|
| Thread: Achievements / Decisions you're proud of |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 · «PREV / NEXT» |
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
posted February 15, 2010 02:22 AM |
|
|
Quote:
not really. you could get as much knowledge or even more without going to the school
Sure. You could also just go around claiming to have knowledge and skills that you do not have.
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
Fauch
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 15, 2010 02:42 AM |
|
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted February 15, 2010 06:08 AM |
|
|
I think you're missing my point.
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
Binabik
Responsible
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted February 15, 2010 06:54 AM |
|
|
Quote:
You could also just go around claiming to have knowledge and skills that you do not have
You've obviously never lived in California. That's standard procedure out there.
|
|
ohforfsake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted February 15, 2010 12:55 PM |
|
|
As I see it.
University as a method for enhanced education is justified by two things.
1) The first thing however, assembling of knowledge, is in the modern age, which as time goes seems to get more and more accurate, not that big of a problem due to inventions that make us able to easily communicate over great distances.
At least I have never had trouble from authorities on different fields when I have questions (such as teachers, or workers in the given field) to get them to justify why the answer is so and such or redirecting me for relevant literature.
The reason it earlier was a justification is that it is something a book cannot offer as the communication with a book is one-way only, but as the world gets more open this justification won't last, since it is not required.
I would actually claim it is by far better the people behind the lectures get questions at a collective place on the internet, or something like that, and if they find it relevant they can share the question and the justified answer with the rest of the class, than to been asked during lecture, meaning changing focus and disturbing the planned process.
2) The second thing however, which is also about justification of knowledge, but not related to the openess of the world for what communication is considered, is the ability to collect methods at one place where you can directly observe and test out different theories.
That is, books can make you a know-it-all, but you always have to question and justify your knowledge, which I believe you only can do through observation.
Of course the degree of justification through observation varies a lot, in math, as an example, I believe it is purely a logical process defined through a set of axioms, whereby no real measurement is required.
However in most others, if not all, fields there's a connection with the real world, which requires for measurements to be made.
The testing part is relevant to testing out theories and not the method of deriving theories, unless it is done completely statistical, which I am not very informed about.
So if you want to learn classical mechanics, you can either take Newtons laws of emotions for granted, and whatever other aximons there may be, just accepting them without question, or you can measure if the world really acts this way, then use logic on the system which a book can offer and then test if the theories you derive from these axioms holds true by more observations.
When you've justified it to a satisfying degree, you can make justified predictions, etc.
However, without the measurements, without the justification, you could as well have been reading the bible if you ask me.
What I would really like about the transfer from the education system to the work environment would be if it would evaluate the interest of different subjects, by some, to me unknown, objective way. That is, as I see it, most work requires of you to make some kind of progress to get ahead of everyone else to get success, every work employer wants their worker to get success, because that means a better worker, however to create this progress, a know how is not enough if you don't have the interest.
That is, the work must be meaningful to the worker, otherwise you can just as well have drones/robots that does the exact same actions if no progress in the given field is desired. What makes it meaningful is not how well you are to prepare for different tests and remember and connect stuff in your head, no I think what makes it meaningful is that it to some degree interests you.
____________
Living time backwards
|
|
watcher83
Supreme Hero
Child of Malassa
|
|
posted February 15, 2010 04:06 PM |
|
|
Well actually, my work.
I never liked law school while I was a student(had v.good grades though) but in the last three years practicing as a lawyer were really nice, did a lot of things I never thought I would be able to do, and generally managed pretty well. Financially I don't depend on my parents for quite a while, and feeling quite proud of it actually, and being able to make it as a lawyer when so many friends failed and were forced to look for something else.
____________
|
|
Fauch
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 15, 2010 06:09 PM |
|
|
Quote:
What I would really like about the transfer from the education system to the work environment would be if it would evaluate the interest of different subjects, by some, to me unknown, objective way. That is, as I see it, most work requires of you to make some kind of progress to get ahead of everyone else to get success, every work employer wants their worker to get success, because that means a better worker, however to create this progress, a know how is not enough if you don't have the interest.
That is, the work must be meaningful to the worker, otherwise you can just as well have drones/robots that does the exact same actions if no progress in the given field is desired. What makes it meaningful is not how well you are to prepare for different tests and remember and connect stuff in your head, no I think what makes it meaningful is that it to some degree interests you.
but how many teachers can do that? how often do you hear students (at least here, in france) who do not get the point in studying such or such subjects? the usual justification for studying is usually that the "baccalauréat" is needed to ensure your future. but the "baccalauréat" itself means close to nothing.
