Intellectualist Elitists are anti-American and we just ain't a-gonna take it no more!

[eagl]

This forum makes me dumber.

[TheDudeDVant]

I believe all should be required to study James Burke's 'The Day the Universe Changed'

Best stuff that i've seen as to western civilization's approach to knowledge and understanding..

I can't find the video anywhere though..  Guess i might have to read the book..

[Arlo]

Originally posted by sluggish
Huh?  You see, I too can put quotations around parts of a post for emphasis.

You mean you can actually learn from my example? I consider that potential.

[sluggish]

The whole idea of American public education is set up to fail.  Basic academics are great, but if you're not taught the basics of organization and multitasking you are doomed to failure.  With the danger of looking a bit like Arlo's conspiracy theorists, I will say that this is not a coincidence.

[eagl]

From another forum, concerning something Obama said (but which could have come from Clinton as well):

Well, I clearly heard him say in a speech 4-5 wks ago that "we need to put more money into our schools" (with that trademark Obama-speech vagueness about the referent of "us").

Nobody should let THAT go by without asking him: "What about the Kansas City experiment?"

http://www.amren.com/ar/1995/12/index.html  

When a theory has been thoroughly tested and found false, it ought to be discarded, oughtn't it?

JD

Not by American politicians, who find truth in campaign support. The NEA and AF of T say that more money is all the schools need. They need no evidence to say that, and evidence to the contrary can safely be discarded. This is the Voodoo Science of the 21st Century. See Man Caused Global Warming for another example.

But the myth that money can improve education survives all research. The studies have consistently shown that more money not only does not improve schools but often causes deterioration; and especially the state pays for attendance payment system. No one cares. Hillary hasn't a much different view from Obama.  I don't know if either knows better, but it hardly matters. They will never say different.

[moot]

Originally posted by Arlo
The math I took in HS was more than adequate for the blue collar work enviroment. But let's go back to critical thought. That and a genuine desire to learn facts before forming conclusions. Can that be made mandatory? Especially in an enviroment where more and more in power managed to get there without it? Or is this something that requires nurturing, inspiration and example?

Arlo the math we're talking about is today's and tomorrow's, not yesterday's that can't be changed.
The math I took was simple enough that anyone could spend a week thinking over the few basic concepts of the whole semester or even year, and come out as informed as the guy that took the full course..  It all boiled down to very few discrete math ideas.

Desire to learn the fact before forming conclusions would be second nature if kids had understood that nothing is proven until it's proven.  Empirical evidence is the last word, but abstract proof that something can't be is (or should be) precursor to that.

Logic is the precursor to critical thought. Without it you've got people making incorrect associations because they don't discern true from false enough.  You can't get more brass tacks than that.

[Arlo]

Originally posted by sluggish
The whole idea of American public education is set up to fail.  Basic academics are great, but if you're not taught the basics of organization and multitasking you are doomed to failure.  With the danger of looking a bit like Arlo's conspiracy theorists, I will say that this is not a coincidence.

There's a rather big difference between a conspiracy theory (and yes, you present one beautifully) and an observation of cause and effect within society. That being said, can you offer direct support or dispute of this article without coming off like Mel Gibson in Conspiracy Theory (your personal issues with public education notwithstanding)?

[Arlo]

Originally posted by moot
Arlo the math we're talking about is today's and tomorrow's, not yesterday's that can't be changed.
The math I took ... (snip)

Desire to learn the fact before forming conclusions would be second nature if kids had understood that nothing is proven until it's proven.  Empirical evidence is the last word, but abstract proof that something can't be is (or should be) precursor to that.

Logic is the precursor to critical thought. Without it you've got people making incorrect associations because they don't discern true from false enough.

While I don't dispute the mechanics of logic (mathmatical or otherwise) and critical thought nor their relationship, you seem to be fixating on mathematics and avoiding my question regarding what you offered as the cure for the disease:

Originally posted by moot

Make introductory logic, philosophy and math a requirement in schools and the kids will take care of themselves. And the earlier in the curiculum, the better.

I'll repeat:

Originally posted by Arlo

But let's go back to critical thought. That and a genuine desire to learn facts before forming conclusions. Can that be made mandatory? Especially in an enviroment where more and more in power managed to get there without it? Or is this something that requires nurturing, inspiration and example?

