Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  >      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 Aries_328
Joined: 10/16/2011
Msg: 130
view profile
History
Has society bred stupidity?Page 6 of 8    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8)

She does not allow for anyone thing to maintain dominance over all others.

Nature not only prefers equality, she demands it.


????.

No really... ?????

Project much? Anthropomorphism much?

So, if you would have called it 'He' that would be God and that would be bad but since you call it 'she' that is mother earth and tree huggers unite?

I really could have swore you were in the 'Nature is a process' camp and had no intelligence which means no checks and balances. Haven't you ever heard of 'invasive species? Haven't you noticed that Man is the dominant animal species? Haven't you noticed that nature isn't a balance? It is a pretty powerful force that really does dominate and holding it back at the borders of a city can be quite daunting? Nature is anything but equal. Adaptation is how that dominance can be overcome. We can do it because we has puny brains.

Nature is not balance. It is a system. It doesn't have checks. It has opposing forces. Man is a will. Nature has no will it is absolute. So, do you think Man made global warming is making her angry? hahahahaha.

There is no negotiations with Nature. There are no agreements. Nature operates one way we try to do things that nature didn't do... like build our houses and city's and methods of travel and all of those things that people do. We then write them down and pass them on for others to continue that effort. It takes brains and the opposite of stupidity. Our baseline intelligence is higher than a century ago just by the fact of sheer volume of available information. It is a different intelligence because it requires different skills. Inner cities have different intelligence's then rural farmers.

As far as you assertion that the intelligence of nature does not allow for any one thing to maintain dominance over all others... Not entirely sure what you mean but I think you are saying that nature can just shrug her shoulders and wipe out all of our cities and whatever dominance we thought we have is crumbled in an instant... Well, not sure if you meant that or not but it is true. Whatever you meant by it... putting thoughts on it and humanizing it is pretty funny to me, but that's just me.
 Aristotle_Amadopolis
Joined: 12/8/2011
Msg: 131
Has society bred stupidity?
Posted: 9/29/2012 12:18:42 PM

I really could have swore you were in the 'Nature is a process' camp and had no intelligence which means no checks and balances. Haven't you ever heard of 'invasive species? Haven't you noticed that Man is the dominant animal species? Haven't you noticed that nature isn't a balance? It is a pretty powerful force that really does dominate and holding it back at the borders of a city can be quite daunting? Nature is anything but equal. Adaptation is how that dominance can be overcome. We can do it because we has puny brains.

You have just proved once again you have little to no understanding of nature.

Nature is always trying to maintain balance, which is why when one species gets out of line there are checks and balances to bring it back into line. If one was to think that this happens overnight and does not take generation to occur they would also be in the camp of people that have no understanding of an eco-system and how it works.

If an animal populations goes beyond its balance, things like disease will come in to thin the heard among other things.

When a population is able to breed beyond its means (ie. produce more offspring that its environment can support) you will have weaker offspring which is what has been happening to humans for some time. Examples of this can be seen everywhere.
 Aries_328
Joined: 10/16/2011
Msg: 132
view profile
History
Has society bred stupidity?
Posted: 9/29/2012 12:42:15 PM
How to decide...
Are we getting dumber?
Is it on purpose or natural?
If on purpose then who is doing it?
If it is natural what does that mean?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/post/the-closing-of-the-the-liberal-lefts-mind/2012/04/01/gIQA8g6cpS_blog.html


The analysis begins from a nonpolitical fact: Numerous studies of both the UC system and of higher education nationwide demonstrate that students who graduate from college are increasingly ignorant of history and literature. They are unfamiliar with the principles of American constitutional government. And they are bereft of the skills necessary to comprehend serious books and effectively marshal evidence and argument in written work.


That fits nicely with this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zY3b1a-zGwA0s

at around 32 minutes he goes into the 'whole language' approach used to teach. The****and jane style of learning to read.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whole_language

Whole language describes a literacy philosophy which emphasizes that children should focus on meaning and strategy instruction. It is often contrasted with phonics-based methods of teaching reading and writing which emphasize instruction for decoding and spelling.


Whole language is also possibly linked to dyslexia
http://www.educationnews.org/articles/whole-language-causes-dyslexia-.html

he matrix of proof - "connecting the dots" - draws upon the National Reading Panel report (2000), brain research at UCLA and Yale, and data from a new testing tool that quantifies the damage to children's reading that manifests as a "whole-word dyslexia"


Where does Whole Language philosophy come from?
from the earlier wiki link.

