Why the disdain for math, science, numbers, quantitative statements, and cold logic?

[howard112211]

We currently have a thread up on DU that basically calls for the elimination of algebra from the high school curriculum because "it is not practical in everyday life". This seems to be exemplary of an overall trend that spans all across the political spectrum and it very much reminded me of something I saw on television the other day:

A couple of days ago there was a show on TV about important people that came from my geographic region. They mentioned all sorts of people, from book authors, to poets to people who were deported during the holocaust (I live in Germany). Finally, they concluded that a guy who basically did nothing but write poetry, was the most important person and was deemed the exemplary "universal scholar", even though he contributed nothing of note to the natural sciences of his time.

I thought, holy crap, we have two people who were awarded the nobel prize in physics in my town alone, but not a single mention of them, in a show devoted to "important people of the region".

Where does this disdain for anything quantitative come from?

It is manifest in all sorts of forms: From the idea that a "well educated person" knows a symphony of Beethoven and the works of Shakespeare, but not necessarily how to perform integral calculus of elementary polynomials or what the difference between a proton and a neutron is, over the idea that "anecdotal evidence" and "personal experiences" are of greater relevance than statistics (which really only represent the sum over all documented samples) to gross stereotyping such as that science nerds are geeks with poor social skills who are bitter and sexist because they never got laid (actually most scientists I know are excellent public speakers, and not very few of them are quite the "ladies men").

I will not say that it happens on the left as much as the right (I think we have nothing that comes close to the creationists), but it certainly seems to be present on the left as well in times.

[trotsky]

1. Anti-intellectualism

It knows no political boundaries. And trust me, we sadly have just as much of it on the left.

[ixion]

5. exactly... are society tends to treat intellects the same way

they treat the handicapped: as if there is something wrong with them.

[trotsky]

6. And the most frustrating part is the cycle feeds itself.

Ignorance breeds fear of intellectuals - the only remedy is more education, but the ignorant demand LESS education - they wouldn't want to become more like the feared intellectuals. Who needs algebra indeed.

[Maraya1969]

60. Is this why it seems like no one cares about the things I have learned

and they act bored and don't even ask questions and I feel like an outsider? And then if I get in the car with most of them they turn the music up real loud and you can't even talk anyway? The music thing annoys the shit out of me. What is the point of taking a ride with someone just to listen to music? I do that when I'm by myself in the car.

I don't even know where to find people who want to know more.

So I am being ostracized because I am intelligent and like to learn new things. Except I didn't even realize that it was a universal problem until now. I always thought it was just me.

[Cronus Protagonist]

79. Perhaps they're trying to tell you something

And it might not have anything to do with intellect.

[Maraya1969]

97. No because if I talk about stupid shit and gossip and such there is no problem

I just have to dumb it down for most of my friends.

[BlueJazz]

118. Sounds like you just have more class and intelligence than they have.

[Demeter]

191. Here's a Source for You

The Florida groups are quite active...

http://www.us.mensa.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Events1

[Grinchie]

89. There is somethiong wrong with them - They see through the Emperors New Clothes

And then they'll go out a write a thesis on why Everyone Else sees something where there is nothing.

People with intelligence and a broad spectrum of knowledge are ususally self sufficient, are less dependant on the systems that enslave us, and are not so easily fooled into following the herd.

We are hard to control, do things that make our lives more rewarding, and taint the belief systems so treasured by the Powers That Be by providing concrete examples that crush the Status Quo and enable new paradigms and thinking.

Intellects can be just as handicapped however, especially when they are so focused on their own little specialty to the bitter end, while ignoring empathy and compassion and alternate views. The system exploits these people by getting them to write credible dissertation supporting a myopic worldview that supports the current Power Structure.

One the other hand, the intellects will be able to blend into society at will, if they can silently suffer the Idiocracy that continues to destroy the planet.

[WingDinger]

125. In essence, they are. This leeway costs. And so we are allowed to push boundaries

and in exchange, we are given a defensive grain of salt.

[pintobean]

10. I don't know any anti-intellectuals

Most people are anti-pompous-ass. That's frequently brought on by education.

[trotsky]

12. Thank you for illustrating the point. n/t

[pintobean]

15. Ditto

[trotsky]

16. LOL

How appropriate.

[amyrose2712]

40. +1

[Fumesucker]

25. I know at least a couple of clueless and uneducated pompous assess..

Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck spring immediately to mind, indeed those two practically *define* "pompous ass".

[pintobean]

29. I agree

[xocet]

47. It looks like "Idiocracy" is spot on:

Narrator: As the 21st century began, human evolution was at a turning point. Natural selection, the process by which the strongest, the smartest, the fastest, reproduced in greater numbers than the rest, a process which had once favored the noblest traits of man, now began to favor different traits. Most science fiction of the day predicted a future that was more civilized and more intelligent. But as time went on, things seemed to be heading in the opposite direction. A dumbing down. How did this happen? Evolution does not necessarily reward intelligence. With no natural predators to thin the herd, it began to simply reward those who reproduced the most, and left the intelligent to become an endangered species.
...
Narrator: Unaware of what year it was, Joe wandered the streets desperate for help. But the English language had deteriorated into a hybrid of hillbilly, valleygirl, inner-city slang and various grunts. Joe was able to understand them, but when he spoke in an ordinary voice he sounded pompous and faggy to them.

(http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0387808/quotes)

[WCGreen]

70. I view it as a documentary.

[valerief]

71. Sadly, you're correct. nt

[reggie the dog]

106. a couple i know decided to have children AFTER seeing that film

they didnt want to have kids before seeing it, they wanted to adopt, but they saw idocracy and then decided to have a child....

[Hello_Kitty]

133. Jeez, not too narcissistic are they?

I find people who act like their progeny are such blessings to the gene pool to be insufferable. Plus, if the world is really heading in the direction depicted in Idiocracy, why would you want to subject your offspring to it? Aren't "the stupid" always going to outbreed "the smart" anyway?

[reggie the dog]

217. they dont act like their kid is better

they just identified with the couple that had no children in idocracy, he was getting his phd, she had her masters, they had careers in urban planning, no time to be pregnant etc....

[bhikkhu]

163. There is a problem with that thesis (though I enjoyed the movie)

While the whole subject of how much genetics influence intelligence is very contentious, a general view is that it not genetically determined. There is a greater volume of connections (potential "information") in the human brain than the sum total of information in the human genome; in short, our minds are too complex to be determined by heredity. The basic instructions given to the cells of the human brain are "go forth and proliferate", and every child - whether Einstein's nephew or the village idiot's son - begins early childhood with a far larger brain capacity than is necessary.

Development involves as much paring down and streamlining of capacity as growth, rendering culture and environment as the biggest factors on intelligence...so Idiocracy is entertaining, but fatally flawed in its model.

[mkultra]

73. that's usually the view of the underintelligent

No one likes to be reminded that an intellectual strata exists, yet we all know it does.

[pintobean]

87. It has nothing to do with intelligence

and everything to do with mutual respect. Respect is earned by being respectful. When it is demanded, it is rarely received.
How intelligent is it for someone of privilege to claim to be a victim of those less privileged?

Edit: btw I recced the op before reading any replies.

[AlbertCat]

171. and everything to do with mutual respect.

So people who are dead wrong should not be corrected because it might hurt their feelings. Right? :eyes:

[SharonAnn]

215. Mutual respect? Like "jocks" show to "non-jocks"? That kind of respect?

[trotsky]

192. Respect for someone's knowledge and experience...

has nothing to do with that person being personally respectful. I think you are making a key error here and an error that contributes to the anti-intellectualism of the country - that somehow if someone who genuinely understands something better isn't polite or approachable enough, then s/he isn't as worthy as a person and shouldn't be trusted/respected.

Recognize that phenomenon? It's what got people to vote for Bush (they guy they'd want to have a beer with) over Gore (the pompous intellectual).

[pintobean]

210. Your error is thinking you're somehow special

You're not. We all make our living selling goods and services. Selling knowledge doesn't exempt one from the rules of commerce and common decency. If you're not polite or approachable, people don't want to deal with you.

