One of our most prolific writers, Joyce Carol Oates, was first in her immediate family to finish high school.
On Oct 29, 7:58 pm, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > We may have sunk too far for education to be much of an answer because > of its own prejudices. > > On 29 Oct, 22:41, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > As far as I remember, the you’re/your mistake is a typical Craig > > confusion, not Ian’s. That’s why he is pissed whereas Craig is the one > > who has always been too old. And Vam joins the bandwagon. But then who > > got these Minds Ayers rolling in the first place? > > > On 29 Okt., 14:40, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Yes Slip - the logic is 'strange' - a key element in a lot of > > > scientific thinking. Ian's wit is sharp here and there is much to > > > agree with. Does, for instance, this 'making everyone winners > > > sportsday' translate to the current fetish for accrediting everything > > > (from NVQs in stair sweeping) and the passing everyone habits in > > > schools and universities and the dilution of what school certificates > > > and degrees mean? Pat is talking a sophisticated educational language > > > that one can find in a recent Cambridge-led review - ideas that very > > > much seem to work in Greater Scandinavia and is linked as you point at > > > to notions education needs to be linked to a fairer society. The > > > pedantry over 'your' and 'you're' may also be a key problem - is this > > > attention to detail (sometimes good) or the kind of chronic limiting > > > of creativity 'red pen' often brings? Here, one would hope it's just > > > an 'in joke' that can damage neither Ian nor I, but it's also > > > representative of a miserable educational culture that is marking > > > grammatic literacy ahead of ideas. I've had really bright dyselxic > > > students reduced to tears and confidence collapse by much worse and > > > the arguments about this establishment bias go back to Labov how > > > sought to show one could find more intelligence in street-talk on real > > > problems than amongst Ivy League training mediocrity. Ian's tale was > > > short and cutting (to a chase). I can't remember how many people have > > > assumed I must be an idiot, sexist, racist and so on because I played > > > so much sport and was so competitive. I'd say the experience helped > > > make me the opposite. Key in Wittgenstein's form of deconstruction is > > > an ability to see many apparently opposing arguments are not what they > > > seem, that they can be based in similarities (the key notion in the > > > Ludwig and Snell programmes in the hsitory of science). Chris is > > > rig > > > ht too, that the 'chavs' can easily take advantge inn our society - > > > > we could go a lot further and spot this in forms of 'intellectual > > > chavism' and varieties of it inthe 'hoolier than thou' claiming moral > > > certainty, or even those apparently denying such certainty whilst > > > living very comfortably as commentators of the left. > > > > Pat suggests a solution of new competitions with worthy ends. Quite > > > right - almost nothing left to say and much to do. > > > > Before turning a few words in here I was 'supervising' my grandson and > > > some of his mates - it's half-term (pure joy!) - two black lads and > > > 'half-cast' (where do we get these terms?) and a lot of east-European > > > genes, now off in search of Jamil after some Grand Theft Auto. Not a > > > trace of racism amongst them and families who make a few extra chips > > > and such in hospitality - yet around us the old problems are rearing > > > their ugly heads again - they have never gone away. > > > > On the IQ stuff there is key scientific evidence - that we differ very > > > little genetically - that should be making us see the problem clearly > > > as indicating unfairness and a proneness to see certainties (such as > > > races lacking intelligence) where there is nothing other than cultural > > > elitism and self-deception, a repeated failure to see how different > > > and radical a fair society would be. Our kids sort of manage it - > > > what are we doing that destroys this? Sport is a good exemplar of how > > > much nonsense is talked on superiority, when looked at historically. > > > Classics are the success of ethnic minorities once colour-bars are > > > destroyed and 'showtime' allowed. How many of our 'so valuable we'll > > > die without paying them small fortunes bwankers' would survive if we > > > introduced open examinatons insttead of the current old boy network? > > > Sadly, only the colour and class origins of the King Mice would change > > > as it has in the NFL and Premier League, if we don't change the > > > broader structures. > > > > The arguments are strange and complicated - simplexity might emerge if > > > we worked harder. What we try todo needs aan understanding of > > > tolerance and a dropping of much almost iconographic levels of > > > remembered pain, whilst establishing a true history from which we can > > > work. Much of this history will be a history of failures and > > > unintended consequences. The question is partly about recognising > > > links between personal-individual virtue and social success. We