The whole language approach to phonics grew out of Noam Chomsky's ideas about language acquisition. In 1967


Who is Noam Chomsky?

In his late twenties, Chomsky became a reader of the periodical Living Marxism, which was published in Chicago by Marxist thinker Paul Mattick (1904–1981), a council communist. The magazine critically assessed the situation in Joseph Stalin's Soviet Union and the developments of the Second World War. Although he rejected its Marxist theoretical basis, Chomsky would become heavily influenced by the council communist movement, voraciously reading the Living Marxism articles by the likes of Antonie Pannekoek and Karl Korsch.[49] Chomsky came to know Mattick personally, but would later describe him as "too orthodox a Marxist for my taste".[50] He also took a great interest in the political theories of the Marlenites, an obscure group of American anti-Stalinist Marxists led by George Spiro who had united under the Leninist League. The Marlenites argued that the Second World War was "phoney" because it had been orchestrated by Western capitalists and the "state capitalists" governing the Soviet Union in order to crush the European proletariat, a viewpoint Chomsky agreed with.


So, the links are there. What would the 'Art of War' say about the links?
 Aristotle_Amadopolis
Joined: 12/8/2011
Msg: 133
Has society bred stupidity?
Posted: 9/29/2012 5:03:07 PM

The analysis begins from a nonpolitical fact: Numerous studies of both the UC system and of higher education nationwide demonstrate that students who graduate from college are increasingly ignorant of history and literature. They are unfamiliar with the principles of American constitutional government. And they are bereft of the skills necessary to comprehend serious books and effectively marshal evidence and argument in written work.

So to address the problem, one needs to look at the source.

Look into how the curriculum for high schools are chosen based on the text books available.

Learn how the whole text book business works and see how states like Texas are able to influence what goes into them and the lies and untruths that have been injected.

Also consider that the majority of history is written by the winners, thus reading must be done with that in mind.

Kids are coming out of schools dumber because of the dummies that are controlling the curriculum combines with school programs like "No Child Left Behind" that do nothing to but encourage a teach the test atmosphere and do nothing to advance the learning process.
 Aries_328
Joined: 10/16/2011
Msg: 134
view profile
History
Has society bred stupidity?
Posted: 9/29/2012 5:38:57 PM

So to address the problem, one needs to look at the source.


What if you don't like what you find? Ignore it?

Source of American Education Theory:
John Dewey
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_education

The "Progressive Education Movement," starting in the 1880s and lasting for sixty years, helped boost American public schools from a budding idea to the regular norm. John Dewey, a principal figure in this movement from the 1880s to 1904, set the tone for educational philosophy as well as concrete school reforms. His reactions to the prevailing theories and practices in education, corrections made to these philosophies, and recommendations to teachers and administrators to embrace “the new education,” provide a vital account of the history of the development of educational thinking in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.4 Dewey placed so called pragmatism above moral absolutes and helped give rise to situational ethics.


When it started really going wrong. The Moral Majority period
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/jan/27/newt-gingrich-betrayed-ronald-reagan/

Although Mr. Gingrich was an unknown congressman after being elected in 1978, he was one of the very few Republicans who voted for the creation of the Department of Education under Jimmy Carter, a position Reagan abhorred and a central campaign whipping boy in the 1980 campaign.


What it is now.
http://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/focus/goals.html

The Department of Education has identified a limited number of priority goals that will be a particular focus over the next two years. These goals, which will help measure the success of the Department's cradle-to-career education strategy, reflect the importance of teaching and learning at all levels of the education system. These goals are consistent with the Department's four-year Strategic Plan and will be used to regularly monitor and report progress. To view information on all Department programs


Cradle to career?


Improve outcomes for all children from birth through third grade.

Improve outcomes from birth? Education at birth?

Sigh... I'm sure no baby left behind is going to be a raging success... What is the purpose of all of this?

So... I know where I can't help landing every time I look. Show me a different perspective that says that it isn't a left wing controlled and dominated system that has lead to a miserable and ineffective and weak education... Origins, relationships, idologies, philosophies and actions matter.