If you walk into your local hardware store, and the guy behind the counter is rude and condescending, wouldn't you complain to the owner? What would you think if they told you you were anti-hardware? I laugh at them, too. An asshole is an asshole, no matter what he's selling.

btw - In case you hadn't heard, Al Gore won the popular vote.

[trotsky]

216. And your error is in assuming I think I am.

I know enough to know that LOTS of people know more than me. Try looking up the Dunning-Kruger effect.

In case you hadn't heard, Al Gore won the popular vote.

He sure did - but in case you hadn't heard, that doesn't matter! He should have won in a landslide, and there is no doubt that the anti-intellectualism tide was a big factor in steering votes away from him. The same anti-intellectualism whose memes you are promoting. "Oh those snobby pointy-headed intellectuals - they are so rude!"

Good luck to you in your quest against smart folks who aren't nice enough to you. Perhaps you'd prefer a pleasant smiling gentleman like George W. Bush who will be more than polite and gracious while stabbing you in the back and undermining progress.

[Patchuli]

80. That's because book-learning and common sense

don't necessarily walk hand in hand. I have known 'booksmart' people who didn't know enough to put water in the radiator of their car and blew up the engine. My husband who works in hardware has tried desperately at times to dissuade local university professors from attempting their own wiring ideas (to protect them from themselves!) Common sense is not learned in a book.

[Marr]

85. And common sense is no substitute for

the ability to examine complex problems, to read, learn, etc. There are a lot of things that can't be deciphered with good old 'common sense'.

[Lordquinton]

128. Common sense isn't common

There are many more dropouts and other non-educated people who lack common sense than there are highly educated people. You just don't hear about it as much because they're not being held under the microscope and are expected to do dumb things like blowing up engines.

[kenfrequed]

147. Hmmph.

I think that people take and advesarial view to people that seem to have knowledge or brains because they are insecure about their intellect. The whole world is telling them they aren't bright and if a person seems to be too smart it grates on them even more. So they do anything they can to make a smart person seem dumb or foolish.

[blackspade]

162. Oh, the sweet taste of irony.

[Warren DeMontague]

227. You don't know ANY anti-intellectuals? Really???

Have you lived in the United States at all for any time in the last 50 years?

[WinkyDink]

18. Because of math? Let's hear all the calls here for Shakespeare, shall we?

[Codeine]

112. I firmly believe exposure to and understanding of Shakespeare should be a requirement

for HS graduation, just like history, biology, and basic algebraic maths.

[Lucky Luciano]

150. Indeed. Cultural literacy is important too...

though I will confess that I simply don't get Willy the Shake. Maybe I should give him another shot now that I am no longer a high school kid. Could be a quick read on my train commute from NYC to Connecticut every morning.

[gkhouston]

184. You might find yourself enjoying it, now that you don't "have" to read it.

Grab a version with footnotes about Elizabethan usage; it should help tremendously.

[AlbertCat]

168. I firmly believe exposure to and understanding of Shakespeare should be a requirement

Art is not a luxury. It is a component of a life with substance. It improves the quality of life.

Why should you know about Shakespeare and the Impressionists and Bach? Because, if you are Western, they are big parts of your culture.

Why should you know about algebra and logarithms? Because they explain things you use everyday. (and you do use algebra all the time, even if you don't realize it)

(besides, you "get" a lot of jokes if you know things!)

It has to do with the curious and the incurious. Some people just don't seem to care about where they came from or what is going on around them.

[Orrex]

32. Know what'll cure that? Acupuncture and a healthy overdose of vitamin D

Works a treat!

[MicaelS]

81. Absolutely....

All the crystal worshipping, indigo children, anti-vaccine, UFO, 9/11 Truthers, and those of such similar mindset, are quite prolific on the Left.

[reggie the dog]

107. UFO???

UFO doesn't mean from out of our planet you know. there may indeed be life from other planets but i tend to think ufos exist and that most of them are experimental aircraft

[LWolf]

108. Anti-intellectualism despises literacy, ideas, and thinking

as much, if not more, than numeracy.

[MrScorpio]

109. Damn Skippy! Nt

[NotThisTime]

115. Absolutely... Something people can't or won't understand & they don't think we should either

[hobbit709]

2. Because thinking hurts the brain.

Don't want to burn out the old synapses by actually using them.

[Dulcinea]

3. It makes so-called "average" people uncomfortable.

In a world where people communicate in 140 characters or less, smart people are a threat to the self-esteem of the masses.

[Fumesucker]

4. "Math is hard"..

-Barbie

[pintobean]

7. So is oak

Gotta know some math to make a table.

* I know you were joking

[WinkyDink]

20. Interesting. Is that why students would rather take it than literature courses?

[Fumesucker]

23. Who said anything about literature courses being easy?

At least with math there is a commonly accepted answer that can be reached through logic, IMO much analysis of "literature" is more about finding out what the instructor's biases may be and then slanting your work to fit those biases.

In other words literature is hard too but in a different way than math.

And besides I was making a joke, something a literate person might have recognized but a math geek would have probably missed. ;)

:hi:

[Kalyke]

50. While I don't support eliminating algebra, you also have to realize

that not everyone thinks the same. I don't like that math has a commonly accepted answer. I don't like "black and white." For example, many times in algebra, I would get the correct answer, but was given marks off because I didn't "do" the problem like the instructor wanted. I did it the way my mind thought - and still had the correct answer.

In literature, which I found "easy," I could easily ascertain the meaning, the foreshadowing, the underlying concepts, etc. and it didn't matter what the instructor's bias was - that was also easily ascertained by the material they chose to present - as long as you understood the overall "gist" of the piece in question.

[Marr]

88. If you did the problem incorrectly, then you may have arrived at

the correct answer in that instance, but would likely arrive at an incorrect answer given a different set of values.

[fishwax]

140. taking a different approach isn't necessarily doing it incorrectly

there is usually more than one way to approach a given problem ...

[Lucky Luciano]

151. This is true, but getting the right answer for the wrong reason should get marked totally wrong.

Getting the right answer in a really clever way that is correct and new to the teacher should get double credit.

[fishwax]

155. I like your idea about double credit

:)

[gkhouston]

183. I've known professors who do that, actually. n/t

[Kalyke]

211. It happened more than once, so, I can say that it was not the wrong reason.

[Fumesucker]

130. Actually I do recognize that everyone doesn't think the same..

Hence my little joke about math geeks not getting the joke. :)

My scores were generally higher in the "literature" portions of the curriculum but I didn't do badly at all at the math portions either. To an extent I was intimidated by my father (not deliberately on his part) who was about one small scintilla away from being a mathematical genius so I doubted my own abilities because I was measuring myself against someone I admired who was better than I would ever be.

Also your point about the instructor's bias being easy to discern shows that you are ignoring the differences between people, for a great many people such a bias is far from easy to ascertain. The more socialized you are the easier such a task is, for those of us who lack social skills it's a very chancy thing picking up on those cues.

My daughter failed algebra three times in HS, once in summer school for which she paid out of her own pocket, she then took algebra a final time and made an A in the course.. The difference? The first three times it was taught by coaches that apparently didn't connect with the way she thought, the last time was a non-coach and she found the subject almost easy.

[Confusious]

138. I like that math has one commonly accepted answer

It means I eat.

[LeftishBrit]

199. Maths teaching that assumes that there is always only one correct solution method...

is bad maths teaching.

Either your instructors had been taught maths badly themselves, and lacked real understanding so relied on a textbook solution; or they were following some sort of set curriculum which required them to do this.

In fact, there are huge numbers of solution methods for most maths problems; and the more able/expert someone is in maths, the wider the variety of methods they use - contrary to the bureaucratic stereotype that expertise means fixing on a single 'best' method. V.A. Krutetskii's 'The Psychology of Mathematical Abilities in Schoolchildren' is very interesting on this subject.

[WinkyDink]

149. It's not that literature is easy; far from it. It's that math-oriented people often scorn its study

because they can't figure out "the correct answer." There are no formulae to memorize. There are no "steps".

[Lucky Luciano]

152. Formulas to memorize?!?

If teachers are emphasizing rote memorization, I can understand why people hate math. Math is far more complex than that. It takes a lot of creativity to do good math.

