out of the educational process successfully, it becomes easier for people to be manipulated by an ideology founded in ignorance.
For example, Bushy Beaver seeks a more regimented focus on STEM education, but he also believes women shouldn't have been given the right to vote. IQ ratings in Africa are a result of "science" and not socioeconomic conditions. And anyone opposed to his own conservative political views hate America. I'd argue that a comprehensive understanding of art and history would help rid us of minds like his. Conservative or liberal, denying women the right to vote, or not recognizing the effects of socioeconomic status on learning, is just ignorant. Hence my post.
But just because someone is a business major, doesn't mean they don't benefit from philosophy. That was my point. Education shouldn't ONLY be about professional preparation, it should be about developing good thinkers, good citizens, and good neighbors.I see now you were focusing on Brushy's use of 'only' but I'll go ahead and point out that most top shelf jobs in the US are STEM related. There is a limit to how much money a free society will spend on philosophers. Not enough return on investment if you have to many thinkers of thought on the collective payroll.
I pointed out that your were referring to ONLY. You don't have to reemphasize it on my account. Haha. Philosophy (Ethics) is one of the few classes in which I got an A.But just because someone is a business major, doesn't mean they don't benefit from philosophy. That was my point. Education shouldn't ONLY be about professional preparation, it should be about developing good thinkers, good citizens, and good neighbors.
In some cases you might be right. But in a very few out of many.99 out of 100 people that enroll in college don't belong there. College these days is little more than a scam to extract money from the young and naive.
I very much agree about philosophy being intertwined with warfare and business. Art? Mehhhh, not so much. Understanding and being able to size up my enemy in warfare and in business has always been extremely important to me. I like to know and understand who I'm killing, literally and figuratively.But just because someone is a business major, doesn't mean they don't benefit from philosophy. That was my point. Education shouldn't ONLY be about professional preparation, it should be about developing good thinkers, good citizens, and good neighbors.
Teaching is not a profession that should be treated with such indifference. If you think bad professors exist on college campuses, imagine how many are writing copy for the internet.I very much agree about philosophy being intertwined with warfare and business. Art? Mehhhh, not so much. Understanding and being able to size up my enemy in warfare and in business has always been extremely important to me. I like to know and understand who I'm killing, literally and figuratively.
I see both sides, with information as readily accessible in this country as it is, I see less of a need for forced exposure through elective requirements. Prior to 98 when everyone was on dial up and we didn't have an endless internet to satisfy our curiosity? Sure.
What about my post illicited that response?Teaching is not a profession that should be treated with such indifference. If you think bad professors exist on college campuses, imagine how many are writing copy for the internet.
It sounded to me from your post that the internet is somehow a substitute for being properly instructed in art, philosophy, and other electives not directly relevant to ones profession.What about my post illicited that response?
Ahhhhhhh, I see how you could read that, let me clarify. I have no issue with those subjects being taught as there are always going to be people who seek to learn that information. My point was forcing them to be included in the curriculum at the college level, and this is mostly related to art, is outdated. For most people, that's the only reason they are taking them.It sounded to me from your post that the internet is somehow a substitute for being properly instructed in art, philosophy, and other electives not directly relevant to ones profession.
It's not just exposure though. It's meant to provide students with a somewhat comprehensive understanding of the world around us. And you discount the power of art. Come on, you're a Panic fan, surely you understand the importance of soulful excercise?Ahhhhhhh, I see how you could read that, let me clarify. I have no issue with those subjects being taught as there are always going to be people who seek to learn that information. My point was forcing them to be included in the curriculum at the college level, and this is mostly related to art, is outdated. For most people, that's the only reason they are taking them.
The idea unless I'm mistaken is to ensure exposure to a variety of subjects. My point was the art and 100s of years of interpretation of that art is easily attainable for the casual interest on the internet if one is so inclined. If someone wants to pursue something in that field, sure, take the classes in college.
Forcing that stuff into the curriculum via elective requirements with information as easily attainable as it is today, in my opinion is pointless.
I respect your opinion.It's not just exposure though. It's meant to provide students with a somewhat comprehensive understanding of the world around us. And you discount the power of art. Come on, you're a Panic fan, surely you understand the importance of soulful excercise?