Neil DeGrasse Tyson - Best point ever made on childrens ambitions lost by parenting and testing

Fantastic graphic!!!

Thanks I rendered the colors myself and chose the proverb, and added to my philosophy and proverbs album for my group, you may like some of them too: www.facebook.com...

Could you give me five guesses about what the world will be like in 30 years time? ... I doubt you could. Back in 1950 we could work out 30 years trends and guess, but now the worly is far more chaotic, unpredictable and complex.

As a matter of house-keeping, what you show in this post as a quote from me is not. I know it wasn't deliberate and such things are easy to do.

That said, no I can't guess what the world will be like in 30 years and that is a prime reason for changes in education and understanding. I can make 'fair' predictions based on 'linear' progressions - such as global warming, growth of poverty, etc - but they do not take in to account 'emergent' properties that are expressed by ever more complex systems (natural and manmade). Nor does would such 'projections' allow for bifurcations of systems either.

I'm not sure how the fact of not being able to guess what the world will be like in 30 years is supportive of your stance.

Educating for Systemic Thinking and Flexibility, however one goes about it, is what this thread is about or so I thought.

reply to post by ZeuZZ


Back in 1975 I was told I would currently be wearing disposable paper clothes and flying my car to work.

I have seen some of the predictions of magazaines like Popular Science from 100 years ago. They were not very accurate, to say the least.

Predicting what the world will be like in the future is destined for failure. We are clouded by compounded ignorance: we just are not aware of what we are not aware of. Otherwise, when the global cooling scare was going on in the seventies, someone would have done what should be done today: raised a hand and said, "Whoa, whoa, whoa....".

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by FyreByrd

 

We can call it modern society all we want. But the implication is that because of our modern society being a modern society, that it is somehow more exquisite than those cultures that have come before it. It is akin to considering Neandertals to be cavemen.

There is really nothing new under the sun. Just novel expressions of the same old stuff.

Rather then "Just novel expressions of the same olf stuff", I would , and I think others, would consider the implication of the term "modern society" to be - that which society (defined as any grouping of humans) has evolved to at this space and time. It is not a judgement of good/bad, right/wrong, useful/useless, it is a statement of the fact of this place in time and it's curcumstances.

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by Bleeeeep

 

I think the OP is talking about how we, as people, as not taught to think anymore. We are told what to think, not taught how to think. Consider in your education.....when you did math.....you (and most of your classmates) hated having to do "word problems". Word problems? Why are they called that? It is more like they should be called, "real world problems".

The math you are taught is not taught as an applied mathematics. It is more theoretical mathematics. You are given abstract formulas to memorize. If you are good at memorization, some of those formulas may last in your mind a little longer. But the applied capabilities of those formulas does not change. For example, to this day I still remember the slope intercept formula (y=mx+b). What is its applied use? I have no clue. I am 40, and am considered a "math whiz" in my company. Go figure....but its all because of my applied capabilities (i am good with Excel).

Education is not geared towards creating creatures with strong logic matrices established for thought processing. It is geared towards making an easy placable creature who believes they have an education. And when the OP suggests that the education you worked for 12 years to get has less value....you bristle. Understandably. For the same reason that the scientists you seem to take issue with do: you are invested in your knowledge.

Funny, that.

Your post reminded me of my high school algebra teacher... Mind you, in the second half of the '60s the 4 function calculator had yet to be invented. It wasn't as if I wasn't capable of memorization. In the 6th grade we were given the assignment of memorizing any stanza of The Wreck Of The Hesperus in English class on a Friday. Being the turd I was, when my chance to stand came I recited the entire poem. (With proper in inflection, I might add... No rote robotics. I understood exactly why I was saying what I was saying.)

Problem with my algebra class was that every time I asked, "Why?" the standard answer was, "This isn't an English class. In Math you don't ask 'Why?'". I almost MAJORED in freshman algebra!!!

It's a real hoot that I wound up working with computers. If I'd had one back then maybe it would have made a difference. As it is, I only remember his class as a colossal waste of time.

reply to post by ZeuZZ


I would thank you for this thread for just that affirmation:Worry is a misuse of Imagination.

As someone who doesn't consider Jung a crackpot, I can appreciate the impact of that thought.

Originally posted by zayonara
How often are children taught that everyone is different, no two are alike, celebrate difference. Right? Then along comes big gov, and shoves them into a canned classroom, with canned teachers, and canned exams, and then holds all of them up to a bright light, and expects to see the same thing from all of them.

Things have only gotten worse, but I tried (unsuccessfully) to make that point when I was in high school.

Our DIL gets it. She's a grade school teacher and a wonderfully bright and creative young woman.

The days of getting an F were irrelevant by the time I graduated in 1970. Average is not a C. Average = F. Any student at a C+ level = D. It is all hypocrisy. The only grades that count are B or above.

Because I did my PASCAL assignments on my ATARI, I thought my professor/employer was ridiculing one of my programs. I didn't realize that because I'd included the code necessary to write my output to my hard drive that he'd awarded me a grade he'd only given once before in the entire time he'd been teaching. ABCD = Above & Beyond the Call of Duty...

reply to post by ZeuZZ


Good and bad only exist as concepts.

The concept of bad is anything which forces the stoppage of the ability to achieve good.

If someone's creation, achievement, or experience of good does not force the stoppage of another person's ability to achieve good, then it is not bad.

You should not seek to halt what others attempt to do to find good, unless their good forces the stoppage of others from experiencing their version of good. (their version not your version)

No one forces Iridology or Mormonism upon adults. If they want to partake in that because they find it to be good, then it is their right to do so.

What you seek is what is bad.

Know that good and bad are not static things, thus what you find bad is not truly bad, it is only your opinion. You have no right to force your opinion unless your opinion give freedom to others so that they may achieve their version of good however they want.

Wow, nice to see this thread proved so popular. Thanks for all the likes and flags peeps