[lumberjack_jeff]

45. Given the choice of a course with an infinite number of correct answers

and a course for which there is one correct answer to a test question, most people have a good enough grasp of numbers to choose the former.

[no_hypocrisy]

8. Because they're devices that can be used to invalidate their wild ravings.

Example: Logic. Take just about anything Glenn Beck says and you can't apply logic to it. Then it remains "true" and unchallenged. And everyone (not only his listeners and his viewers) accept it as their own truth.

[earcandle]

61. Logic in its original meaning was "the ability to demonstrate or refute a claim"

defined by its father, Aristotle, as one of the Three Offices
of Truth. 

[SoCalDem]

9. Mike Rowe (Dirty JObs) interview here.. some points he makes are very valid

http://www.good.is/post/america-s-dirtiest-interview-mike-rowe-talks-about-work/



Mike Rowe Talks About Work

* October 12, 2010 • 11:00 am PDT

America's Dirtiest Interview: Mike Rowe Talks About Work



Every three months, GOOD releases our quarterly magazine, which examines a given theme through our unique lens. Recent editions have covered topics like the impending global water crisis, the future of transportation, and the amazing rebuilding of New Orleans. This quarter's issue is about work, and we'll be rolling out a variety of stories all month.
..........................................................................................
Mike Rowe, the host of Dirty Jobs, is building a resource for skilled trades, sounding off about the false dichotomy of blue versus white collars, and extolling the virtue of good old-fashioned filth.

As the creator and host of Discovery Channel’s Dirty Jobs, Mike Rowe has wisecracked his way through almost 300 apprenticeships at some of the country’s hardest jobs, poking fun at himself whenever possible, and demonstrating that hard work and good humor go hand in hand. In 2008, Rowe launched his website, mikeroweworks.com, an online resource center for anyone looking to explore a career in the skilled trades, which provides job listings, connections to apprenticeships, and more. Today, Rowe speaks regularly on the perils of the widening skills gap and the changing definition of a “good job.”

GOOD: What do you think it means to have a "dirty job," or a job that most people would not want?

MIKE ROWE: Attitudes toward hard work have changed, and not for the better. Many people view dirty jobbers with a mix of pity and derision. Some ignore them altogether. However, one thing is unchanged: People with dirty jobs make civilized life possible for the rest of us. For that reason, I see a willingness to get dirty as a mark of character.

G: Why don’t more people respect dirty jobs?

MR: Once upon a time, we were proud to be dirty. Dirt looked like work, and work was revered. Now, we’ve redefined our notion of what a “good job” looks like. We’ve taken the “dirt” out of the formula, and in the process, marginalized a long list of important professions. Big mistake.


snip

[trotsky]

11. That's a great show.

And when watching it, you see that a lot of these people with dirty jobs are pretty damn smart and actually do make use of math and advanced tools in their line of work.

[SoCalDem]

14. exactly.. see how long you'll last on a jobsite

it you cannot figure out how to miter a joint & you keep ruining lumber:evilgrin:..or you get the pitch of a roof just a wee bit off & the house collapses:scared:

or if you are a cook & can't figure out how to triple a recipe that has fractions :)

[pipoman]

35. As a professional cook

I see this all the time. I have 20 other cooks who work for me, only 3 or 4 of us can expand a recipe, then reduce the results to the largest possible measure without entering it into a recipe calculator. This isn't to mention the front of the house who can't figure the change from a $50 bill for a $40 ticket without a calculator or register entry.

[justabob]

74. lol

but the waiters CAN usually rattle off what is 10%, 15%, and 20% of the same bill with almost no thought at all. :)

[Dappleganger]

67. I love it, too!

My father was a phone man and crawled up poles, inside hot-as-hell attics as well as snake/rat infested crawlspaces to do his job. He was proud of himself at the end of the day (union man, too) and made a good living at it.

[AtheistCrusader]

117. I have never, NEVER IN MY LIFE, met a stupid farmer. Not a single one.

Clawing a living out of the dirt is not for the simple.

[eridani]

181. Someone from Iowa once said on another listserv that in the old days

--if you were smart enough you'd move to the big city. These days it's if you're smart enough, you'll have a chance at making a go of farming.

[Fumesucker]

13. Kudos to Mike Rowe, he has hit the proverbial nail on the head..

I see that attitude a lot here on DU, if the job is dirty any moron can do it.

[Confusious]

139. Doing a job well is an art form

My dad was a mechanic. I used to think that all you needed to do was turn a bolt. I was wrong.

There are so many things that go into it, that to do it well, and get a piece of machinery to work well for a long time, it's an art.

[lumberjack_jeff]

46. +1 n/t

[MadMaddie]

57. I believe the redefining of hard work started during the Reagan

years. I also believe that from that point forward outsourcing the manufacturing skilled labor was the goal. Remember when the talk was that all jobs were going to move to technology and we don't need to have manufacturing jobs in the U.S. This was the beginning of the declin of the U.S. and the middle class. Those hard workig jobs created the middle class.

[MNBrewer]

123. Facts are stupid things

-Ronald Reagan

[JDPriestly]

77. My grandfather was brilliant at math and pretty well read for his time -- and was a farmer

So, he was able to do better at farming than other farmers who were not so good at math and did not read regularly.

Knowledge is useful regardless of your job. I know a couple of college graduates who have flourishing businesses as handymen. They love their work and enjoy their independence.

[Odin2005]

105. That doesn't suprise me, farming is actually very math-intensive

[JDPriestly]

204. And a dirty-hands job like no other.

In fact, it is dirty-hands, dirty-feet, dirty-ears, pretty much dirt everywhere.

I must have inherited his love for the earth. I'm never happier than when my hands are full of black earth, hopefully with a few worms in it.

Dirty hands can be washed. A dirty soul cannot. It's character that counts.

[WinkyDink]

17. Your premise is completely wrong. The other OP said one law REQUIRED algebra to GRADUATE. There is a

HUGE difference between opposing that and "calls for the elimination" of the subject.

Nice example of how mathematics does NOT necessarily help one in LOGICAL ARGUMENT.

[howard112211]

19. I was looking at individual posts of the thread, rather than just the OP.

[WinkyDink]

21. Where is science denigrated? If that was done, it was ignorant.

[howard112211]

27. Well...

science is quantitative. doing science mostly implies doing math. besides, i am speaking also of general trends, which i perceive as present in society as a whole.

[patrice]

229. There is such a thing as qualitative science, often known as Naturalistic Observation, but also

pursued in various other forms, such as interviews.

Even with quantitative science, the whole matter of the significance of results is not always just straight-forward stuff. "Use this one statistical formulation in this particular manner" is not always the case as there are various statistical justifications for using various statistical formulations to identify various kinds of "significance", hopefully inherent to the data. And, then, there is the whole question of the validity and reliability of the research methodology employed, in and of itself, and also relative to any similar/different methodologies used to pursue the same or similar questions, through peer review.

[Hello_Kitty]

120. Not a single person on that thread did what you accuse

No one argued for the removal of algebra from school curricula. No one.

[Lionel Mandrake]

124. Thank you.

As the arch villain who started that notorious other thread, I have been repeatedly accused of wanting to eliminate algebra, wanting to dumb down the schools, etc.

These accusations are like the heads of the Lernaean Hydra: as soon as you chop off one head, two more grow to take its place.

But thanks for trying.:)

[GoCubsGo]

194. Some of us DID realize it wasn't you making the accusations

I understand that you were just the messenger. I think that, like me, others were just completely appalled at the thought of eliminating algebra in order to, once again, dumb things down for the lowest denominator. It happens too much in this society, and in our schools, and it needs to stop. But you knew that. :-)

[nadinbrzezinski]

157. And apparently there is a problem with MINIMUM graduation requirements.

:sarcasm:

[Sheepshank]

200. self delete

[retread]

22. "it is not practical in everyday life" Large amounts of time

are spent in the weight room PREPARING for sport. Shouldn't mental exercises be viewed as preparing a brain and its thought processes for "everyday life"??

Problem is, it would lead to less Republicans.

