I don't know about that, I think you're just defining "works" as if pacifism is a means to and end. Pacifism doesn't have to be a means to ends. No one saying you might not get killed as a pacifist. But you people who aren't pacifists get killed all the time as well. The whole point is that you don't do violence that's all. Nothing else to be really gained by it. Even if you end up dieing (which everyone does at some point) it still works..
I don't necesarily think it's as simple the the benefit to citizens on avg. With that idea we could have a 90/10 scenario where 10% of the population gets 90% of the benefit. That's not going to work in a democracy. It's bound to lead to income inequalities that will hurt our society as a whole.
Learning without instruction? That's crazy, I mean some students might be fine at that, but the vast others are going to get screwed. Now I have nothing wrong with critial thinking and originality and we need a balance. on the other hand you can see in lots of asian countries they teach to a strict regimin and graduate a large number of engineers who certainly seem to be able to get the job done. Hell half our jobs are going over there. We need more teaching not less. No one can learn every topic on their own, somethings just need to be taught to you. You just wouldn't learn them any other way. I'm not knocking original thinking or creativity, but most ppl aren't going to be able to self learn very complex topics.
I think you're living in a dream world engineers are compared to everyone, doctors, lawayers, economists, functional business ppl, shopkeepers and it's fairly easy to see how. It's called money. We all need to get paid no matter what you do the bills keep coming. Now I would agree a liberal arts degree isn't like a engineering degree. Nor should it be, but you have to wonder when countries in asia are turning out thousands more engineers than we are much cheaper, if something is going wrong. You can deny it all you want, but their something profoundly wrong there.
I would tend to agree with you, and that's the whole point. That's the exact reason foriegn students come over for undergrad or post grad degrees in engineering and have no problem, while our students struggle like crazy. Although what academic advisor let him atke a genius level class is beyond me. We really need high schools that prepare our students and colleges that can teach studnets who graduated from our high schools.
I gotta kind of agree allot of schools really don't give people a good idea what they're teaching in a particular major early on. Although that's compounded by the fact that lots of people do work that has little too do with their degrees. But the general impression on engineering schools from the article, I went to a hug university with a big engineering college and I only lasted a year or so until i went to MIS instead, much easier, jobs, were better, but I have to say the stuff I learned just seemed much more practical to all the jobs I wanted to Sysadmin, network engeeing, IT work. Hist first year in engineering college sounds just like mine, I mean that kind of teching style is just not going to work for everyone. Also I always though allot of engineering schools tend to spend little if any time really teaching students. They just seemed to expect you to know everything. I dunno that may work sometimes, but overall it's obviously not working in our educational system.
I gotta agree, lot of colleges don't really give you a good idea what the major is until it's too late. I also kinda gotta agree with the article, mabe I'm baised because I left the engineering school and went into MIS after a year, but I found the same thing. Allot of people just don't learn well without any help or even basic teaching. Plus it al=ways seems like allot of engineering schools rushed students through things and gave them crushing class loads for no reason I could ever see. I dunno don't seem like the best way to learn at all.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know about that, I think you're just defining "works" as if pacifism is a means to and end. Pacifism doesn't have to be a means to ends. No one saying you might not get killed as a pacifist. But you people who aren't pacifists get killed all the time as well. The whole point is that you don't do violence that's all. Nothing else to be really gained by it. Even if you end up dieing (which everyone does at some point) it still works..
I don't necesarily think it's as simple the the benefit to citizens on avg. With that idea we could have a 90 /10 scenario where 10% of the population gets 90% of the benefit. That's not going to work in a democracy. It's bound to lead to income inequalities that will hurt our society as a whole.
Learning without instruction? That's crazy, I mean some students might be fine at that, but the vast others are going to get screwed. Now I have nothing wrong with critial thinking and originality and we need a balance. on the other hand you can see in lots of asian countries they teach to a strict regimin and graduate a large number of engineers who certainly seem to be able to get the job done. Hell half our jobs are going over there. We need more teaching not less. No one can learn every topic on their own, somethings just need to be taught to you. You just wouldn't learn them any other way. I'm not knocking original thinking or creativity, but most ppl aren't going to be able to self learn very complex topics.
I think you're living in a dream world engineers are compared to everyone, doctors, lawayers, economists, functional business ppl, shopkeepers and it's fairly easy to see how. It's called money. We all need to get paid no matter what you do the bills keep coming. Now I would agree a liberal arts degree isn't like a engineering degree. Nor should it be, but you have to wonder when countries in asia are turning out thousands more engineers than we are much cheaper, if something is going wrong. You can deny it all you want, but their something profoundly wrong there.
I would tend to agree with you, and that's the whole point. That's the exact reason foriegn students come over for undergrad or post grad degrees in engineering and have no problem, while our students struggle like crazy. Although what academic advisor let him atke a genius level class is beyond me. We really need high schools that prepare our students and colleges that can teach studnets who graduated from our high schools.
I gotta kind of agree allot of schools really don't give people a good idea what they're teaching in a particular major early on. Although that's compounded by the fact that lots of people do work that has little too do with their degrees. But the general impression on engineering schools from the article, I went to a hug university with a big engineering college and I only lasted a year or so until i went to MIS instead, much easier, jobs, were better, but I have to say the stuff I learned just seemed much more practical to all the jobs I wanted to Sysadmin, network engeeing, IT work. Hist first year in engineering college sounds just like mine, I mean that kind of teching style is just not going to work for everyone. Also I always though allot of engineering schools tend to spend little if any time really teaching students. They just seemed to expect you to know everything. I dunno that may work sometimes, but overall it's obviously not working in our educational system.
I gotta agree, lot of colleges don't really give you a good idea what the major is until it's too late. I also kinda gotta agree with the article, mabe I'm baised because I left the engineering school and went into MIS after a year, but I found the same thing. Allot of people just don't learn well without any help or even basic teaching. Plus it al=ways seems like allot of engineering schools rushed students through things and gave them crushing class loads for no reason I could ever see. I dunno don't seem like the best way to learn at all.