Is it too late? Funny, I don't think so. No one believes it is occurring so they wouldn't notice if it was wiped out. Abolish the Dept of education and turn it back into a statistical collection office. Collect numbers but under no circumstances dictate outcomes. But, teachers union have to be dealt with. The new home of predators needs to be exposed. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443437504577547313612049308.html

In the last five years in New York City, 97 tenured teachers or school employees have been charged by the Department of Education with sexual misconduct.


Has society bred stupidity or is it something else?
 Aristotle_Amadopolis
Joined: 12/8/2011
Msg: 135
Has society bred stupidity?
Posted: 9/29/2012 5:55:01 PM

So... I know where I can't help landing every time I look. Show me a different perspective that says that it isn't a left wing controlled and dominated system that has lead to a miserable and ineffective and weak education... Origins, relationships, idologies, philosophies and actions matter.

I did.

As I addressed the curriculum which is seriously lacking in facts which I believe is a big cause in the reason why people in university are doing poorly in history.

With regards to the education system and how it is run it once again falls to:

Step 1: Underfund system to the point that failures are exposed.

Step 2: Point out failures in system.

Step 3: Profit.

It is all about big business wanting a piece of that education pie and convincing people that the future is in selling your kids education to the lowest bidder.

One can not blame the system without looking at how the system is run and in comparison to well funded private schools who seem to do a great job in turning out the best and brightest, but one of the major differences between the two, is the amount of funding that is allocated.


So has the failure to understand that a sound investment in the populations education pays dividends in the end or has society breed stupidity into the people that think it should be trusted to the highest bidder?



For reference read:

Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong
James W. Loewen (Author)

Americans have lost touch with their history, and in this thought-provoking book, Professor James Loewen shows why. After surveying twelve leading high school American history texts, he has concluded that not one does a decent job of making history interesting or memorable. Marred by an embarrassing combination of blind patriotism, mindless optimism, sheer misinformation, and outright lies, these books omit almost all the ambiguity, passion, conflict, and drama from our past....
 Aries_328
Joined: 10/16/2011
Msg: 136
view profile
History
Has society bred stupidity?
Posted: 9/29/2012 6:17:15 PM

did.

As I addressed the curriculum which is seriously lacking in facts which I believe is a big cause in the reason why people in university are doing poorly in history.

With regards to the education system and how it is run it once again falls to:

Step 1: Underfund system to the point that failures are exposed.

Step 2: Point out failures in system.

Step 3: Profit.


But none of this is true in the least since your premise starts out, "underfund system to the point that failures are exposed."

??? Are you saying we don't spend enough on education? That we underfund it? The money is stolen by the unions.
the us spends almost $2000 more per child than the next highest country
http://mat.usc.edu/u-s-education-versus-the-world-infographic/

So what are you trying to say? That we should underfund the system to expose the true failures? There is some logic there. I don't understand why its so difficult to see that the people that control the education system are the progressive liberals and that everything we have wrong with our system is a direct result of their idologies and philosophies of outcome. The attempt to set standards based testing was an attempt to have demonstrable accountability so what do the educators do.. they teach to the test.

Your assertion that it is corporatism is pretty baseless. There were some attempts by the schools over the past few years to find funding elsewhere and that lead to very bizarre intrusion by corporations in the school. I think most of that is now pretty much gone.

Public education is pretty much completely government owned operated and maintained from local, state, federal. To say it isn't is pretty bizarre. There are private schools and non government schools and they often have higher reputations.

I didn't find the original source of study but another article referencing it
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1670063,00.html


By contrast, achievement tests measure the amount of material students have committed to memory in any particular field.) Combined with high-school grades, SAT scores are the best predictor of how kids will do in their freshman year of college. And the data in the new study shows that private-school students outperform public-school students on the SAT.

Isn't that just because richer private-school kids can afford to be coached more before the SAT? No — remember that this study carefully controlled for socioeconomic status. Rather, it appears private schools do more to develop students' critical-thinking abilities — not just the rote memorization required to do well on achievement tests.


Money isn't the problem.
 Aristotle_Amadopolis
Joined: 12/8/2011
Msg: 137
Has society bred stupidity?
Posted: 9/29/2012 6:39:02 PM

...I don't understand why its so difficult to see that the people that control the education system are the progressive liberals and that everything we have wrong with our system is a direct result of their idologies and philosophies of outcome...

It is difficult to see because it is not the case.

I am giving specif examples and you are talking about ideologies and philosophies.

