Is it good policy to give financial aid to liberal arts majors?

[Asher]

Originally posted by Whaleboy
The period is essential to the name "classics", but it's not itself integral to the nature of the study.

Thank you for again indirectly proving my point of the intellectually masturbating Liberal Arts and their fundamental uselessness to the modern world.

That quote is gold.

Here's a hint: if the time period is not essential to the study of Classics, I could study works from 1995 and call it studying Classics.

[Whaleboy]

In customs pertaining to that sort of thing, yes.

You obviously know jack **** about Jewish customs.

After all, less than a thousand years of natural selection gave Europeans vastly better immunity to certain diseases than people in the New World.

Immune system |= intelligence

[TCO]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
The only Classics programs I've heard about were ones where you learn calculus by reading Principia Mathematica, etc. I figure the only reason that people who graduate from those programs end up very skilled is because you'd have to be a good student to learn through such a suboptimal method.

That does sound pretty ****ing miserable.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Asher

I examine life, and I've evaluated the worth of people who decide they need to study Philosophy in university to examine life by exactly that.

Re-edited for truth: you use your preconcieved prejudices to judge issues you don't care to understand in a way to justify your pre-existing prejudices.

There, that is better.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Whaleboy
You obviously know jack **** about Jewish customs.

The paternal side of my family is Jewish. And I'm not talking about explicit customs; I'm talking about unrecognized memes.

Immune system |= intelligence

So? Memetic evolution occurs even more quickly than genetic evolution.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Whaleboy
You obviously know jack **** about Jewish customs.

Ritualistic Circumcision is both stupid and hilarious to the observer.

Watching a Briss The most fun you can have with your boots on.

[TCO]

Originally posted by Agathon


Yes, but in a different and complementary fashion.

Really? Maybe. It is interesting how important it is to categorize and organize in business and corporate presentations. And how it is non-trivial and people do not do it well.

[Whaleboy]

Originally posted by Asher

Thank you for again indirectly proving my point of the intellectually masturbating Liberal Arts and their fundamental uselessness to the modern world.

That quote is gold.

Here's a hint: if the time period is not essential to the study of Classics, I could study works from 1995 and call it studying Classics.

Try understanding what's being said. To say that something is "Classics", that is understood to mean a very specific thing; a study of writings, plays, language etc, during a certain period in Graeco-Roman history. To use that for 1995 is a misnomer. The nature of what you actually learn in Classics is something you can apply anywhere, which is a testament to the usefulness and worth of the field.

[TCO]

Originally posted by Agathon


Yes, but in a different and complementary fashion.

Be MECE

[Asher]

Originally posted by GePap
Re-edited for truth: you use your preconcieved prejudices to judge issues you don't care to understand in a way to justify your pre-existing prejudices.

There, that is better.

What issues are there to understand? Agathon gets paid to talk about an old guy that died thousands of years ago, and then pretends it's some big exercise in thinking. It's hilarious because so many people don't question it, and then blast people who do question it as people who don't question existence.

[Kuciwalker]

Philosophy is a particularly bad case because everything rigorous got spun off into the hard sciences and mathematics.

[Whaleboy]

Originally posted by Asher
I examine life

Not modest about the weight of your thoughts are you?

[Asher]

Originally posted by Whaleboy
Try understanding what's being said.

I understand what's being said, you're up to the typical Liberal Arts **** by overcomplicating the simple and then spending the rest of the time arguing semantics.

To say that something is "Classics", that is understood to mean a very specific thing; a study of writings, plays, language etc, during a certain period in Graeco-Roman history.

For the life of me I can't see how you can say that and then say the time period is not integral.

The nature of what you actually learn in Classics is something you can apply anywhere, which is a testament to the usefulness and worth of the field.

If it's something you can apply anywhere, why is it restricted to a single time period?

That's just like saying computers are not integral to computer science because you can take your mathematical and problem-solving abilities and use them anywhere...

[TCO]

Originally posted by Whaleboy


People have always wondered why Ashkenazi Jews are perceived to be so successful in life, and the answer is simple: we were brought up to constantly expand our horizons with various and diverse interests and studies. It's not just Jews, early Islam, India, Sung-dynasty China, Renaissance and Enlightenment Europe... all have been characterised by tremendous economic and social progress, and at the centre of it all can be found acceptance and encouragment of the arts and humanities .

Simiarly, think of all the periods you can of social and economic retardation... there the arts were on the fringes, sidelined by mainstream society and authoritarian governments who have always considered arts and humanities to be a breeding ground for dissent against authority.

Or maybe it is because your DNA makes you better, just like thoroughbreds are faster than Arabians.

Well...since we are in a thread talking about logic and such, we should not make the fallacy of ruling out possible causes because of a plausible explanation of a single other cause. (I've never had formal logic, so hope that is clear...)

[GePap]

Originally posted by Asher

What issues are there to understand? Agathon gets paid to talk about an old guy that died thousands of years ago, and then pretends it's some big exercise in thinking. It's hilarious because so many people don't question it, and then blast people who do question it as people who don't question existence.

There is a difference between questioning and examining.

Plenty of people question things. Take all those people who just question those dumb scientist who dare tell them people come from monkeys. Or those people who question the validity of the moon landings.

Questioning by itself takes you only so far. You then have to move beyond skepticism into examining the issue.

My view of science is not based on a prejudice against scientific thinking (like your prejudice against philosophy) , but is based on an opinion that what makes us human is examined more deeply through the arts and philosophy than through science, and what makes us human is the most interesting question of all, at least, to a human.