Students are just said "you need to get your baccalauréat". not even sure if they know why or if there is really a good reason for this. they just think that if they can get that little piece of paper, then it will save their life.
|
|
ohforfsake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted February 16, 2010 02:03 AM |
|
|
Yes sure, with the current system it does not seem very natural to implement such a measure, however I do also think the current system is flawed in the way that it does not bring education to the individual, it rather brings "trivia" to the mass.
That is at least until you get to decide for yourself, which you actually don't even do at university.
As it is now, at least for the countries I am aware, education is not a mean for higher freedom of the individual, it is rather seen as a mean for higher profit for society. That is at least the only way I can see it justified with all the silly beauracracy that seems to flood the universities of my country and tries to rush the students through their educations.
____________
Living time backwards
|
|
Fauch
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 16, 2010 02:56 AM |
|
Edited by Fauch at 02:57, 16 Feb 2010.
|
yeah, seems that way.
by the way, I got some diplomas myself, and I'm still wondering what's their use.
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted February 16, 2010 03:13 AM |
|
|
What's the use of a Nobel Prize?
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
watcher83
Supreme Hero
Child of Malassa
|
|
posted February 16, 2010 08:16 AM |
|
|
especially since it was given to those guys who talked about global warming and now they apologize for mistaking
and lol peace prize for Obama, next year maybe George W. Bush
____________
|
|
ohforfsake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted February 16, 2010 01:12 PM |
|
|
That made me wonder, why does it seem so important for so many people that they get credit for the work they have done?
Edit: I remember when I was going to choose my education, many of those I know talked about there either needed to be money in it, or fame, but it didn't matter if it interested them.
For me it was the opposite, what I do must be meaningful to myself, I don't care much about money, except if I have too little of course. Neither do I like fame much. Though I suppose I subconsciously do, though that is not something I am going to continue on in this topic.
I understand that without credits given properly it can be harder to find out who you want to hire for even more interesting projects, though the kind of fame/credits I am talking about is not in the sense of the work community knowing who to rely on, but in the sense of the general public acknowledge a single person. That is the kind of fame that triggers a lot of "happy emotions" in me, which I however see no rational reason to pursue.
____________
Living time backwards
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted February 16, 2010 03:27 PM |
|
|
Quote:
especially since it was given to those guys who talked about global warming and now they apologize for mistaking
and lol peace prize for Obama, next year maybe George W. Bush
Let's exclude the easy-to-criticize Peace Prize and discuss the real Prizes, such as Medicine, Chemistry and Physics. What is their value?
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 16, 2010 03:34 PM |
|
|
Objection, your honor.
Let's not exclude the peace prize, just because it may be easy to critisize. Just because something can be critisized easily doesn't mean the thing as such is useless. If this would be standard procedure nothing would be left - you can easily critisize democracy, capitalism, life as such, medicine, and basically everything at all.
So. Just because this or that specific pick may be questionable (which happened in every other Nobel Prize department as well), the price as such isn't.
Should you mean, however, that the Peace Prize as such would be questionable (compared with the other departments) I'd vehemently diagree.
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted February 16, 2010 03:57 PM |
|
Edited by Corribus at 15:58, 16 Feb 2010.
|
JJ, it's no question that the Peace Prize is more politicized than any other prize category, as Nobel left no criteria about how it should be awarded. How could it not be? Certainly, there have been Chemistry or Physics prizes awarded that have been controversial, and some of the rules surrounding the way the Prizes are awarded are rather unfair (well, perhaps "limiting" is a better word).
That said, critizing this specific prize or that specific prize is beside the point I was making. You can, if you are so inclined, level a criticism against ANY achievement award. And people always will. And often those criticisms are warranted. But is that then to say that all achievement awards have no value, and we should recognize nobody for anything?
The original contention was that a diploma or an academic degree - and, by implication, a formal education - has no value. Well, I'm sorry, but I beg to differ. I worked my ass off for the greater part of a decade to earn my degree, and it does actually mean something to be able to hold up an authenticated piece of paper which verifies to the world that I spent a lot of time and energy trying to master something that's both important to me personally and also to the world at large. In a more perfect world, I suppose, knowledge would be its own reward and personal integrity would be make the acquisition of proof of accomplishment unnecessary. Sadly, humans, being far from honest and selfless heroes, make more formal bookkeeping practices necessary. The value of achievement awards, titles, distinctions, and academic degrees is that they protect the people who have dedicated their lives to something special or important from the rest of the charlatans out there who would falsely claim that they had done the same.
