Who is a teacher?

[infamous]

Why waste it persuing the impossible dream of knowledge?

Why waist your live is absolutely the main question here. And I for one will not waist my life by failing to seek out new knowledge. Asking the question WHY requires an answer Ananke and the answer to a question is increased KLOWLEDGE.

 

Point, counter point......................Infy

[Ananke]

Support your claim with more than comments like, "Anybody can see this." How would you present this if, oh, I don't know, this were a science oriented site?

 

In every subject there are many conflicting theories. Since only at most one can be true, it is apparent that the others must be false. For every claim made by one person, there is a counter claim. One or both of these must be untrue. For every breakthrough in science, there is another further down the road that disprooves some or all of the theoretical basis of the first. Thus, there is more untruth in the world than truth, and if there is more truth available today than ever before, there must equally be more untruth.

 

State when this was, and support that as well. It would be quite useful as well, but not mandatory, if you could parameterize "all there is to know" and also what it is "to know." Still waiting for you to support this despite your answer.

 

Maybe you can provide an example of some beings who "knew all there was to know," since you seem so sure I'm missing something that's obvious? Per the thread at hand, a good teacher would show the student the path toward knowledge and understanding...

 

I am not claiming that there was a time when _everyone_ knew all there was to know. But, a figure such as Leonardo da Vinci comes to mind, a man who mastered all the disciplines known at his time, a 'rennaisance man' in a quite literal sense, whose investigations in all fields to which he turned his mids involved pushing forward the bounds of knowledge, since he had already reached the existing limits. Such a figure, at the cutting edge of all knowledge, is simply impossible today, where our vast knowledge base requires many years of study to master to even a single highly specialised field.

 

Leonardo was able to test the experimental basis of the theories he mastered, but today such a rigourous approach is impossible. How does a normal person go about testing the basis of QM, or of the claims of cosmologists, or of genetics? Each of these specialised fields requires years of study and access to sophisticated technology (the theoretical basis of which in turn would have to be investigated for true rigour).

 

Thus, a person today must take at least some this on faith. And since there is more falsehood than truth, how can they be sure thay have taken a truth on faith and not an untruth? It is, after all, hardly unknown for a dedicated scientist to waste his life investigating a theory which was later proven to be false, since he had taken an untruth on faith.

 

Since there is no way to know the truth of any given narrow branch of human enqiry, most people quite justifiably resign themselves to not knowing or caring about the truth of any field of human enquiry. To expect them to spend thier lives in the persuit of an impossible goal of aquiring true knowledge is to expect too much.

[Ananke]

Why waist your live is absolutely the main question here. And I for one will not waist my life by failing to seek out new knowledge. Asking the question WHY requires an answer Ananke and the answer to a question is increased KLOWLEDGE.

 

Opinion. I would say, the answer is not to bother at all and spend your life instead persuing pleasure.

[infamous]

Opinion. I would say, the answer is not to bother at all and spend your life instead persuing pleasure.

I receive much pleasure from learning new things Ananke. And it's not bad for my health like a few other pleasures practiced by some people that have little or no concern about the consequences to their health. I'd say that sort of knowledge is recommended wouldn't you?..................Infy

[Ananke]

I have no obection to people choosing to persue knowledge. My objection is to the opinion that people 'should' persue knowledge.

[infamous]

I have no obection to people choosing to persue knowledge. My objection is to the opinion that people 'should' persue knowledge.

Taking that last statement of yours into account, I have to wonder why you would waist your time pounding on the desk of Hypography? This forum is, in fact, an exercise in the pursuit of knowledge, of which 99.9% of the membership holds education in high regard.....................Infy

[InfiniteNow]

Long tangential diatribe...

I'll take your response to mean that you are incapable of supporting our claims with anything more than personal anecdote, and hence your claims are not scientific. It's okay to present opinions, but it's important to categorize your statements as such when appropriate.

 

Consider the matter settled. You cannot support the claims you have made in this thread, and are perhaps a better story teller than a scientist.

[infamous]

I'll take your response to mean that you are incapable of supporting our claims with anything more than personal anecdote, and hence your claims are not scientific. It's okay to present opinions, but it's important to categorize your statements as such when appropriate.

 

Consider the matter settled. You cannot support the claims you have made in this thread, and are perhaps a better story teller than a scientist.

Well said Infynow....................Infy

[Spiked Blood]

There is also more falsehood on earth than at any other time.

 

Support your claim with more than comments like, "Anybody can see this." How would you present this if, oh, I don't know, this were a science oriented site?

 

This isn't my battle, but this asking for evidence bugs me. How do you prove that there is more falsehood on earth today than at any other time in history? It is an impossible question...to answer accurately. Kinda the crux of the problem, no?

 

Lets look at this in a cold csi like manner.