[dkf]

24. Logic is too harsh for some. They would rather rely on magical thinking.

[NNN0LHI]

31. I didn't realize how true that was until just recently

And it sure is true.

Don

[Still a Democrat]

26. I don't want to see kids pushed to excel in areas where their abilities and interests are lower

Too often a child will get good grades but be dressed down for the poor grade s/he got in a class in an are they don't excel. Then they'll be pushed to take more in that area rather instead of just being allowed to thrive in others.

I'm pretty good at math and algebra probably should be on the curriculum, but pushing kids through trigonometry and calculus when they aren't inclined toward math is ridiculous. And depending on your profession, math applications may indeed be limited.

[pnwmom]

95. I agree. Requiring Geometry and Algebra for high school

graduation makes sense. Requiring calculus is going too far.

And I say that as the wife and mother of engineers, who did well in math myself. Not everyone wants or needs to do higher level math. One of my children hates it, and we're supporting him in finding his own path.

[HereSince1628]

28. Teaching students that practical application makes something important

is a Calvinist plot against curiosity.

It denies people a rich appreciation of Life.

[Swamp Rat]

177. yep

:thumbsup:

[FreakinDJ]

30. I'm OK with it = More Money for Me

I use Trigonometry and Calculus daily in my work and I make very good money. Most people do not want to be bother with it nor wish to learn and implement it in their work

So = more money for me

[xchrom]

33. the health forum has been revealing your topic matter for a long time as it pertains to the left. nt

[pipoman]

34. I have to say that I believe the nature of science + media

have hurt the sciences. Years ago scientific journals were the vehicle for peer review beyond the initial peer review for new scientific theory, not press releases for the masses. Now every day our media reports the contents of these scientific journals, as fact, to the masses. Then after a more intense peer review a year or two later it is discovered to be erroneous in whole or in part. If it happened once in a while it would be OK, but the nature of science has always been evolving understanding. This evolving understanding simply looks like, 'the educated idiots were wrong again', to the masses. This doesn't explain the disdain for mathematics. Mathematics are only as useful as their application. As we have progressed technologically, complex mathematics have been reduced to background applications applied by computer programs. From industry to science, the necessity for understanding mathematical equation has become almost unnecessary. CADD, CNC, and a host of other computer based applications have taken the need for understanding away. I know people with associates degrees who are running engineering teams of other associate degree "engineers", all who have gone through secondary training in the use of the needed software/hardware for their application, but no real need to be mathematicians as used to be necessary in virtually every area of engineering. This has transferred the importance of the analytical thinker to the more creative thinkers in R&D. Now instead of the creative thinkers developing an idea, then taking the idea to the analytical thinkers for development, the creative thinker can enter the idea into an engineering program which develops most of the plan for production of the idea. Just my $.02.

[Posteritatis]

41. Don't equate science journalism with scientific journals. (nt)

[pipoman]

43. Just one example would be New England Journal of Medicine

it is easy to find news reports which source professional journals for breaking news, no?

[Recursion]

53. Almost invariably they do it wrong

The fields I know (electromagnetics, semiconductors, and automatic control) do often see studies break into the larger media, and they're almost always reported not just wrongly, but embarrassingly wrongly. I've heard medical researchers make the same complaint about studies in Lancet or NEJM when they get news coverage.

[pipoman]

143. Yep, exactly my point

Reduction of a complex, voluminous idea or theory to a 2 paragraph summary in the NYT is bound to lead to misunderstanding of the subject. Then when the idea people have read turns out to be inaccurate, the same people think the scientists were wrong again, further reducing their opinion of the scientific community as a whole.

[Taitertots]

36. If they didn't denigrate it than they would feel stupid

Math, Science, logic is hard and they are lazy. It is much easier to be spoon fed media bullshit than to read, think, and learn.

[Codeine]

111. This.

The most amusing thing is everyone who reacted with hostility to HS students being required to learn algebra claimed that they were math whizzes. Riiiight. :rofl:

[surrealAmerican]

37. I must have missed the anti-algebra thread ...

... but that's just plain ignorant. People who can't understand algebra, can't understand our economy. Even their personal finances will be incomprehensible to them.

I know there is a lot of anti-intellectualism in this country, but I don't see that much of it here at DU.

[Obamanaut]

55. Here it is. Link in message block

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x72725

[reggie the dog]

110. hell, algebra helps drug dealers too

perhaps the dealers that smoke, shoot, snort too much and cant pay back their debts and end up getting killed or what not dont have math skills, but i bet the successful ones do...

it amazes me how often people working at a cash register cannot make change without electronic help yet street dealers get the change right just about every time with no electronic help

[notesdev]

38. If you don't know math

then you can continue to deny that the government is insolvent, that SS won't be paid out, that student loans are sustainable, that health care costs don't have to be reined in, that the economy isn't in a full-blown Depression, etc.

It's great for keeping the sheep docile. Just don't teach them anything that would help them to understand what the slaughterhouse is for.

[Yavin4]

39. Without Algebra, The Banks Would Rob You Even More

If you don't know Algebra, then you won't know how to understand banking fees.

[jody]

42. Science and math explain the natural universe. The arts connect us with the preternatural. There are

many who would remain ignorant of both natural and preternatural.

[lumberjack_jeff]

44. Self esteem. If I don't know how to do it, it must be easy.

Only weird geeky people know how to do math.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NO0cvqT1tAE

[Bigmack]

48. Don't mean to lower the intellectual level...

of this discussion....

But...

Watch the video "Idiocracy".. or at least the first 5 minutes. Things get a LOT clearer.

"The years passed, mankind became stupider at a frightening rate. Some had high hopes the genetic engineering would correct this trend in evolution, but sadly the greatest minds and resources where focused on conquering hair loss and prolonging erections."

[hfojvt]

49. "How could those two things be equivalent?"

"The Second Law of Thermodynamics is nothing more than a working hypothesis suitable for various types of scientific research. On the other hand - a work by Shakespeare: teeming with the most vital ideas about the inner development of man, showing the whole grandeur and misery of human existence. How could these two things be equivalent? What do I miss, as a human being, if I have never heard of the Second Law of Thermodynamics? The answer is: Nothing. And what do I miss by not knowing Shakespeare? Unless I get my understanding from another source, I simply miss my life." EF Schumacher "Small is Beautiful" 1973 p 87


"I happen to know that algebra will be of no use to me in the future, and I speak from experience." my favorite line from "Peggy Sue got married" which has been cut when it is shown on cable these days. (for those who have not seen it, Peggy Sue is about a woman at her 30 year reunion who goes back in time to when she was a high school senior in 1955.)

[ladjf]

51. Because it's easier and more satisfying to "make up" answers

to any question. nt

[Recursion]

52. The great ancient geometer Euclid was teaching a child math

After the child proved his first theorem, he asked what he will gain by studying such things.

Euclid told a slave to give the child a gold coin, commenting "it seems he must have profit from his labors."

This problem is not new. (And, I'll add, Plato's academy is said to have had the sign, "Let No-one who has not mastered Euclid's Elements enter here.")

I'm an engineer, but it hasn't kept me from having an interest in the humanities. But, I'll just be blunt: I think there's a difference between a trained engineer that dabbles in the classics and a trained classicist that dabbles in engineering.

[stevenleser]

54. Here is the reason in a nutshell

If you fail, don't learn well, or never take (Insert subject here) you will not get a job that requires or makes some use of that subject and thus you will tend to not appreciate the value of learning that subject.

High School, however, occurs at a time in ones life where you tend to not know what you will do with the rest of your life. It is thus extremely important that you get a well rounded education that includes a high variety of subjects, but particularly, reading, writing, math, science, history and so on.

[Gman]

65. In a nutshell: Lazy

[lunatica]

56. You're talking about one tv show...

I work in UC Berkeley and believe me, science and math as well as research in 100 of areas are still hopping hot subjects. Hell! Even BP has given huge grants for research on things from stem cells to alternate energy research. I'm sure they plan to own the patents on all of it.

[SouthernLiberal]

58. Thirty+ years later, still value my Algebra I class

I program business applications on mainframe computers for a living. In spite of the fact that my early programming classes were offered by the math department, I use almost no math beyond basic arithmetic in my job.