The school books in most US schools are the direct result of what the Texas board of educations decides and that board is heavily influenced by fundamentalists and they have bullied book publishers into printing lies in text books.

"...If you're creating a new textbook, therefore, you start by scrutinizing "Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills" (TEKS). This document is drawn up by a group of curriculum experts, teachers, and political insiders appointed by the 15 members of the Texas Board of Education, currently five Democrats and ten Republicans, about half of whom have a background in education. TEKS describes what Texas wants and what the entire nation will therefore get.

Texas is truly the tail that wags the dog. There is, however, a tail that wags this mighty tail. Every adoption state allows private citizens to review textbooks and raise objections. Publishers must respond to these objections at open hearings.

In the late '60s, a Texas couple, Mel and Norma Gabler, figured out how to use their state's adoption hearings to put pressure on textbook publishers. The Gablers had no academic credentials or teaching background, but they knew what they wanted taught -- phonics, sexual abstinence, free enterprise, creationism, and the primacy of Judeo-Christian values -- and considered themselves in a battle against a "politically correct degradation of academics."

Expert organizers, the Gablers possessed a flair for constructing arguments out of the language of official curriculum guidelines. The nonprofit corporation they founded 43 years ago, Educational Research Analysts, continues to review textbooks and lobby against liberal content in them.

The Gablers no longer appear in person at adoption hearings, but through workshops, books, and how-to manuals, they trained a whole generation of conservative Christian activists to carry on their work..."


A Textbook Example of What's Wrong with Education
A former schoolbook editor parses the politics of educational publishing.
By Tamim Ansary
http://www.edutopia.org/muddle-machine




...The attempt to set standards based testing was an attempt to have demonstrable accountability so what do the educators do.. they teach to the test.

Which means it was a failure of the people that attempted to do that because they should have understood what the result would have been.



...Your assertion that it is corporatism is pretty baseless. There were some attempts by the schools over the past few years to find funding elsewhere and that lead to very bizarre intrusion by corporations in the school. I think most of that is now pretty much gone...

No it a fact that if people want to remove government control of the school system that it will be taken over by corporations.

If a government run system is not the answer, then it must be a privately run and corporations will run those private companies.

Unless you have a third option I would have to content that my assertion that private industry will replace government control and if said happens everyone will be worse off.




Public education is pretty much completely government owned operated and maintained from local, state, federal. To say it isn't is pretty bizarre. There are private schools and non government schools and they often have higher reputations.

I was insinuating that if those public schools are turned overt to the hands of corporations to run and manage and not the government, it will be a bad deal for everyone with the exception of those that will profit monetarily from it.
 Aries_328
Joined: 10/16/2011
Msg: 138
view profile
History
Has society bred stupidity?
Posted: 9/29/2012 6:58:55 PM


I am giving specif examples and you are talking about ideologies and philosophies


You are going to need to do better than this example. #1 Texas does not dictate any other states standards. #2 This is recent and has zero relationship to the past 40 years of education failure. You can't point to the flaws of a recently modified system and say that it was the cause of everything bad everywhere else before it. That is just not an accurate portrayal.

I'm not asking to point me to things you think are bad solutions to the problem. I'm asking you to show me that our current situation wasn't the result of the progressive origins, philosophies, and outcomes over the course of time.

That is like me blaming or crediting Obama for the cold war.
 Aristotle_Amadopolis
Joined: 12/8/2011
Msg: 139
Has society bred stupidity?
Posted: 9/29/2012 7:01:18 PM
Forward Lemmings

That would be a good and somewhat ironic example of things that society does to make us less smart.

Which would be the limited knowledge of lemmings and how Walt Disney changed everyone perceptions of them, by throwing some off a cliff for dramatic effect in a bogus documentary.

Well he did not through any off the cliff himself, they used a turn table rotating a a high rpm to fling them off.


