Cynical skeptic said:
Kagim said:
While school might be tough its a lot more required then it seems.
Elementary to high school to me is not meant for what you learn. That's what college is for. Elementary through high school is to teach you how to act in society.
While some kids are emotionally destroyed by school the majority of kids pick up the lessons they need to learn and the other minority are the bullies, elitists that learn the harsh reality that once your 19 (in Canada) your no longer cool because you can get alcohol.
Hell, my time in school was rough as well. I was pretty damn depressed most my childhood.
However, i have learned to become better then i was because of it. I know whose opinions of me i should care about and who i should just give the finger to and go home. I learned how to deal with getting shit on by faceless nobodies. In life someone will eventually shit on you. Best to learn how to deal with it when the worst that happens is you get suspended, not fired and have assault charges filed against you.
I don't believe in home schooling. People need to learn how to function in society. Your education from P-12 might be private school worthy but unless you have a social network set up how will your child learn to work and play with his or her fellow people? It is, however a parents choice. I will respect that choice they made and if any home schooled kids / parents take offense to that statement i apologize.
Honestly p-12 is about learning how to behave in society. Its about getting your thick skin to deal with assholes and recognizing how people act. Learning who is going to screw you and who is going to back you. Humans are social creatures, we crave interaction even if you feel you hate it.
The education you get from it is only meant to be a brief outline. While i confess i have no clue how it works in the US or UK, or anywhere else but in Canada you can get caught up from grade 10-12 in one or two semesters of college courses. 20 months of High School can get condensed into 6-8 in college, or in 3 hours if you independently study and just take a few tests.
School is how we learn to act as a society. You might wanna say "Well society is so fucked up!" I however don't think society is fucked up so... Not getting into that.
The problem with everything you're saying is children aren't being taught how to be a part of society, they're being taught how cheat systems. The primary lesson being "you only get punished if you get caught." Secondary courses in "suck up for an easier ride," "appearance is everything," and "when in doubt, cheat."
Its the reason society is so fucked up right now.
But, of course, you can't really fault the US public education system for inconsistency. These ideals are applied at every single level. From student to faculty to administration.
Well, all I can really say is that isn't what i learned.
I learned how to deal with people who will try and push me down. I learned how to get along with people I don't have anything in common with to get a project done.
While i know people walk away with the primary message of cheat I feel that's not the majority from my primary time in high school. Very few kids I met would cheat or even consider it all the way up to grade 12. For my first year of college any kid simply laughed at the idea of cheating simply because it meant instant failure for that course and a permanent black eye.
Honestly no matter what you try to do there will always be kids looking for the easy way. Even if home schooled there will be kids who try to get around doing homework or find the answers to the test tomorrow in their parents room.
And well. As i said. I don't think society is fucked up. I think a loud minority is fucked up, and reporting on the small pieces of fuck up on the news and on the internet draws more attention then reporting on the majority of people happy. However like I said i do not want to get into that as it always ends in bickering.
On a side note I'm a Canadian if it means anything....
starfox444 said:
I think it stems from a society which values intellectualism over expressionism to the point of suppression of expression. In the society we live today, a degree in physics is generally more respected than a talented painter. Despite common logic which tells you, the fields are completely unrelated and hence should not have direct comparison. It's an apple and orange sort of thing. I think the positions should be of equal standing due to the recognition of individual valuable traits, with the exception of extreme need for one over the other.
I'd just like to put my small two cents on the physics art degree thing you mention.
While I agree they are completely different I can see why people would value a physics degree.
While both require a great deal of dedication the physics degree if pursued to one of the highest levels to me can be considered an art form almost. To simply look at physics as mundane intellectualism i find kind of insulting to those who have spent decades stretching the boundaries and laws that govern how our world work.
Yes, I do value a talented painter, greatly, a talented painter however needs to be liked. I think Mark Ryden is incredibly talented and one of the greatest artists out there. However in the eyes of someone who hates his work i doubt he will have the same respect for him as me.
When it comes to physics however it is very difficult to say "Aww hes just a hack". Physics is an incredibly hard science to master and a 20 year scientist is difficult to say they have no talent or skill. However with a painter no matter how talented I think someone is another person can easily dismiss him and be on his way.
Higher up in the scientific fields and you get the same thing. Scientists essentially calling each other hacks who have no idea what they are talking about. Bring up string theory to a physicist and they will either talk about how it explains everything or laugh and call it trash. Hell look at biology, the war still rages over which is better, Homeopathy or Chemical compounds. A degree in one is considered trash by someone with faith in the other.
I don't feel there is much comparison outside of individual view. I value people who give us great art as much as someone who teaches me how our world works. Though the person teaching me how the world works I know for a fact has worked his ass of his life to get to be the leading scientist at the LHC. An artist that rigged a set of lights to turn off and on... Well not so much.
I guess what I am saying is that while, say, Steven Hawking is consider one of the greatest scientists and it is hard to dispute that without having a great deal of a scientific background. To say Mark Ryden is one of the greatest artist can be heavily disputed by anyone with a pair of eyes and no taste for his work. There is no universally agreed upon 'good art'. However there are universally agreed upon 'good scientific principles'. At least to us with no scientific background. So there is more recognition in the sciences since more people can easily agree upon the laws of gravity then they can agree upon a painting of a girl crying blood with a rose in her hair.
They might be apples and oranges but a person who hates oranges will still think they taste like crap in comparison to apples. Art and Science may be vastly different but people will have more respect for the one they think worked harder and has a bigger impact.
That's my opinion anyways.
Edit: a thought occurs after posting. To be honest I think an actor is more respected and well known then a scientist. While people might say "scientists work hard" how many except certain really popular ones are ever known? I mean do you know off hand the names of every scientist working on the LHC? What about the top scientists currently working towards Aids and Cancer research? Can you name ten current scientists in any advanced field what so ever?
Now, can you name 10 celebrities that have worked on a movie in the past year? How about the past 6 months? or in the month of June alone?
That's just food for thought.