No, it is in the rest of my life that I use my math skills more (okay, I don't remember how to solve a quadratic equation). Consider the grocery store. Even after decades of unit pricing, it still requires math to be able to tell which of several choices is the best buy. Don't believe me? Take a close look sometime at the unit price labels. You will find different brands and sizes of peanut butter. Some of the jars give their contents by volume, some by weight. Some of the jars that are labeled by weight have a unit price label using fluid ounces. Some of the jars labeled by volume have unit price labels giving the cost per decimal fraction of a pound. You will almost assuredly find at least one brand where the unit price is given as price per 'each'.

Try the tomato sauce area. I doubt if any of what I still think of as 15oz cans contain more that 14.5 ounces. Some are just 14 ounces. And of course, there are larger and smaller cans. The unit price labels are just as confusing as for peanut butter. How do I know how many cans of what size I need for my recipe? And which is the best buy?

And of course, there are shelves where the unit price labels are missing (which may not be the store's fault), and there are still cases where the unit price on the shelf label is just wrong

To me, anyone who does not know math is easily taken advantage of. It is a crucial skill that I think all children should learn.

[ieoeja]

91. I found your reply surprising.

As an application developer I use algebra extensively. But I do work almost exclusively on financial systems.

On the other hand, most financial analysts with whom I work know shockingly little algebra. So they have to explain the finances to me, then I have to translate that into algebra for the computer program. Then if numbers don't match up, they have to ask me to explain it.

Which makes me wonder, if they are just going by what the computer spits out, why do we even have accountants?

Actually, I tossed a similar idea out at a meeting once. We were sending some of our IT work overseas (natch) and talking about the difficulty getting overseas labor up to speed. I pointed out that accounting principals have been pretty much stable for a thousand years and univeral across the world. So why are we sending IT overseas when we could more easily send accounting since they must already have fully functional accountants?

You'd have thought I'd tossed a stink bomb into the room. Their visceral reaction left me with the distinct impression that they had already thought of this, but since the financial people are making the decisions of what jobs are going overseas, they were not about to send their own jobs overseas, and they didn't need an smart ass computer programmer pointing out this fact.

[Imperialism Inc.]

94. As a fellow programmer I have noticed all the programmers are forgetting

that functions are a mathematical concept! Maybe not taught in Algebra I but we learned functions in like Algebra II or III and also the notion of algorithms. Just a friendly reminder. f(x) = or f(x,y,z) = . Sound familiar? :)

[mainer]

59. I grew up in the post-Sputnik era. We all learned algebra.

And geometry, trigonometry, chemistry, etc., etc, in high school. We didn't whine about it; it was just expected of us. Just as it was expected that the US would put a man on the moon.

What's with all the whining now? Kids are stupid or something? They just can't do it because it's too, sob, HARD for the poor dears?

Good god, how America has fallen.

[earcandle]

62. We need both math and english grammar skills, not one or the other.

[eppur_se_muova]

96. Best reply so far. nt

[fatbuckel]

63. Stupid people are easier to control. They learned that lesson a long time ago.

[Gman]

64. Just people that are too lazy to learn it and are making excuses for it

there's no other explanation.

Some of the excuses here sound like they come from Free Republic.

[Hannah Bell]

66. because if the people understood math better they might be dangerous?

[Lydia Leftcoast]

68. I'm an advocate of requiring hard subjects in high school because

kids at that age often don't know what they want to do. By saying, "Oh, you can skip that course, because you'll never use it," or "You don't need math/foreign language/science, because I (the parent) was never good at it,"we are effectively closing off possible life paths.

I hated math in high school, but now I know that it was because we had large classes and the teachers were unable to explain the principles to me in ways that worked for me. Later in life, I had some really good instructors who knew how to make mathematical concepts comprehensible by explaining everything several ways.

As a college professor, I had a few students every year who waited till their senior year to fulfill their language requirement because their parents had told them that languages were "hard" and "useless." Some of these students discovered that, in fact, studying Japanese was easy and fun for them, and they regretted having listened to their parents all through high school and their first three years of college.

How are you going to find out what hidden talents you have if nobody ever requires you to stretch beyond your comfort zone?

(By the way, I have never used actual algebra/trig/calculus in my current work, but the fact that I've had these subjects makes it easier for me to understand discussions of scientific topics, something that I DO encounter in my translation work.)

[EFerrari]

84. The habit of thinking.

I used to feel badly for my students who often seemed so hassled that they didn't seem to be able to enjoy a proposition, a few minutes of uncertainty. It wasn't freeing for them, it was anxiety provoking.

[Codeine]

113. I like the way you put that.

"The habit of thinking." People do seem to actively dislike hitting an intellectual wall and finding out they can't get over it without searching out some handholds and working out a path.

We teach our kids it's ok to avoid a mental challenge and then denigrate the populace as being "sheeple" without critical thinking skills. :(

[gkhouston]

141. I actually look for things that are challenging for my kid because I'm concerned

that too many things come easily for her. I don't want her to give up on something just because she doesn't excel at it the first time she tries it. One aspect of our instant gratification society seems to be teaching kids that they have to be #1 at something right off the bat -- and if they aren't, it's not worth doing at all. The idea that you can enjoy an activity that you aren't the world champion at eludes them and I find that very sad.

[valerief]

69. Stupid people support stupid causes. Critical thinkers can detect the BS.

Critical thinkers are dangerous to charlatans.

[GOPBasher]

72. I basically agree with you mostly, but to be fair, that thread did not call for the elimination

of algebra from the curriculum. The poster was merely saying that s/he didn't believe it should be required of EVERYONE. I think there should be a rational debate over what, exactly, should be required of EVERYONE. I'm a physics major and a former science and math teacher, so one would know where I stand. However, the other side of the debate should be heard as well.

[onlyadream]

75. It's our culture

People are facinated with celebrities, not with the mysteries of science. Kids want to be singers and actors, not engineers and researchers.
Engineers & physists are boring, the common person has no idea what they do and they don't want to know. However, get them in a room with an artist, singer or actor and they'll be chatting up a storm.

[jobycom]

76. Maybe because writers aren't always good at math.

Songs, movies, television, journalism, newspapers, and magazines are all written by people who made a choice to major in writing and language over mathematics. Not all writers are hostile to math, by a long shot, and many mathematicians and scientists are good writers, but in general there is a bias based on the way our culture is transmitted to us.

Someone once said that a society that values mediocre philosophers over good plumbers shall have neither good plumbing nor good philosophy. Seems too true, sometimes.

[EFerrari]

83. It's funny, though, because the hard sciences are full of great figures

for poetics. I published poetry through out the college years and that work drew from hard science courses 'way more than any of the social sciences or the lit courses. Science has all these great, specific descriptors and verbs and artefacts in it, not like lit, which tends to generate mushy abstraction or from social science, which tends to long-winded, forgettable phrases.

[dballance]

78. It's Palinism

Such a rush for ignorant. Thinking actually hurts too much.

[pitohui]

82. because people are intellectually lazy, i guess

who are these people who lives are so simple that they never have to use algebra?????

[provis99]

86. you can't work in the social sciences these days without math.

My own field, political science, is all game theory, linear regression theory, calculus, structural equations modeling, time series statistical analysis, and the like. Other social sciences are all mathematical, too. My students used to think political science just meant them spouting their stupid political opinions, without having to do the science part.

[LanternWaste]

90. I think that for the most part, we minimize those things we don't understand.

I think that for the most part, we minimize, or even dismiss those things we don't understand.

[DailyGrind51]

92. Algebra is the mathematical quest for equality!

[pnwmom]

93. I think people may be overreacting to the imbalance that occurs

when math and science is focused on without regard to the humanities -- especially, ethics.

For example, when scientists and engineers develop weapons or other instruments without regard to how society will use them. No math equation is going to tell a political leader when or if it is justified to drop a nuclear bomb.

Highly developed societies need the kind of skills taught in humanities as much as they need tech skills.

[savannah43]

98. Poetry trumps science, as it is easier to manipulate

people who are "dreamers." Plus the fact that most people do not know how to think and have chosen not to learn how.

