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

[TCO]

Originally posted by Agathon


It's not.

It's that there are consequences for the Jewish kids for not doing well. I've taught loads. They aren't natively brighter than the others, but they tend to be much more motivated. The Jewish religion prizes intellectual accomplishment, the English tradition resents it.

Asian kids in NZ are exactly the same. Their parents have a much higher propensity to push them academically, and their culture values education and learning. To be a professor in an Asian country is a position of respect: in an English speaking country it is to be the object of suspicion.

Just asserting it doesn't make it true. How could you make an experiment to differentiate between the twin hypotheses of nature and nurture. Here science mindset helps a lot. The partial derivative mindset. the one factor at a time experiments from chemistry.

[Whaleboy]

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

You're not Jewish then.

I don't think that there is any evidence on your part so show that Jewish success is genetic or cultural. I think most people would prefer the cultural explanation as better fitting since the memetic position is always based upon speculation regardless. As a field it works on the premise of 17 year old upstarts who read "The Selfish Gene" and pretend to understand.

[CrONoS]

Nobody understand why we learn classics.

Talking about old romantic painter, philosopher, poets help us to score with some kind of woman!

Poor you Ash!

[Kuciwalker]

He's gay. I doubt he's crushed.

[CrONoS]

yeah I know! That's why I say this...
(without being "bad" or anything like this)

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
He's gay. I doubt he's crushed.

[Asher]

Originally posted by GePap
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.

Don't you see it can just as successfully be argued that your views are based on your prejudice against science?

We are human without arts and philosophy, what you are asking is what makes us people of society. Which is an utterly boring and subjective question.

We can have philosophy and arts without boring bald fat lecturers droning on and on about it in a giant lecture hall that most people attend for a GPA booster.

[GePap]

Re: TCO

You could argue that social norms influence sexual selection within communities, thus creating an "intelligence differential" based on the view of intelligence in a partner. Of course, then you have to stack this up with just random mutatiuons and 'natural' selection to see how influential one is against another in a population.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Whaleboy
You're not Jewish then.

Never said I was.

I don't think that there is any evidence on your part so show that Jewish success is genetic or cultural. I think most people would prefer the cultural explanation as better fitting since the memetic position is always based upon speculation regardless. As a field it works on the premise of 17 year old upstarts who read "The Selfish Gene" and pretend to understand.

The cultural explanation is a memetic one; it just identifies the specific attribute that makes them more inclined to learn, which is a bigger assumption than that fact that it is a cultural attribute.

[Asher]

Originally posted by cronos_qc
Nobody understand why we learn classics.

Talking about old romantic painter, philosopher, poets help us to score with some kind of woman!

Poor you Ash!

Some of us don't need to attract new people by learning nonsense that people think makes them sound intellectual.

Nothing makes me laugh like passing by the liberal arts kids at the coffee shop on campus having "deep" conversations about such trivial things. The emo glasses so many of them wear, and the scarfs -- so good!

[TCO]

Originally posted by Whaleboy



Immune system |= intelligence

So. Do you have a specific experiment that proves the time required to select for intelligence? The onus is on you if you are going to make an assertion and laugh about it. Please be logical, if that is what your LA training has taught you. Do a clear issue analysis.

Oh...and dogs have been bred for different intelligence over very short periods of time.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Asher

Don't you see it can just as successfully be argued that your views are based on your prejudice against science?

Try.

We are human without arts and philosophy, what you are asking is what makes us people of society. Which is an utterly boring and subjective question.

There of course is the difference. I find the question intensely interesting and always relevant. You on the other hand either assume it has been answered already, or don't care.

We can have philosophy and arts without boring bald fat lecturers droning on and on about it in a giant lecture hall that most people attend for a GPA booster.

Can we get a sentence filled with more prejudices, please? You are simply not trying hard enough right now.

[Asher]

Originally posted by GePap
You could argue that social norms influence sexual selection within communities, thus creating an "intelligence differential" based on the view of intelligence in a partner. Of course, then you have to stack this up with just random mutatiuons and 'natural' selection to see how influential one is against another in a population.

You could argue that -- and may Liberal Arts kids do. But I'll argue: "who ****ing cares?"

I'd much rather people waste time and energy arguing something that can actually improve our world. Much like most scientists do.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Asher
You could argue that -- and may Liberal Arts kids do. But I'll argue: "who ****ing cares?"

I'd much rather people waste time and energy arguing something that can actually improve our world. Much like most scientists do.

Actually, assuming he was talking about the Jewish subthread, that's actually a decent area of inquiry...

[Asher]

Originally posted by GePap
There of course is the difference. I find the question intensely interesting and always relevant. You on the other hand either assume it has been answered already, or don't care.

I find many things intensely interesting, like pornography. I don't think we should have the public paying for pornography either.

[GePap]

at Asher.

Try to multi-task here.