 

Means:

How does a person lie, is it only through speech? A falsehood, lie, deception is much more than just speech. It is action, intent, flattery, manipulation. If my hair is graying and I dye it, is that not also a deception? In the comfort of my own home I eat food like a pig, ignoring proper dinner table etiquette yet in a restaurant I follow this dinner code, am I not being deceptive? Makeup is deceptive, find a link that shows the sales of makeup in the last so many years.

 

Human beings are a duplicitous little people, it is so ingrained in society that some people don't even realise. A lie is only a lie when you're caught. Until then its a tool.

 

Motive:

This is obvious. People lie because they intend to gain from it. To advance their position. To give a false impression. To manipulate. People have agenda's, the truth is often a barrier.

 

Opportunity:

Good ol' opportunity. If you intend to prove that there is more falsehood today than at any other time, opportunity is a good way to advance your assertions. What was the population 100 years ago? More people=more opportunity. When was the telephone invented? More means to communicate=more opportunity. THE INTERNET. How many people log onto the internet each day? Mass communication=more opportunity.

[InfiniteNow]

How do you prove that there is more falsehood on earth today than at any other time in history? It is an impossible question...to answer accurately. Kinda the crux of the problem, no?

You've just proven my point. Please recall that prior to my request for evidence, this was presented as a statement of fact. How does one make a statement of fact that cannot be proven? That's where the issue was. If that's their opinion, great, but qualify it as such.

 

Now, how did the rest of your post relate to the thread? My hope was to dehijack it...

 

I'd be glad to PM if further discussion on this is desired.

 

 

Cheers. :beer:

[Spiked Blood]

You've just proven my point. Please recall that prior to my request for evidence, this was presented as a statement of fact. How does one make a statement of fact that cannot be proven? That's where the issue was. If that's their opinion, great, but qualify it as such.

 

Now, how did the rest of your post relate to the thread? My hope was to dehijack it...

 

I'd be glad to PM if further discussion on this is desired.

 

 

Cheers. :beer:

 

Kinda silly to use my opinion to prove that there is 'more lying today than at any other time' is an opinion. It's unprovable because you can't measure every single person. A lie is a LIE. Its intent is to hide the truth. You can't record factual findings. And you can argue till the cows come home. You can hold onto your "its an opinion" all you want. Not being able to prove something doesn't mean its wrong. It is wrong when you prove it isn't true. Which you could never do.

[hallenrm]

Coming back to the original point of discussion, I think

 

Life is the best and most effective teacher

 

I got inspired for this opinion by the signature of our friend Racoon and I was prompted to post it because of the foregoing discussion.

 

I do believe that the genesis of the discord between the learned members of Hypography who have been participating in this debate, is the difference in time and lessons that life has taught them :cup: :) :)

[cwes99_03]

I'll take your response to mean that you are incapable of supporting our claims with anything more than personal anecdote, and hence your claims are not scientific. It's okay to present opinions, but it's important to categorize your statements as such when appropriate.

 

Consider the matter settled. You cannot support the claims you have made in this thread, and are perhaps a better story teller than a scientist.

 

While Ananke's original post was most likely full of Hyperbole, some of us have read the ensuing discussion with a bit of disdain.

Those of you who participated in it and treated each other poorly (not that I have not done similar in the past) simply refused to understand each other because of your ego.

 

Ananke was wrong in saying that pursuit of knowledge was pointless. There is a point to it in that, by increasing knowledge one is able to pursue other avenues and make situations better. Why do so when you will just die? Two possible reasons. 1) you want to help others who come after you to enjoy life more fully, 2) you yourself want to enjoy life more fully. Remaining in an ignorant state can do the second for you as well, but it cannot do the first.

 

That being said, while Ananke was using hyperbole in her first answer (or so I will choose to interpret it), Ananke made a valid point. That is to say that many humans on earth today (at least as far as the US is concerned) are not actually growing smarter/wiser/whatever. The median ability to think critically is being lost. Instead, some people are acting like drones in that they learn a process and continue in that process until they die (most jobs in the world are still process driven and do not require someone to be able to think on their feet and resolve issues that come up, since that is left to a few with the ability to think critically.)

I deal with this every day. People think they know what they are doing because they have seen it work before, but when it doesn't work the way they expect it to, they shut down not knowing how to proceed. You have all probably experienced this. Thus you all have personal evidence that it does occur.

For further evidence on the deplorable state of the education system, watch "stupid in america" 1 and 2. Watch battle of the Jaywalk allstars on the Jay Leno show. Conduct your own experiment in a local secondary school. I garauntee you will find less than 10% will be able to answer all the simplest questions about the history of their own country (stuff a 4th grader should know), let alone questions about the global conflicts that have occured (WWI and WWII), or other global "crises" (global warming), even current events. Heck many people on this site, continue to fight things because they prefer to remain un-informed, and you all have repeatedly said that Hypography members are the cream of the crop.

 

They instead chose to believe what one person tells them, rather than find the truth. When searching for something online, I like to take a brief sample of all websites that are output from my google search.

If I don't see some consistency then I figure my search was flawed.