[patrice]

186. There is "poetry" and then there is poetry. True poetry does not manipulate:

For example, check out The Well Rising here: http://www.poetryfoundation.org/bio/william-e-stafford

There are disparate others you may consider, such as T. S. Eliot and Dylan Thomas, or Ranier Marie Rilke and Anne Sexton, Denise Levertof, and Marianne Moore, Sylvia Plath, and Emily Dickinson amongst others.

In his work titled Poetics, the distinctions between good poets and bad ones were described by Aristotle, the same teacher who laid the foundations of Logic in his book Posterior Analytics. Another perspective in this critique was written by Robert Graves. In his book The White Goddess, Graves presents a theory of poetics that poses true poetry as a psycho-linguistic cognitive calculus that expresses unique living truths for which there no other more valid terms, besides the direct experience itself which the true poetic construct elicits.

[defendandprotect]

99. Know-nothings detest intellectuals -- that's pretty much where we are with rise of right ...

[Codeine]

114. Plenty of it on the Left as well.

Some posters here freaked out because they thought there would be ecological repercussions when we "bombed the moon."

Oh, wait. . . :rofl:

[defendandprotect]

164. We "bombed the moon" .... ???

[DetlefK]

100. The reason is the upcoming relativism.

When you are willing to give up your morals, because someone told you it would be okay, that's the beginning.
When you abandon critical self-reflection and thinking, that's the beginning.
When you accept the notion, that everything can be debated away, you lost.


Of course you don't need algebra per se in everyday life, but it is important for the EXACT same reason why literature is important: It greases your brain, it prepares your thinking for strange situations you might come across.
You won't accept obstacles. You will think.


Oh, and regarding the cliché of bitter scientists: I know firsthand that physicists prefer rock music. :-)

[Duppers]

205. rock and...

classical, blues, jazz. :)

[femrap]

101. I've had conversations about the

'numbers people.' They're kinda on the 'shit list' now because they all went to Wall Street to write computer trading programs.

I loved algebra, trig and calculus....can't remember much of it now, but I loved the way they worked my brain. And I love science as well. A well-rounded person needs a basic knowledge of sciences, math, arts and the social sciences, IMHO. And big doses of common sense and humor are a must as well.....and would it be too much to ask for basic manners and civility as well?

[Lucky Luciano]

153. Hey your friends need to eat too.

"They're kinda on the 'shit list' now because they all went to Wall Street to write computer trading programs. "


In our society there are not many well paid jobs anymore where you can be sure your kids can go to college. So, if being a badass high frequency trader/programmer is what it takes to be able to live ok in this country, then that is what they have to do.

[femrap]

166. Yes, I agree.....fuck the people,

fuck your neighbors....look out for #1. And after you're done....eat your young.

buh bye....

[Lucky Luciano]

167. I guess they should share the sacrifice and be a typical outsourced IT person?

The trading programmers are not the big economy destroyers anyway. Even if they scalp a few pennies off of your trades by being so clever, it is still cheaper than the commissions sued to be before electronic trading brought down commissions by eliminating a lot of phone brokers.

[Duppers]

206. 'shit list' .....

'numbers people.' They're kinda on the 'shit list' now because they all went to Wall Street to write computer trading programs.

That's because they cannot find jobs in high energy physics....that's because of funding cuts...because the rethugs will not vote to fund science projects....because they don't respect science and numbers. ;O

[Odin2005]

102. There has been a tendency by artsy-type left-wingers to demonize the technical and logical.

The "bourgeois" Liberal Arts major that treats people majoring in technical and scientific fields with disdain is the stereotype.

[WinkyDink]

148. I detect the reverse in your post.

[Odin2005]

159. You haven't run into those kind of people? They are a bunch of them at my university.

[RagAss]

103. Why?..How can you elect the Palins of the world with a population that can think?

[Prometheus Bound]

104. "a guy who basically did nothing but write poetry"

After such a disdainful comment, you dare ask "why the disdain"?

[patrick t. cakes]

176. +1000

[LWolf]

116. The underlying issue in that thread is not about mathematics.

It's about the current trend to insist that every student earning a high school diploma be college-ready.

I graduated from high school in 1977. My sons graduated in the 90s. We attended high schools that offered the classes needed to be accepted to universities, and counselors who helped us choose what classes to take; classes for graduation, or college-prep. Anyone who wanted to take those college-prep classes, and were willing to do the work to pass them, could. Those who DIDN'T took more basic classes designed to insure that they had the skills needed to enter whatever trade they hoped to. In my high school days, we could also take vocational classes that would lead to certificates and jobs in those vocations. Not so in my sons' tenure; vocational ed was mostly gone by that time.

The reality is that not every human is college material. Not every student WANTS to go to college. Nor should they. Trade school? Vocational ed? Yes. We need skilled tradespeople. And yes, EVERY student needs to be literate and numerate, needs to know the history of her species, needs to know how the world works, and needs critical thinking skills. Does numeracy include algebra? I could argue both sides of that question, but that's not the point.

Does every student need college? Not if we provide other paths for them, and not if our nation maintains rigorous labor standards and champions social and economic justice.

[Hello_Kitty]

122. Also, if you don't learn algebra in HS there are opportunities to learn it later

People are having the vapors over the notion of kids getting diplomas without taking algebra (it's required in only 20 states IIRC) while community colleges are full of people taking it at the remedial level so they can move up to college math.

[sofa king]

127. I think my gripe was that...

...in at least one of those threads, the poster was doing a damned good job of describing all the mathematics we have to do every day, whether we acknowledge it or not.

As I said in that one, knowing how much money you have left to spend out of the $20 you have at the store is solving for x, an algebraic problem. Those of you who are skipping straight to the addition and subtraction simply aren't giving yourselves enough credit for thinking algebraically.

And that sort of calculation is just the tip of the iceberg of the math we perform with near-perfection every day. Most of you drive or ride a bike or type or instantly convert code like this print into actionable thought. All of those things require calculations so vast and numerous that the computers we live with simply can't be asked to even try it... just yet. All of those things can be described in physics, using mathematics, even if I don't personally know the math behind it.

Maybe we don't all need to know it, in fact I'm sure you're right about that. But we all need to know about it.

The most important thing that underpins mathematics is rational thought. That's something Americans need to be practicing as much as possible, because frankly I think we suck at it.

[Hello_Kitty]

129. My problem is that people would rather more kids drop out of school

Thus foreclosing future educational opportunities for most of them.

[Odin2005]

161. In my school Algebra was a required course in 7th and 8th grade.

Can't drop out when you are 14. :shrug:

I have no problem with the mentally disabled and people with specific learning disabilities such as Dyscalculia being exempt from the requirements. I repeat BASIC Algebra is not that hard, my neice, who is in 6th grade, is no math wiz by any means and she is getting an A in her Pre-Algebra stuff. People are brainwashed to think algebra is super-hard and the stress and worrying lead to a self-fulfilling prophesy.

[Hello_Kitty]

169. But people ARE dropping out because of the algebra requirement.

Those kids aren't going to get the opportunity to learn it later in community college, trade school, or military training because they aren't going to get HS diplomas. The link between algebra and dropping out is well established. If you want to argue for increased funding for math tutelage, by all means, do so. But please don't tell me that unfunded mandates on schools to require passing of algebra for a HS degree are a step in the right direction. AZ Public Instruction Superintendent Tom Horne, a bigtime wingnut, pushed them on Arizona to ensure that fewer students would graduate.

[LWolf]

198. That's one of the strengths of the American system, imo.

That you can always go back for more.

[Hello_Kitty]

119. Why are you being dishonest about the other OP?

It did not call for the removal of algebra from the high school curriculum. It argued against making it a high school graduation requirement. Big difference.

Can't you make your point without grossly distorting someone else's position?

[WildEyedLiberal]

136. Ironic for an OP championing "cold logic," no?

More DU faux-intellectual tripe.

[sofa king]

121. I like Arthur C. Clarke's observation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarke%27s_three_laws

3. Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

Empiricism and the scientific method may account for only a tiny part of our human past, but we've probably lived with magicians, witch-doctors, snake-oil salesmen, and their equivalents for most or all of that past.