[sluggish]

"The ultimate goal of the sincere man is to erect his beliefs into law".

[Arlo]

Originally posted by sluggish
"The ultimate goal of the sincere man is to erect his beliefs into law".

First, I wholeheartedly recommend proper attribution of quotes as well as the context behind their formation. Secondly, the can of worms this quote entails seems oblivious to you. But just to make it a certainty let's see how you think it properly applies by starting here:

Do you believe in moral legislation? If so by what group or individual enforcing what code of morals on what group that doesn't apparently have them? Bear in mind that history provides all sorts of examples. Upon review and in such context is your above used "quote" anything more than a randomly applied or biased one?

[moot]

Arlo the kids'll turn into lean mean thinking machines if you trim the fat off.  A diet of 0% fat logic will do.
That doesn't mean boring lectures about dusty greeks, just basic demonstrations of simple logic, the building blocks of critical thought.  Give the kids these tools and they'll eat information and crap out all sorts of very accurate assesments of anything that gets in their way...  Whether that's critical thought on politics or society, ACM, or skirt flock mechanics.

The genuine desire to learn facts before coming to conclusions would be inherent to someone looking for a solution to his query... You don't "find" an answer when there's no question.  No problem = no solution.  No information = nothing to recognize a problem in the first place.

I say math because it's useful.  Philosophy is less formal but more removed from material reality, e.g. blue collar tasks.  
I mentionned the math I took because it's more recent than yours.  It's closer to the state of things now, and doesn't seem to have changed much when I talk to my step brother who's going through HS now.

[Arlo]

Originally posted by moot
Arlo the kids'll turn into lean mean thinking machines if you trim the fat off.  A diet of 0% fat logic will do.

The genuine desire to learn facts before coming to conclusions would be inherent to someone looking for a solution to his query...

I say math because it's useful.  Philosophy is less formal but more removed from material reality, e.g. blue collar tasks.  

I'm all for the basic building blocks being enforced in education at all levels. I support you in this. But I feel it doesn't present the only element required for solution. I would add that the instinct for critical thought is actually bred into us by nurturing parents who care more about their kids than their HDTV (those who don't tend to pass on this trait).

[moot]

I guess that's why you don't see the relevence of what I mentionned earlier.  HDTVs and Myspace just don't matter as far as education is concerned.  
If a kid is taught to think for himself correctly (i.e. has understood logic underlies everything), he'll recognize britney spears and other crap like it as just ephemeral artifacts, just fads, just bait on someone's hook.

You say instinct like it's a separate thing from reason, but I don't see the difference.  Instinct is the most basic form of thought.  Thought is reason... Reason is the precursor to any sort thought.  Everything a kid does can be justified by a simple "why?".  That's a matter of reason.

I don't mean to go around in circles Arlo, but that's all it comes down to, anyway you go about it.  Teach kids to reason and they'll take care of themselves no matter what happens.
What precedes reason?  I don't think anything does.  Everything follows from reason.  Making sure the integrity of kids' reasoning is flawless (or as nearly so as possible) is the best possible thing a parent can do.  From that, everything follows: knowing when something doesn't add up one way or another.. I'm sorry but it's always about logic, plain and simple.

Kids are just thinking machines starting on a clean slate.  They are what they eat and making sure they can make good proverbial diet decisions, or failing that, correctly digest something "unhealthy" on their own can be assured by giving them as early as possible the basic building blocks that "a genuine desire to learn facts before coming to conclusions" is made of.
They wouldn't need to be mandated to inform themselves before they made decisions, they'd do it on their own because it's "right".  It just makes sense.

The only difference I see between learning and education at home and at school is the affective flavor at home.

[Suave]

One of the things that hurts Ron Paul is that when he talks he comes off as an intellectual, which he is, but americans don't trust intellectuals.

There is a good reason why Dr Phil talks like a yokel and calls himself Dr "Phil".

[moot]

Yep.. From the start I had wished he was or had a more brawny running mate with the same values and policies.  I thought Thompson could've been it, but unfortunately neither he nor anyone else seems to be it.

TBH though, I'd rather have a Patton or R. Lee Ermey teaching kids, than a Dr. Phil.