It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Garfee
reply to post by k1k1to
Um... because the abolition of slavery is relevant to the american civil war, that's why.
Which you obviously don't think is an important milestone in the history of the country which is the subject of this thread.
edit on 8-2-2012 by Garfee because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Xtrozero
Originally posted by Starchild23
Originally posted by Xtrozero
If you don't know history your Dumb? I agree History is a weak subject in school and only those interested in it go any farther, but society is always changing as to what it feels is important to know or not know.
You go anywhere and you find very ignorant people, high school students are no different.
This is part of what I was trying to say. No one agrees on what's important to know...so they decide everything is important to know, then proceed to cram twelve text books down a 14 year old's protesting throat and expect them to regurgitate every answer the teacher wishes to hear onto a piece of paper, after which they will never again use that information.
Unreasonable expectations, indeed.
Well with all the basic subjects lets add computer classes such as internet, Word, Power Point, spreadsheets etc...
One thing to remember is we do not need to know things like we did in the past when kids read encyclopedias and a few books on each subject, we can search anything in seconds and be an expert in minutes.
Now let's take a kid from 1950 and give him 30 mins to learn and tell us everything about WW1, and do the same with a 2012 kid....get my point?
edit on 8-2-2012 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)
So what, today's young people say. The iphone will tell you more about Ulan Bator in sixty seconds than I could possibly remember. That's true, but by relying on the computer, we stop training out minds, and we stop filling our memory banks. By doing so, I believe we diminish our ability to solve life's problems unaided, and we become more and more dependent on machines. When the machines give us answers, we seem superficially smarter, but we really are dumber, because we're not building the networks in our brains to solve a whole host of problems.
Want another example of this? Think navigation. I went my whole life looking at maps and finding my way. I have a long, long history of reaching my destinations, whether on foot, by boat, or by car. I looked at a map, related it to the world around me, and found my way. All too often, navigation today is handed off to a machine. Many motorists can't make sense of a basic road map, or estimate the distance between two points on a printed page. They are lost if their machine loses touch with the satellites.
Originally posted by Mcupobob
I just got out of highschool about a year ago, knew all those things. Course my history teacher was the best.
Well I couldn't quite remember, how long a senator is in office, 6 years I think. I do remember it being covered in history. Also, not sure if I entirely trust you're source it looks dare I say sensationalist? However, I don't doubt its to far off the mark.
EDIT: Oh also, I noticed nearly all this questions pertain to dates. Now, while the 'when' in history is important. Its not nearly as important as the why in history. Sure the kids could know that the attack on Pearl harbor happened 12/7/49 and thats all dandy, but not know why it happened and the implications it had on the world would be more troubling.
Originally posted by The Sword
reply to post by joyride0187
That's because I didn't mention all the other things that I've accomplished in life. A job is a job in this crappy economy.
What do YOU do for a job? Do you even have one?
Originally posted by Mijamija
reply to post by Stormdancer777
Kids today have instant access to oodles of information, but without the critical thinking skills to process that information in a practical way and apply the information in real world settings then they become nothing more than knowledge filled people who have little common sense. Information is useless unless you know how to apply it, and knowing a lot of information does not make a person smart, it does not necessarily mean they are knowledgeable either....knowledge is having a strong grasp of a subject, the ability to acquire information fast, is not a sign of knowledge in my view.
Give the people contests they win by remembering the words to more popular songs or the names of state capitals or how much corn Iowa grew last year. Cram them full of non-combustible data, chock them so damned full of 'facts' they feel stuffed, but absolutely 'brilliant' with information. Then they'll feel they're thinking, they'll get a sense of motion without moving. And they'll be happy, because facts of that sort don't change. Don't give them any slippery stuff like philosophy or sociology to tie things up with. That way lies melancholy.
Originally posted by poet1b
If you think the next generation is dumb, that is what you were programmed to believe.
Further quotes from this site.
"According to official reports, only a small fraction of the population is capable of what you and I call mental life: creative thought, analytical thought, judgmental thought, a trio occupying the three highest positions on Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Just how small a fraction would shock you. According to experts, the bulk of the mob is hopelessly dumb, even dangerously so. Perhaps you’re a willing accomplice to this social coup which revived the English class system. Certainly you are if your own child has been rewarded with a 'gifted and talented' label by your local school. This is what Dewey means by 'proper' social order."
"If you believe nothing can be done for the dumb except kindness, because it’s biology (the bell-curve model); if you believe capitalist oppressors have ruined the dumb because they are bad people (the neo-Marxist model);....
if you believe any of the various explanations given for the position of the dumb in the social order we have, then you will be forced to concur that a vast bureaucracy is indeed necessary to address the dumb. Otherwise they would murder us in our beds."
"The shocking possibility that dumb people don’t exist in sufficient numbers to warrant the careers devoted to tending to them will seem incredible to you. Yet that is my proposition: Mass dumbness first had to be imagined; it isn’t real."
"Once the dumb are wished into existence, they serve valuable functions: as a danger to themselves and others they have to be watched, classified, disciplined, trained, medicated, sterilized, ghettoized, cajoled, coerced, jailed. To idealists they represent a challenge, reprobates to be made socially useful. Either way you want it, hundreds of millions of perpetual children require paid attention from millions of adult custodians. An ignorant horde to be schooled one way or another."