I think we may have evolved a healthy distrust of such people.

Our technology is sufficiently advanced that, to some of us, everything works by the machinations of some cabal of magicians who probably shouldn't be trusted.

And you know, now that I think of it, even though the reasoning is completely unsound, the conclusion is essentially the same one that science itself makes: doubt until confirmed by peer review.

Scary, huh?

[patrice]

222. And even with that peer review, it's still only a probability, perhaps a STRONG one, but a

probability nonetheless.

So, even if "it", whatever it is, is 99.9999999999% probable, unless you've identified those conditions that produce that 0.0000000001% probability of "not-it", there's still at least a remote chance that you are supporting a falsehood.

And the reason that is significant is that those improbable conditions that produce "not-it", i.e. something "other", could be significant conditions and, hence, a significant "other".

http://des.emory.edu/mfp/Kuhn.html

[Turbineguy]

126. Fox News

is not just successful with wingnuts.

[patrice]

131. Why is it necessary to point out false dichotomies so often? Reality does not exclude quantitative

truths from qualitative truths, nor qualitative truths from quantitative ones.

Some people over compensate for our materialistic, power-oriented, acquisitive culture by excluding quantitative logic in favor of qualitative truths. Some people over compensate for anti-rational, intuitive, emotional "spirituality" by excluding qualitative truths in favor of quantitative logic. Neither quantitative, nor qualitative epistemologies necessarily imply absolutes. Each is part of the phenomenological ground out of which the other is elicited.

There are different grades of both perspectives on reality. Some quantitative truths are more valid than others. Some qualitative truths are more valid than others, but relative to one another, they are apples and oranges, so, though a given quantitative assessment of a phenomenon may be either superior or inferior to most other such quantitative assessments, and a given qualitative assessment of a phenomenon may be either superior or inferior to most other such qualitative assessments, relative to relative to each other, it's still a difference in kind, not validity.

[MedicalAdmin]

132. The first group the Nazis went after were intellectuals and artists.

That is not a mistake. Artists and scientists have the job of seeing and revealing the truth.

The current marginalization of intelligence is planned - count on it.

[BrklynLiberal]

135. BNGO!!! Fascism Anyone?? Check out #11

http://www.secularhumanism.org/library/fi/britt_23_2.htm

<snip>

Analysis of these seven regimes reveals fourteen common threads that link them in recognizable patterns of national behavior and abuse of power. These basic characteristics are more prevalent and intense in some regimes than in others, but they all share at least some level of similarity.

1. Powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism. From the prominent displays of flags and bunting to the ubiquitous lapel pins, the fervor to show patriotic nationalism, both on the part of the regime itself and of citizens caught up in its frenzy, was always obvious. Catchy slogans, pride in the military, and demands for unity were common themes in expressing this nationalism. It was usually coupled with a suspicion of things foreign that often bordered on xenophobia.

2. Disdain for the importance of human rights. The regimes themselves viewed human rights as of little value and a hindrance to realizing the objectives of the ruling elite. Through clever use of propaganda, the population was brought to accept these human rights abuses by marginalizing, even demonizing, those being targeted. When abuse was egregious, the tactic was to use secrecy, denial, and disinformation.

3. Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause. The most significant common thread among these regimes was the use of scapegoating as a means to divert the people’s attention from other problems, to shift blame for failures, and to channel frustration in controlled directions. The methods of choice—relentless propaganda and disinformation—were usually effective. Often the regimes would incite “spontaneous” acts against the target scapegoats, usually communists, socialists, liberals, Jews, ethnic and racial minorities, traditional national enemies, members of other religions, secularists, homosexuals, and “terrorists.” Active opponents of these regimes were inevitably labeled as terrorists and dealt with accordingly.

4. The supremacy of the military/avid militarism. Ruling elites always identified closely with the military and the industrial infrastructure that supported it. A disproportionate share of national resources was allocated to the military, even when domestic needs were acute. The military was seen as an expression of nationalism, and was used whenever possible to assert national goals, intimidate other nations, and increase the power and prestige of the ruling elite.

5. Rampant sexism. Beyond the simple fact that the political elite and the national culture were male-dominated, these regimes inevitably viewed women as second-class citizens. They were adamantly anti-abortion and also homophobic. These attitudes were usually codified in Draconian laws that enjoyed strong support by the orthodox religion of the country, thus lending the regime cover for its abuses.

6. A controlled mass media. Under some of the regimes, the mass media were under strict direct control and could be relied upon never to stray from the party line. Other regimes exercised more subtle power to ensure media orthodoxy. Methods included the control of licensing and access to resources, economic pressure, appeals to patriotism, and implied threats. The leaders of the mass media were often politically compatible with the power elite. The result was usually success in keeping the general public unaware of the regimes’ excesses.

7. Obsession with national security. Inevitably, a national security apparatus was under direct control of the ruling elite. It was usually an instrument of oppression, operating in secret and beyond any constraints. Its actions were justified under the rubric of protecting “national security,” and questioning its activities was portrayed as unpatriotic or even treasonous.

8. Religion and ruling elite tied together. Unlike communist regimes, the fascist and protofascist regimes were never proclaimed as godless by their opponents. In fact, most of the regimes attached themselves to the predominant religion of the country and chose to portray themselves as militant defenders of that religion. The fact that the ruling elite’s behavior was incompatible with the precepts of the religion was generally swept under the rug. Propaganda kept up the illusion that the ruling elites were defenders of the faith and opponents of the “godless.” A perception was manufactured that opposing the power elite was tantamount to an attack on religion.

9. Power of corporations protected. Although the personal life of ordinary citizens was under strict control, the ability of large corporations to operate in relative freedom was not compromised. The ruling elite saw the corporate structure as a way to not only ensure military production (in developed states), but also as an additional means of social control. Members of the economic elite were often pampered by the political elite to ensure a continued mutuality of interests, especially in the repression of “have-not” citizens.

10. Power of labor suppressed or eliminated. Since organized labor was seen as the one power center that could challenge the political hegemony of the ruling elite and its corporate allies, it was inevitably crushed or made powerless. The poor formed an underclass, viewed with suspicion or outright contempt. Under some regimes, being poor was considered akin to a vice.

11. Disdain and suppression of intellectuals and the arts. Intellectuals and the inherent freedom of ideas and expression associated with them were anathema to these regimes. Intellectual and academic freedom were considered subversive to national security and the patriotic ideal. Universities were tightly controlled; politically unreliable faculty harassed or eliminated. Unorthodox ideas or expressions of dissent were strongly attacked, silenced, or crushed. To these regimes, art and literature should serve the national interest or they had no right to exist.

12. Obsession with crime and punishment. Most of these regimes maintained Draconian systems of criminal justice with huge prison populations. The police were often glorified and had almost unchecked power, leading to rampant abuse. “Normal” and political crime were often merged into trumped-up criminal charges and sometimes used against political opponents of the regime. Fear, and hatred, of criminals or “traitors” was often promoted among the population as an excuse for more police power.

13. Rampant cronyism and corruption. Those in business circles and close to the power elite often used their position to enrich themselves. This corruption worked both ways; the power elite would receive financial gifts and property from the economic elite, who in turn would gain the benefit of government favoritism. Members of the power elite were in a position to obtain vast wealth from other sources as well: for example, by stealing national resources. With the national security apparatus under control and the media muzzled, this corruption was largely unconstrained and not well understood by the general population.

14. Fraudulent elections. Elections in the form of plebiscites or public opinion polls were usually bogus. When actual elections with candidates were held, they would usually be perverted by the power elite to get the desired result. Common methods included maintaining control of the election machinery, intimidating and disenfranchising opposition voters, destroying or disallowing legal votes, and, as a last resort, turning to a judiciary beholden to the power elite.

Does any of this ring alarm bells? Of course not. After all, this is America, officially a democracy with the rule of law, a constitution, a free press, honest elections, and a well-informed public constantly being put on guard against evils. Historical comparisons like these are just exercises in verbal gymnastics. Maybe, maybe not.