If I do see some consistency, then I figure my search to be good, but possibly too good.

If I don't find some differences in the reply then I know that I have narrowed my search too much.

It is only by muddling through the different answers that one can do a WWW search and find the most likely correct answer.

[InfiniteNow]

Per post #78, restrict further conversation on the matter to PM.

[InfiniteNow]

.

Today the 5th of September is observed as the teacher's day in India, remembering the contributions of S.Radhakrishnan, a great teacher and former President of Indian Union.

 

That is sufficient for me to ponder about the question, "Who is a teacher?" because I myself take pride in calling myself a teacher. But before we proceed any further let me solicit the opinions of some other members of Hypography community about this question.

[Michaelangelica]

This is from a man who is a teacher.

It is the final address given to the student's leaving high school in year 12.

It has lots of lessons about life and about being a teacher

It chokes me up

Philip Heath is headmaster of St. Andrew's Cathederal School, Sydney City

(see their website)

Farewell Year 12, 2006

 

By Phillip Heath - Head of School

Friday, 29th September 2006

 

It was a dull afternoon at a Headmaster's conference a few months ago when a headmaster colleague from a well respected school leaned over and placed in my hand a copy of a book entitled "Could do better - school reports of the great and the good". The rest of the lecture brightened up considerably for me, though no one around me could tell why 1 was laughing during such a humourless address.

 

Some of the reports defy belief that they could ever have been published.

 

Beatles star John Lennon at the Quarry Bank School, Liverpool had one report that declared : "Certainly on the road to failure…hopeless...rather a clown in class...wasting other pupils' time"

 

Upon leaving his school in 1957, his headmaster wrote: "He has been a trouble spot for many years in discipline, but has somewhat mended his ways. Requires the sanction of losing a job to keep him on the rails. But I believe he is not beyond redemption and he could really turn out a fairly responsible adult who might go far".

 

Nick Park, the animator responsible for Wallace and Gromit, not surprisingly had this written on his report card: "Nicholas is inclined to be lazy. He is an artistic child and produces beautiful drawings. Inclined to dream. Could do better if he tried".

 

Winston Churchill, the British WWII Prime Minister received this report from Harrow school: "Constantly late for school, losing his books and papers and various other things into which I need not enter. He is so regular in his irregularity that I really don't know what to do. He had such good abilities but these will be made useless by negligence...He has no ambition... "

Richard Briers, actor who starred in the sitcom The Good Life and Monarch of the Glen in the Headmaster's report from Rokeby School in Wimbledon: "It would seem that Briers thinks he is running the school and not me. If this attitude persists, one of us will have to leave."

 

Michael Palin, one of the Monty Python team at Shrewsbury School in 1960, received the following comment from his Headmaster: "I think he is just a teeny bit pleased with himself - or so I am prepared to hazard…We're all for a bit of jollity and mild eye-flashing business, but he must not try to get away altogether with this slightly facile manner".

 

There were reports on other famous people, where the School characteristically called upon them to do better, confidently forecasting that they would amount to nothing.

 

Actress Judi Dench "would be a very good pupil if she lived in this world".

 

Comedian Stephen Fry, "He has glaring faults and they have certainly glared at us this Term…"

Woody Allen, "While cautiously holding out some hope of readmission suggested he seek counselling for his inability to take life seriously".

 

Perhaps the unkindest reports were of Max Hastings, who became the editor of the Evening Standard and the Daily Telegraph in the UK. His French report read: "He plummeted to the bottom of the form in the first fortnight. It is a position which ill becomes a scholar, and we have looked for signs of surfacing; but there he is still, and only the bubbles rise."

 

Perhaps these are the kinds of plain English reports that the Commonwealth government requires of schools once again. I think not. The real message is to make the most of what God has given you.

 

You stand at the end of your school career, John Lennon like, wondering whether you might turn out to be "a fairly responsible adult who might go far…". Today, in this Cathedral, you can cast back your mind across more than 13 years of school education.

We do not know where your future will lead you - could it be that in years to come.

 

When you try your best but don't succeed,

When you get what you want but not what you need;

When you feel so tired but you can't sleep,

Stuck in reverse.

And the tears come streaming down your face,

When you lose something you can't replace

When you love someone but it goes to waste

Could it be worse.

Lights will guide you home and ignite your bones

And I will try to fix you.

More at http://www.sacs.nsw.edu.au/page.php?id=170&nid=634

[Ananke]

I'll take your response to mean that you are incapable of supporting our claims with anything more than personal anecdote, and hence your claims are not scientific. It's okay to present opinions, but it's important to categorize your statements as such when appropriate.

 

Consider the matter settled. You cannot support the claims you have made in this thread, and are perhaps a better story teller than a scientist.

 

My post was neither over-long nor a diatribe. If you are unable to understand it, you should be man enough to admit it. Perhaps if you pointed out what you could not understand, I could attempt to illuminate you?