We are led to believe everything we saw was true and a new generation is coming along and they are told not to question anything because mommy and daddy have it all under control and they know better while making sure a vast number of them have been diagnoses with some invented social disorder so they are good and doped up, you are going to produce dumb dumb f*cking kids, no doubt and none of those are the result of liberal minded thinking.
 drinkthesunwithmyface
Joined: 3/27/2012
Msg: 140
view profile
History
Has society bred stupidity?
Posted: 9/29/2012 7:16:01 PM
I see that it's still ineffective sometimes to cite post numbers instead of copy pasting posts. My message 127 refers to something that is no longer there, and now points to a post that I wasn't talking about at all. Arg!
 Aries_328
Joined: 10/16/2011
Msg: 141
view profile
History
Has society bred stupidity?
Posted: 9/29/2012 7:24:57 PM

We are led to believe everything we saw was true and a new generation is coming along and they are told not to question anything because mommy and daddy have it all under control and they know better while making sure a vast number of them have been diagnoses with some invented social disorder so they are good and doped up, you are going to produce dumb dumb f*cking kids, no doubt and none of those are the result of liberal minded thinking.


You have that all backwards... The new generation is to not only question your mommy and daddy but to rebel against them and that the government has it all under control and the government knows better because you likely have a social or learning disorder and here are necessary drugs to help you.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attention-deficit_hyperactivity_disorder_controversies

Meyers states that in the 1990s some social conservatives began to see ADHD as a sign of societies' hostility towards men and as an infringement upon the family.


You can thank this guy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell_Barkley

, Ph.D., is a Research Professor in the Department of Psychiatry at the State University of New York Upstate Medical University. Involved in research since 1973 and a licensed psychologist since 1977, he is an expert on attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and has devoted much of his scientific career to studying ADHD and related problems in children.


I can't argue that it isn't a real condition. Can you? However, what the diagnosis and treatment is doing to people today isn't a right wing conspiracy as you want to think.

Please try again.
 Aries_328
Joined: 10/16/2011
Msg: 142
view profile
History
Has society bred stupidity?
Posted: 9/29/2012 7:46:50 PM

Public Education were defunded by the post-Reagan Republican K-Street/C-Street bunch in the last 40 years.


Before I consider that as anything other than addressing how one state is addressing the issue as being relevent to anything else... please provide evidence that "Public Education was defunded post Reagan.

actually look at when the money started being spent
http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=66

It started in the 80's. Why... the Department of Education thanks to douche newt the closet leftist. I remember that time very well. the f*n moral majority with Al and Tipper Gore leading the charge.

http://thinkerspodium.wordpress.com/2009/07/24/tipper-gore-why-do-you-haunt-me-so/

But prior to that, I remember Gore from the political power he enabled his wife to wield back in the 1980s. Particularly in relation to the way she hooked up with the moral majority (particularly the wife of Reagan’s chief of staff) to crusade against the Devil’s music.
 emotionalheat
Joined: 6/27/2007
Msg: 143
view profile
History
Has society bred stupidity?
Posted: 9/29/2012 8:55:59 PM
Response to Gingerosity Msg 151


I'd think that stupidity and intelligence would be opposites, in general.

I like J. Martin Rlotsche's take on what intelligence means:


"Intelligence is derived from two words -- inter and legere -- inter meaning 'between' and legere meaning 'to choose.' An intelligent person, therefore, is one who has learned 'to choose between.' He knows that good is better than evil, that confidence should supersede fear, that love is superior to hate, that gentleness is better than cruelty, forbearance than intolerance, compassion than arrogance, and that truth has more virtue than ignorance."

I like the Rlotsche quote but it only speaks of one’s ability to identify between virtue and vice. How does a person attain the knowledge to identify between virtue and vice and what would guide the individual to choose one over the other?


So if intelligence is promoted by facilitating informed, rational choice, then the question becomes to what extent does society assist or retard such development and create an environment of freedom in which to choose?


I think your first assumption is backwards, we must first have knowledge (information) in order to apply it, rationally, to a choice. Therefore, having knowledge facilitates intelligence which is the ability to apply knowledge(information) to a choice in a rational manner. Then, I think, your two questions can be restated to be more relevant.
To what extent does society assist or retard the ability of individuals to attain knowledge (information)?
AND:
To what extent does society promote or inhibit an environment of freedom for the expression of choice?

Getting back to the first quote
I'd think that stupidity and intelligence would be opposites, in general.


I think that stupidity occurs in different ways, two of which I’ll state here.

1. Stupidity can be a willful act, it occurs when an individual makes an irrational choice by deliberately ignoring or denying information of which the individual has full knowledge.
2. Stupidity can also be attributed to the lack knowledge or , more specifically, ignorance of how to think critically. (at this point I leave out individuals who do not have the mental (cognitive) capacity to comprehend all the information much less make critical assessments)

In example (1) a stupid act by such an individual can be thought to be a rational and virtuous choice by those who are ‘ignorant’ of all the information that is necessary in order to form a more rational conclusion. For whatever reason, the ignorant have placed faith in the stupid person’s choice.