have > > > been making do with greed and myth, including many about clarity and > > > certainty, many born in cultures equally unsuited to the current > > > crisis. I was going to send Ian some nappies as a gesture of help > > > with his problem, but obviously I should retain these for personal use > > > following Dr. Vam's diagnosis. > > > > It's sad to see cricket venues I once hoped to be god ennough to grace > > > in Pakistan being blown to bits. Sadder still is the feeble Olympian > > > movement that can organise obsessive drug-cheats into a festival (has > > > there been a decent incident at such since the Black Power glove?) > > > from which we never learn we could organise projects that would bring > > > peace, security and something to want to do? > > > > On 29 Oct, 12:07, Pat <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > On 28 Oct, 18:05, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Good thoughts all, Pat, but as noted, idealistic and utopian. Here's > > > > > where > > > > > it breaks down: > > > > > > 1. The intelligent and socially rsponsibble agree that disarmament and > > > > > non-competitive cooperation is the ideal, and take steps to make this > > > > > a > > > > > reality. > > > > > > 2. The brutes and anti-socials (chavs, if you will), recognize this > > > > > accurately as a weakness, and come take all the posessioons, > > > > > liberties, and > > > > > virginities of the rest of the group. > > > > > > Darwin accurately noted the brutality of nature,and it's onnly > > > > > idealism and > > > > > rank utopianism that allows us to believe that it could be anything > > > > > else. > > > > > Those who are raised upwithout thhe ability to recognize this, and > > > > > compete > > > > > accordingly, fail in the inevitable competitions which WILL occur. > > > > > I'll buy > > > > > your dream when one day goes by on this planet that a woman is not > > > > > raped. > > > > > I completely agree that the world will always afford us > > > > competitions but that they can be won by us all if we combine our > > > > efforts. I have no problem with ideals or idealism, outside the fact > > > > that they aren't striven towards. Possessions are a misnomer, liberty > > > > fades in the face of a space-time continuum and viginity MUST fail if > > > > we are all to survive to the next generation. The brutes, as you call > > > > them, hould thhen, as an act of compassion by the rest of us, be > > > > removed. No doubt that's why we have no more Neanderthals--perhaps > > > > the Cro-Magnon were more evolved spiritually and found that they HAD > > > > to remove the brutes in order to survive t OUU stagee. > > > > If we want competitions in schools, rather than meaningless egg-n- > > > > spoon races, why not have a competition to reforest an area and reward > > > > the individual/class/school the excels in planting the most trees? At > > > > least there's a tangible and beneficial result from the competition, > > > > rather than a meaningless 'sport'. > > > > I see no benefits to having what amounts to 'circuses' when there > > > > are people (homeless and starving) who require bread. At least Rome > > > > gave 'bread and circuses'; we only give circuses. How sad is THAT? > > > > > > On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 1:57 PM, Pat <[email protected]> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > On 28 Oct, 14:01, Ian Pollard <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > 2009/10/28 Pat <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > Of course we have schools all wrong. We encourage children > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > compete against one another--to score better on tests than their > > > > > > > > peers, to excel at sports over their their peers and teach them > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > the only way THEY will do well is if they can continue to beat > > > > > > > > everyone else 'out there' in the real world. > > > > > > > > Totally wrong, Pat. This is exactly what we don't do any more in > > > > > > > schools. > > > > > > My > > > > > > > nephew's recent sports day was pathetic. No prizes for the winners > > > > > > (because > > > > > > > "everyone was a winner")! What a fucking celebration of > > > > > > > mediocrity. > > > > > > > Well, you can prove that by, first, adopting my system for a > > > > > > generation (maybe 2) and seeing if it works better or not. Anything > > > > > > else is just hot air. 'Sport' doesn't matter as much as getting > > > > > > along > > > > > > with one another. And, if you think it does, then, I'm afraid, > > > > > > we'll > > > > > > have to agree to disagree. Nothing lost in that. But nothing > > > > > > gained. > > > > > > > > Unsurprisingly, the most popular schools -- and the ones with the > > > > > > > highest > > > > > > > level of achievement -- are the ones that are independent, fee > > > > > > > paying, > > > > > > and > > > > > > > encourage competition in all areas. > > > > > > > But how many bright, poor, homeless people go there? Straw man, > > > > > > I'm afraid. All of us are equally individual. I don't ascribe to > > > > > > 'animal farm' ideals. > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