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
watcher83
Supreme Hero
Child of Malassa
|
|
posted February 16, 2010 04:06 PM |
|
|
An academic degree is an academic degree ( where you have to earn it yourself) where as Nobel prizes are similar to Oscars, where a comitee based on their criteria pick a winner, that doesn't mean that other people's work from that domain is less important.
E.G.: 1)in 1998 Shakespeare in Love won the oscar although I and many, many other people consider it to be lame.
2)In literature Mario Vargas LLosa never won the Nobel prize, which doesn't make him less of a great writer as the others who have won it.
____________
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 16, 2010 04:06 PM |
|
|
Quote:
That said, critizing this specific prize or that specific prize is beside the point I was making. You can, if you are so inclined, level a criticism against ANY achievement award. And people always will. And often those criticisms are warranted. But is that then to say that all achievement awards have no value, and we should recognize nobody for anything?
 That was exactly the point of my post (and I wrote something similar).
Which is the reason why I don't want to exclude the Peace Prize - why should we?
The question was what the merits of Prizes and (diplomas and so on) are in general, not whether a SPECIFIC prize or diploma may be more questionable than others.
A prize is a prize and a diploma a diploma - whether it's the Oscar or the Golden Raspberry, a Nobel Prize or an Elementary School Prize, a High School Diploma or a Driving License.
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted February 16, 2010 04:26 PM |
|
Edited by Corribus at 16:27, 16 Feb 2010.
|
Quote:
An academic degree is an academic degree ( where you have to earn it yourself) where as Nobel prizes are similar to Oscars, where a comitee based on their criteria pick a winner, that doesn't mean that other people's work from that domain is less important.
E.G.: 1)in 1998 Shakespeare in Love won the oscar although I and many, many other people consider it to be lame.
2)In literature Mario Vargas LLosa never won the Nobel prize, which doesn't make him less of a great writer as the others who have won it.
I see; so you would suggest we offer no awards of merit to anyone? You are aware, are you not, that academic degrees are also awarded by the same process, in which "a comitee [sic] based on their criteria pick a winner"? In the case of doctoral degrees, those criteria are not always made abundantly clear, vary from institution to institution, and are seldomly applied fairly or consistently. I will be the first to admit that this is frustrating and unfair, and the politicizing of the awarding of academic degrees, and the failure to use (and enforce) consistent criteria in awarding them, is a major point of contention with me. I could discuss the problems with academic degrees for pages and pages, using a lot of personal anecdotes to do it, and you'd be surprised, perhaps, given your post above, that the academic degrees and, for example, the Oscars or Nobel Prizes, share a lot of common problems. For example, awarding Obama the Nobel Peace Prize was as much a travesty as it was an unabashed political statement, made especially apparent and laughable given his recent commitment to MORE troops in Afghanistan; to my mind, these sorts of things permanently put a taint on the Prize and decrease its value. So too does a dissertation committee awarding a Ph.D. to an undeserving graduate student only because he happens to be studying under a professor who brings in a lot of grant money to the University, while they deny the same Ph.D. to a more deserving candidate who works under an assistant professor. Certainly not fair, certainly not right. Certainly it lessens the value of the Ph.D.
Still: corruption and politicization doesn't render the degree (or the Nobel Prize) value-less.
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 16, 2010 04:34 PM |
|
|
I support this by claiming that EVERYONE has his or her standards. Usually a prize or diploma is given by the establishment or mainstream of a society.
Of course there are always those who don't agree with the specifics - but they will develop their own standards, prizes and so on.
These things are acknowledgements of achievements by a more or less established and "relevant" part of society. People will respect those acknowledgements the more they identify with that part of society.
|
|
ohforfsake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted February 16, 2010 04:44 PM |
|
|
But to get these prizes, must you not already be a well respected part of the relevant community, thereby making that argument obsolete?
I mean, I don't think I have ever heard of a case where someone completely unknown got a prize, but then again, I have not really looked deep into it. It would just seem weird if these prizes for extraordinary events, which to me seem more directed towards the general public than the community of relavence, would be what made someone known in the community in the first place.
____________
Living time backwards
|
| |
|
|