So Ignorance is lack of knowledge (or information), and those who lack information are not necessarily stupid. For example, a person may claim to be agnostic. That person may have sufficient information about various religious beliefs, and science and may be adept in critically evaluations. That person may reason (rationally) that all the dogma associated with religious beliefs is fallacious. On the other hand it might be going too far to think that humans will ever have it in their power to fully understand what preceded our universal existence. Therefore it might be best to consider that, at this point, there is not enough information with which to determine if our universe occurred through intention or through nature. I would not consider such a person to be stupid, but the person admits that ignorance (lack of information, which cannot be attained objectively) has played a role in the critical evaluation.

So stupidity is not the opposite of intelligence. Stupid people have knowledge and having knowledge facilitates intelligence. Ignorance however, is a lack of knowledge and since knowledge facilitates intelligence, the lace of it suggests the opposite of intelligence which is the ability to apply knowledge to a choice in a rational manner.

These are my thoughts but before I apply this thought process to the other comments about free market capitalism, widespread availability of scientific method and social contract, I would like to have some feedback.

Does it make sense that
Having knowledge facilitates intelligence which is the ability to apply knowledge(information) to choices in a rational manner. Would that make the following two questions relevant.

To what extent does society assist or retard the ability of individuals to attain knowledge (information)?
AND:
To what extent does society promote or inhibit an environment of freedom for the expression of choice?

And do my definitions of ‘Stupidity’ (1 & 2) and of ‘Ignorance’ lead to the my conclusion that:

Stupidity is not the opposite of intelligence. Stupid people have knowledge and having knowledge facilitates intelligence. Ignorance however, is a lack of knowledge and since knowledge facilitates intelligence, then the lack of it suggests the opposite of intelligence (intelligence being the ability to apply knowledge to a choice in a rational manner).
 rockondon
Joined: 2/21/2007
Msg: 144
view profile
History
Has society bred stupidity?
Posted: 9/29/2012 9:51:49 PM

Has society bred stupidity?

I think society is breeding stupidity.
Uneducated dolts spending their lives on income assistance are great at popping out tons of kids, far more than the higher educated ones who actually benefit society.
/devil's advocate.
 Outsideofthebox1
Joined: 8/18/2012
Msg: 145
Has society bred stupidity?
Posted: 9/30/2012 8:32:20 AM
Yes, it always has and always will...
 427cammer
Joined: 3/1/2008
Msg: 146
view profile
History
Has society bred stupidity?
Posted: 10/1/2012 4:37:13 PM
Aries msg. 156:


She does not allow for anyone thing to maintain dominance over all others.

Nature not only prefers equality, she demands it.

????.

No really... ?????

Project much? Anthropomorphism much?

So, if you would have called it 'He' that would be God and that would be bad but since you call it 'she' that is mother earth and tree huggers unite?

I had similar thoughts when I read that post.... kind of like he's deifying Nature. Strange animals people, no?... no matter how much they fight against it, it seems their brain has a "Flying Spaghetti Monster" shaped void in it that they feel compelled to fill up with whatever's available.

Nature abhors a vacuum.... so It is written.


Aries msg. 171:

actually look at when the money started being spent
http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=66

No one seems to want to touch this with a ten foot pole.

So.... from 1961 to 2008 spending on education has almost quadrupled?.... and people are still getting stupider?

Whodathunkit?
 Kohmelo
Joined: 9/20/2011
Msg: 147
view profile
History
Has society bred stupidity?
Posted: 10/2/2012 3:32:56 AM

So.... from 1961 to 2008 spending on education has almost quadrupled?.... and people are still getting stupider?

Did it actually quadruple?

http://www.thepeoplehistory.com/1961.html

How Much things cost in 1960
Average Cost of new house $12,700.00
Average Monthly Rent $98.00
Cost of a gallon of Gas 25 cents
23 inch Television $219.95
Average Cost of a new car $2,600.00
 427cammer
Joined: 3/1/2008
Msg: 148
view profile
History
Has society bred stupidity?
Posted: 10/2/2012 6:40:31 AM

Did it actually quadruple?

No, it actually went from $393 to $10,297 actual dollars (these are costs per pupil).... an increase of 26 times.

