Slashdot Mirror
University Offers Course To Help Sniff Out and Refute 'Bullshit' (engadget.com)
An anonymous reader shares an Engadget report: There's now a course at the University of Washington, "Calling Bullshit in the Age of Big Data" that helps you find bad information and show others why it's bad. The instructors, Professors Jevin D. West and Carl T. Bergstrom, jokingly write that "we will be astonished if these skills do not turn out to be among the most useful ... that you acquire during the course of your college education." They add that the intention is not to be political, as "both sides of the aisle have proven themselves facile at creating and spreading bullshit." The intention, then, is to arm students (and the public if they want) with the tools to combat a scourge of misinformation that's aided and abetted by social media.
1. College is the only means of success in modern society. trade schools and vocational professions are unsuccessful.
2. college debt is normal, and shouldnt be questioned. you will become successful after college.
3. college atheletes are students and not paid performers, despite lucrative contract deals with advertisers and meaningless classes.
4. college deans command high salaries because they work hard and get results.
Good people go to bed earlier.
Now you can't say shit without some snowflake getting their feelings hurt because, you know, feelings are more important than the truth and stuff.
I sexually identify as a snowflake, and this triggers me!
I call bullshit on this...
Totally saw that coming and am slightly annoyed you beat me to it...
I sexually identify as a gun. Trigger me all night long, baby!
Now you can't say shit without some snowflake getting their feelings hurt because, you know, feelings are more important than the truth and stuff.
I sexually identify as a snowflake, and this triggers me!
Is that an icicle in your pocket, or are you just glad to see me?
I run into the same issues with my wife - who does not understand things like the limitations of the conversion of a proposition; consequently, she does not understand me, for how can a woman expect to appreciate a professor of logic, if the simplest cloth-eared syllogism causes her to flounder?
For example, given the premise, 'all fish live underwater' and 'all mackerel are fish', my wife will conclude, not that 'all mackerel live underwater', but that 'if she buys kippers it will not rain', or that 'trout live in trees', or even that 'I do not love her any more.' This she calls 'using her intuition'.
I call it 'crap', and it gets me very irritated because it is not logical.
Take it to the limit, everybody to the limit, come on, everybody fhqwhgads.