posted on Jun, 10 2013 @ 02:38 PM
reply to post by FortAnthem
I don't think it's just to call a course stupid without knowing what the course material is. In other words we shouldn't just a book by its cover.
Yes, some of these courses may seem stupid to someone not involved in the field that it's in, but it could be highly relevant to the field of study.
The course about invented languages, for example, could be highly valuable to someone studying linguistics and/or someone who wants to try and invent
a language that could be used the world over. Philosophy and Star Trek could be of interest, and importance, to someone studying philosophy, more
specifically one studying who philosophical thoughts have influenced popular culture, or something along those lines.
After noticing the link in the OP I followed it to the course description for the Star Trek course. I sure hope my kid never has to ponder topics
III. What is the relation between a person's mind and his functioning brain--are they separate substances or identical? Can persons survive death?
Can computers think? Is Data a person?
IV. What is a person? When do we have one person, and when do we have two (think of the episodes where people "split" or are "fused")?
V. Do people have free will, or are they determined by the laws of nature to do exactly what they wind up doing, while believing they have free will?
Or both? What is free will?
Given how critical ATSers tend to be about history as we know it, I'm surprised that someone would critize the Harry Potter class, given that they
tackle such questions as:
This course will engage students with questions about the very nature of history. Who decides what history is? Who decides how it is used or
mis-used? How does this use or misuse affect us?
It should be clear to anyone that the professors for these courses are using pop-culture references as a spring board into the topic; you know to
garner interest for the class.
edit on 10/6/2013 by octotom because: Added comments about courses themselves.