In adjusted for inflation dollars it almost quadrupled.... the link that Aries provided was there in my post.
 Kohmelo
Joined: 9/20/2011
Msg: 149
view profile
History
Has society bred stupidity?
Posted: 10/2/2012 9:02:35 PM

the link that Aries provided was there in my post.

...and there I was proving the thread title....
Anyways - look at the data.
61 thru 91 (30 years) the spending increase is 2.8 times whereas 91 thru '08 (27 years) the increase is only 33%, which is still large but pales in comparison to the first 30 years.
Most of the answers to the spending increases can be found in those first 30 years.
 Aries_328
Joined: 10/16/2011
Msg: 150
view profile
History
Has society bred stupidity?
Posted: 10/2/2012 9:57:11 PM

61 thru 91 (30 years) the spending increase is 2.8 times whereas 91 thru '08 (27 years) the increase is only 33%, which is still large but pales in comparison to the first 30 years.
Most of the answers to the spending increases can be found in those first 30 years.


I have no clue what you are trying to say but you need to learn about rates of change and exponential growth a bit before you can say that the first 30 years growth is similar to the recent 30 years. $1 : $2 and is 100%growth. $100
: $1000 is only 10% growth. Unless you were saying something different and that doesn't apply.

Now take our population of school children and we still compare to the rest of the world which means we spend a whole crapload more than any other country.
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php?title=File:Expenditure_on_educational_institutions,_2003_and_2008_(1).png&filetimestamp=20111117102022

For what? Now, keep in mind. I didn't say we are getting dumber. I think our overall intelligence has risen greatly. I also think that the effort to equalize education has lowered the bar for education and severely lowered standards. I also think the teaching methods are not based in teaching anymore and are more in self esteem which has no value in actually educating. Also, more kids depend on school for their meals which is an entirely different form of control.

So... What were you saying?

You guys really should read Plato's Republic. It's all covered.
 427cammer
Joined: 3/1/2008
Msg: 151
view profile
History
Has society bred stupidity?
Posted: 10/2/2012 10:20:59 PM

61 thru 91 (30 years) the spending increase is 2.8 times whereas 91 thru '08 (27 years) the increase is only 33%, which is still large but pales in comparison to the first 30 years.
Most of the answers to the spending increases can be found in those first 30 years.

From '91 to '08 is 17 years.

...anywhooo... not sure where you're going with this. Spending has not increased at the same rate as the first 30 years. Are you suggesting that it should have? If so, why?

Edit for above:

$1 : $2 and is 100%growth. $100: $1000 is only 10% growth.

From $100 to $1000 would be 1000% growth. I can be a bit obsessive/compulsive (read prick) about numbers.
 Aries_328
Joined: 10/16/2011
Msg: 152
view profile
History
Has society bred stupidity?
Posted: 10/3/2012 10:32:03 AM

From $100 to $1000 would be 1000% growth. I can be a bit obsessive/compulsive (read prick) about numbers.

!doh. so what you are saying is that 10% is not equal to 10x :D
 Kohmelo
Joined: 9/20/2011
Msg: 153
view profile
History
Has society bred stupidity?
Posted: 10/3/2012 8:04:18 PM

.anywhooo... not sure where you're going with this. Spending has not increased at the same rate as the first 30 years. Are you suggesting that it should have? If so, why?

Thanks for correcting my math - brain fart.
Anyways - No. I didn't suggest it should have nor did I suggest that it should not have. All I am saying is that the majority of the increase is in the first 30 years, thus the rate of change is no where near linear.
If you were to compare today vs 91, you'd see only 33% increase and while that may seem high, with increases in technology and rapid advances in sciences, I would expect that schools would dole out a few extra bucks, especially over the past 17 years.

So just to make it very clear, my point is this data was relevant 17 years ago (after the 280% increase) but is not so relevant for right now (33% increase over 17 years).
 Smplguy55
Joined: 1/10/2012
Msg: 154
Has society bred stupidity?
Posted: 10/10/2012 11:41:29 AM
Sadly humans are the most stump dumb creatures on this planet. We are the only creatures on this planet who systematically and willfully destroy the very things we require to survive (air, water, soil) Ponder this next time you get feeling like your really smart! Humbling!! George Carlin was spot on It's all bullshit and it's bad for you! R.I.P. George.
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  >