Excellence in Shitlording

Morphic Tide said:

The amount of this required to get anywhere new makes college or university ties rather important, because the up-to-date textbooks and studies are not easy to get elsewhere. There is no longer a reasonable expectation of "law hanging fruit", testing theories takes large sums of money to pay for the equipment and cross-referencing thousands of pages of previous works in a  great many areas of research.

Click to expand...

What are you even smoking?
you literally can buy any college textbook online. The notion that you cannot buy textbooks outside of college is ridiculous

Even if you magically couldn't, you could drive to a local college and buy the books in their on campus store without being a student.
No need to pay for 4-7 years of classes to just buy and read the books.

And yes, developing new science requires the scientist to read books about existing science... so?
I didn't say abolish universities and I didn't say scientists don't need to read books.

I said: universities can train doctors and engineers (of varying quality based on university quality), but they cannot create a scientist.
AT BEST (if working correctly) they can provide a budding scientist with a foundation, and he can do better by just reading college level textbooks at home instead of attending university.

My high-school required us to take Civics and Econ

mrttao said:

I said: universities can train doctors and engineers (of varying quality based on university quality), but they cannot create a scientist.

Click to expand...

The methodologies of modern science are non-trivial and many only make sense deep into the field, while figuring out how to sort the enormous bodies of information is a significant challenge in itself. It took centuries of peer-reviewing research to start codifying standards for such. To do useful science at this point necessitates such an enormous amount of information acquired without guidance that it is actively unreasonable.

Colleges and universities cannot create the desire from nothing, but the desire matters rather little when the ways of thinking needed are so extremely counter-intuitive and interconnected. Nobody's self-teaching their way into CERN, not because of corrupt credentialization but because it is simply absurd for anyone to put together enough of the picture to do useful work there without following the paths developed in academia.

A lot of mathematicians who could are likely to never wrangle the patterns of thought needed to work with multidimensional mathematics without a professor able to lay out fiddly details not in the textbooks. The same goes for many other fields, we've gotten too far from the experiences of normal life for "natural" genius to continue the progress. We now see critical intermediary steps that are flat-out humanly incomprehensible from computer-driven analysis.

Wow, what massive failure to understand @mrttao's point is being presented here!

"Colleges and universities cannot create the desire from nothing..."

They can't create intelligence from nothing. That's the point. That's why it's useless and harmful and downright God-damn cruel to let scores of people into college, even though they lack the intellectual capacity to perform in college. You let them in, you let them drown in debt, and then you wash them out with nothing to show for it.

Either that, or you lower the standards so they can get a worthless degree, which is of zero practical use to them in the real world... and which also devaluates the education of those who actually are fit for college.

The unwillingness of certain people to recognise this reality has veered into active malice. You can't claim to be too ignorant to grasp this. I've seen this poison at work; it inflicts so much harm on so many people, you can barely wrap your mind around it. This insane ideology of "everyone must go to college" has created vast multitudes of victims. On all sides of the equation.

Skallagrim said:

This insane ideology of "everyone must go to college" has created vast multitudes of victims. On all sides of the equation.

Click to expand...

Unless it IS a money laundering scheme cooked up between colleges and some politicians.

Typhonis said:

Unless it IS a money laundering scheme cooked up between colleges and some politicians.

Click to expand...

To a significant extent, it is. But it's worse than that. There's an actual ideology at the root of this. In Dutch, this is called maakbaarheidsdenken. This is somewhat hard to translate, since it literally means "makeability-thinking", but basically, it refers to "the idea that things can be (re)shaped however we want".

So you have de maakbare samenleving ("the society that can be (re)shaped as we wish") and de maakbare mens ("the human being that can be (re)shaped as we wish").

This leads to the notion that if we put enough money into "helping" serial rapists, they'll turn into normal people and can just be released into the wild again. It leads to the notion that if we enact enough social programmes, crime and poverty will disappear and everybody will be happy. And it leads to the notion that if we just let everybody into college, everybody will be an Einstein.

At some stage, a lot of useful idiots on the left actually believed this. The sixties and seventies were the heyday of this nonsense, in the sense of being truly "fashionable". But even though nobody believes in it anyore, the institutions have turned it into a profit model, so they keep pushing it.

I see the "people" who perpetuate this stuff almost daily; the things they knowingly enact are beyond criminal.

It's the same here in the UK -- thanks to Tony fucking Blair and his retarded government, they encouraged everyone and everyone to go to university to get a degree. I'm talking about people who basically flunked or got average scores on their GCSE's and had no A-levels.

Now having a degree is pretty much fucking worthless because even a chimpanzee on meth can get one for anything and everything... for a price. Which, ya know, is exorbitantly expensive.

Morphic Tide said:

The methodologies of modern science are non-trivial and many only make sense deep into the field

Click to expand...

1. my sides. I am laughing so hard. this is so pretentious.

2. books are still a thing.
Look, I went to college. You get books, you read a book, the book explains the methodology. you then memorize it for the test. If you are sufficiently intelligent you actually learn from what the book says seriously and use it in more than just the test.

I don't know why this is so hard for you to comprehend. but books exist, have existed for a very long time, and are where all the methodologies are written down

Skallagrim said:

Wow, what massive failure to understand @mrttao's point is being presented here!

"Colleges and universities cannot create the desire from nothing..."

They can't create intelligence from nothing. That's the point. That's why it's useless and harmful and downright God-damn cruel to let scores of people into college, even though they lack the intellectual capacity to perform in college. You let them in, you let them drown in debt, and then you wash them out with nothing to show for it.

Click to expand...

Thank you!

Skallagrim said:

So you have de maakbare samenleving ("the society that can be (re)shaped as we wish") and de maakbare mens ("the human being that can be (re)shaped as we wish").

Click to expand...

This really premeates every single aspect of leftist thinking.
From the belief that everyone should go to college because it will raise their int score. To the belief that you can just alter someone's sex (trans). To the belief you can replace the family with daddy govt.

On every issue they believe that we can reshape everything like clay to any image they want.

Bear Ribs said:

This is called Home Economics and is usually an elective in high school.

Click to expand...

Not in the last decade or so I've been fostering teenagers.

Bear Ribs said:

This is called Social Studies and is normally done in grade school as a mandatory class, granted how much they emphasize the horrors of communism is going to vary by school, but basic understanding of how the government works is standard at that level. Usually it goes by year, starting with state and then going to national across several years.

Click to expand...

Frankly, that's as worthless as most of what is taught in high school. Public education passes students on despite their failure to actually understand a topic. Failure is not an option in grading, and students are passed up to the next grade so schools continue to get their money.

Bear Ribs said:

This is called PE. The healthy eating part is normally a part of Home Economics.

Click to expand...

Again, Home-Ec is NOT taught anymore. This should be combined with phys-ed b/c it's ALL about being healthy. Don't need a cooking class, just a real discussion about what eating crap makes you look like and feel like.

mrttao said:

I don't know why this is so hard for you to comprehend. but books exist, have existed for a very long time, and are where all the methodologies are written down

Click to expand...

The entire reason why there are class hours is that there are, in fact, things not written down, because writing down all the minutia of how to put the information together to replace the professor is a nightmarish pain in the ass. It does not matter how much brainpower you pack into Plato, he would never be a scientist because the fundamental premises he was working from were anti-empirical.

Your original point was that because science requires genius and creativity and college stifles the latter, colleges cannot create scientists. The flaw with this is that the reason college stifles "creativity" is because what it's doing is instilling ways of thinking, of which "scientist" is one and "progressive activist" is another. They aren't actually contradictory, because there are many topics one is concerned with that the other is not.

Hence my original counter-point about the attempted indoctrination not actually ruining science as a whole simply because "The Narrative" doesn't come up that much. There is little one can write in the progressive activist way of thinking of use to geology, because the human-centered matters of progressive activism is irrelevant to nearly all of it. As such, the most utterly disgusting danger-hair imaginable can "bizarrely" be a successful geologist because all those cognitive failings can be in a different compartment from geology.

Morphic Tide said:

The entire reason why there are class hours is that there are, in fact, things not written down, because writing down all the minutia of how to put the information together to replace the professor is a nightmarish pain in the ass. It does not matter how much brainpower you pack into Plato, he would never be a scientist because the fundamental premises he was working from were anti-empirical.

Click to expand...

Hypothetically it is possible to have things not written down.
However I have yet to ever come across any (science procedure related), despite all the class hours I took.

You explicitly claimed there are important procedural components that you miss without college experience... well, can you give us a specific explicit example?

what are those important scientific procedure parts that are not written down in any book and that you will learn in college in person and not by reading a book?

Morphic Tide said:

Your original point was that because science requires genius and creativity and college stifles the latter, colleges cannot create scientists. The flaw with this is that the reason college stifles "creativity" is because what it's doing is instilling ways of thinking, of which "scientist" is one and "progressive activist" is another. They aren't actually contradictory, because there are many topics one is concerned with that the other is not.

Click to expand...

College does not in any way shape or form instill "scientific thinking".
College is "memorize this then regurgitate it for the test"

"Scientific thinking" is literally covered in 1st grade "science" textbook which explains the "scientific method". When you read the scientific method in first grade, you either get it or you do not.
Even if you were "instilled" with it, it won't make you a scientist. you still need that inborn genius and creativity.

If you are a genius, you may read books explaining the scientific method, what science currently exists, and build upon it via innovation and experimentation.

You are basically blathering platitudes that base around the idea that people can be shaped like clay.
Take a rapist, spend money on him, he is now safe to release to society.
Take an idiot, spend money on him, he is now a creative and intelligent scientist.
Take a man, spend money on him, he is now a woman.

This is simply not how it works.

The Whispering Monk said:

Not in the last decade or so I've been fostering teenagers.

Click to expand...

Curious, the number of students enrolled in various home ec programs has been rising significantly over the last decade. They had been on the decline for some time before, though. The AAFCS reported five million students enrolled in Home Ec programs in 2020, up from 3.8 million in 2012. Somewhere in the general area of a quarter of all public high schools still have home ec programs, it was hit very hard by No Child Left Behind but has been on the rise since then.

You can even find a fair number of job listings as demand for expanding Home Ec classes is leading to a rush for more teachers.

The Whispering Monk said:

Frankly, that's as worthless as most of what is taught in high school. Public education passes students on despite their failure to actually understand a topic. Failure is not an option in grading, and students are passed up to the next grade so schools continue to get their money.

Click to expand...

That's not a problem with social studies, that's a problem with how Public Education works. Unless you fix the underlying issue your proposed "Horrors of Communism" will have the exact same problems as Social Studies that already cover the subject.

The Whispering Monk said:

Again, Home-Ec is NOT taught anymore. This should be combined with phys-ed b/c it's ALL about being healthy. Don't need a cooking class, just a real discussion about what eating crap makes you look like and feel like.

Click to expand...

Again, Home-Ec is not only still being taught, it's a growth industry.

Bear Ribs said:

Curious, the number of students enrolled in various home ec programs has been rising significantly over the last decade.

Click to expand...

USA is freaking huge. And has diverse laws and locations.
It is entirely possible that the national amount of students opting in to learning home economics is rising. Yet at the same times many schools refuse to even offer the option. Because it is "misogynistic" to offer women the choice to be not be a man

So technically, you could both be right.

mrttao said:

USA is freaking huge. And has diverse laws and locations.
It is entirely possible that the national amount of students opting in to learning home economics is rising. Yet at the same times many schools refuse to even offer the option. Because it is "misogynistic" to offer women the choice to be not be a man

Click to expand...

Oh yeah, the 'problematic' nature of Home Ec certainly hit it, as did the mania for hard numbers and absolute standards with no room for judgement that was No Child Left Behind.

However, saying that it flat out isn't taught anymore is just plain wrong.

Bear Ribs said:

Oh yeah, the 'problematic' nature of Home Ec certainly hit it, as did the mania for hard numbers and absolute standards with no room for judgement that was No Child Left Behind.

However, saying that it flat out isn't taught anymore is just plain wrong.

Click to expand...

Well, a more accurate statement would be "in many schools it is not taught anymore".

Actually, I am curious. are the schools that do teach it perchance private schools?
and do you have a sauce on the statistic that the amount of students taught home ec is rising?

I tried searching for it and all I found are articles about why home ec is not taught anymore.

mrttao said:

Well, a more accurate statement would be "in many schools it is not taught anymore".

Actually, I am curious. are the schools that do teach it perchance private schools?
and do you have a sauce on the statistic that the amount of students taught home ec is rising?

I tried searching for it and all I found are articles about why home ec is not taught anymore.

Click to expand...

Citation for the AFFCS having five million enrollees in 2020.
Citation for there only being 3.5 million in 2012, indicating huge growth over 8 years.

The Wikipedia page:
Some schools are starting to incorporate life skill courses back into their curriculum, but as a whole, home economics courses have been in major decline in the past century.[6]

Home Ec has been on the decline since the 80s but has turned this around and begun growing in the last decade.

Bear Ribs said:

Citation for the AFFCS having five million enrollees in 2020.

AAFCS and FCS FAQ - American Association of Family and Consumer Sciences

www.aafcs.org

Citation for there only being 3.5 million in 2012, indicating huge growth over 8 years.

https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2018/06/14/618329461/despite-a-revamped-focus-on-real-life-skills-home-ec-classes-fade-away

The Wikipedia page:

Home economics - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Some schools are starting to incorporate life skill courses back into their curriculum, but as a whole, home economics courses have been in major decline in the past century.[6]

Home Ec has been on the decline since the 80s but has turned this around and begun growing in the last decade.

Click to expand...

thank you very much for the links.

well, this is nice. good to see some actual useful classes starting to make a comeback

Should probably add, the figures I gave for 25% of high schools were public schools, I don't have any exact figures but my impression from talking with people is that private schools have a much higher percentage teaching home ec, not surprising since home ec is generally associated with conservative values as are private schools.

Bear Ribs said:

Should probably add, the figures I gave for 25% of high schools were public schools, I don't have any exact figures but my impression from talking with people is that private schools have a much higher percentage teaching home ec, not surprising since home ec is generally associated with conservative values as are private schools.

Click to expand...

It is funny as all the liberal news blames conservatives for home economics not being taught anymore.
Because the liberal always screams out in pain as he stabs you