<snip>

[NNN0LHI]

193. Actually the intellectuals sat on their asses while the Nazis purged everyone else

"First they came…" is a famous statement attributed to Pastor Martin Niemöller (1892–1984) about the inactivity of German intellectuals following the Nazi rise to power and the purging of their chosen targets, group after group. The text of the quotation is usually presented roughly as follows:

They came first for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for me
and by that time no one was left to speak up.

[BrklynLiberal]

134. Willful ignorance .... the new religion.

[AllyCat]

137. I use algebra DAILY to calculate drug amounts for premature infants

People saying algebra is dead are completely insane. Or stupid. Or both.

[Kurovski]

142. "Well, it all starts when a nulicule comes out of its nest...."

K&R.

[bluestate10]

144. The Left and the Right.

Are fundamentally adverse to methodical reasoning. With the frame in mind, it does not surprise me that and anti mathematics or pure science treads would show up on DU any less likely as they would on FR. The only differences are in the words used and often in spelling posters use. One only has to look at the fact adverse, Obama trashing thread that made it's way into DU during the holiday, the 1000% agree and kick posts that were written in response to such a thread were both demoralizing and enraging.

BTW. I take issue with your observation on anecdotal evidence. Great discoveries in science and math are made because a person notices what you called anecdotal evidence, but what I call empirical data, then launch on a methodical path of validating or discrediting the information. Where people that you decried fail is that their "investigations" are tainted with unsupported assumptions and closely held biases.

[kenfrequed]

145. Cursive writing

If there is actually a need to eliminate cirriculum it would be cursive. I found it redundant in the third grade before the advent of the internet and textual communication's ascendency. Eliminate it or consign it to being tought as an art elective.

But eliminating Algebra? Utterly stupid.

[Libertas1776]

146. I find it quite insulting

the broad brush many here are using to describe many people's dislike of maths like algebra, statistics, quantitative reasoning, etc. Has it ever occurred to any of you that not every single person out there fails to grasp these advanced mathematics because they are "lazy" or somehow willfully ignorant?

Has it ever occurred to any of you that many people simply lack the ability to grasp these subjects with such ease as many of you all seem to claim to do? Many young people say they dislike that which they don't understand. Its anxiety plain and simple. I should know. I experienced it all through high school and college.

We are so ready and willing in this day and age to accept that children and young adults can suffer from learning disabilities like Dyslexia (reading) and Dysgraphia (writing), but when it comes to something like Dyscalculia, a real learning disability involving mathematics recognized by the World Health Organization, forget it. Well, its pretty easy to see why, since something like a disability preventing you from reading or writing is quite obvious and cannot easily be denied. Math, however, is another story. That can easily be denied since its not that obvious.

And can you imagine why teachers, professors, and schools would not be so ready and willing to widely accept this as a real disability, at least without a real fight? Plain and simple, its money. Imagine how much it would cost to set aside resources for struggling students that have a disability, when you can just as easily say they are "lazy" or simply aren't applying themselves. And so they don't get the help they need, unless they get the proper diagnosis from a professional which will often come at great financial expense to the learning disabled person, not the school.

I struggled so hard in school and was always placed in the remedial classes, most often packed with troubled students and delinquents whose math abilities were only strained by their behavior and not any sort of disability. I had no special time set aside or any special techniques taught to help me grasp the subjects. Instead i faced anxiety, especially from persons like many on this board who broad brushed and said its so easy and why don't you get it? You feel inferior, downright stupid and inferior and there is no one to help you. I excelled at english and history and basically all my other subjects but math always weighed me down.

I'm not trying to use this as an excuse to get out of learning math. I would love to grasp algebra and the like but without the proper time and effort say someone with dyslexia or dysgraphia would receive, it is next to impossible. So please, next time, don't be so eager to broad brush. You never know whose feelings you'll damage, especially young kids and adults, it might even be your own children. They're all not "lazy" or willfully ignorant, many are struggling and others pointing out the supposed easiness of the subject they are trying to grasp is not helpful. Put yourself in their shoes. Imagine yourself in front of a blackboard staring frozen at a math problem while your classmates stare daggers at your back and giggling. Put yourself in the shoes of the college kid who has to keep shelling out hundreds of dollars every semester he fails to even pass a remedial class whose credits count toward absolutely nothing.

Oh well, he's just lazy. :eyes:

[Odin2005]

207. I posted above that people with Dyscalculia should be exempt from the requirement.

[Throd]

154. Not everyone is wired for math.

That doesn't make them stupid by default.

[bluestate10]

160. Few people are wired for ANY subject.

Mastering math and science takes hard work and dedication, few that are good in those areas were naturals, precious few, like 0.000001% few.

[bhikkhu]

180. Exactly

I have to tell my kids that over and over. The easiest excuse is "I'm not good at it", when, regardless of whether it is an academic subject, athletics, or anything else really, whoever is good at a thing got their by hard work and long practice. As much as people hate being called lazy - if you don't work hard at anything, you don't excel at anything. It has little to do with talent, and there's no such thing as just "being good at it".

[Marr]

156. Subjects like algebra and logic teach people how to think.

Analyzing problems rationally and testing our own reasoning aren't skills that we're just born with. If you want to understand complex problems (let alone set about solving them) you have to be able to think in an ordered, rational way.

[nadinbrzezinski]

158. Ant-intellectualism

it is rampant, imho of course.

[TheKentuckian]

165. Okay, the algebra stuff is way crazy town. Algebra teaches outside of "math".

Algebra forces the brain to "see" things differently and I think is great problem solving practice.

This isn't the province of rocket scientists, theoretical physicists, and engineers. Algebra, I believe we might use as much as adding, subtracting, multiplying, and dividing but it runs in the background once the mind is trained to view problems in such a way.

I don't know why folks love the Dark Age thinking. I'm no good at math and certainly seldom, if ever enjoyed it but to not see the value and moment by moment impact on your thinking patterns is odd to me.

[HEyHEY]

170. Pff, looks like we got ourselves a reader

:mad:

[Kurovski]

172. Should we drag 'em off an' read him chapter an verse, Vern?

I like could read stuff too, y'know.

Heh. heh. thas rite.


:rofl:

This all goes back to O'Reilly's "gut", which Colbert parodies so good an such.

[HEyHEY]

174. Ah yes the "gut" feeling, let's bring it back to caveman instinct!

4,000 years 0f civilization was such a WASTE OF TIME!

[Kurovski]

175. Now you're talkin', buddy!

I mean, hell! they didn't even have Monster Garage in the olden times! Can you believe that shit!!!??

[mckara]

173. The Decline of the West, Oswald Spengler (1918 & 1923)

Read this

[diane in sf]

178. It allows our would be overlords to get away with their lies.

sp!

[Kurovski]

179. Believing in virgin births doesn't help matters much, either.

[caseymoz]

182. Think algebra's not practical in everyday life? Two words: compound interest.

This mortgage crisis either would not have happened or it would have been far less severe if people were better educated in math. We now have a mathematically ignorant population who are exploited mercilessly by our predatory consumer finance industry. Students might even think twice about the interest they're going to be hit with on their student loans if they had better math training in high school.

We'd probably be making better decisions with money all around if our elected representatives at every level knew math, and the citizens informing them did to.

Also, with our gambling industry being what it is, I think it's important that people have a better grasp of odds before they end up going bust at the casino and having to bail themselves out with payday loans.

The lack of mathematical skills in this society is a tragedy, and if I were paranoid, I'd see the lack of educational training and grasp of the seriousness of it to be a conspiracy, considering who's making money off it.

Which requires propaganda. So, where's that thread? Who put it up?

[JCMach1]

185. It's not just math under threat...

[Mojeoux]

187. The tread above says 65 BILLION Dollars is unaccounted for in Afghanistan

It must be advantageous to someone's agenda to have us unable to do the MATH !!

[patrice]

188. Is there no intrinsic value in knowing anything in and of itself? Only value acquired from income

earning potential?

Sad.

[retread]

196. Thank You!!

[patrice]

202. Amazing how common that assumption is, isn't it? I must be a frakking dinosaur.

I enjoy, and in some cases actually love, knowing whatever I can.

[caseymoz]

197. Interesting use of the word "value" then.

What if a billionaire said to you "isn't there any value to having money you're never going to use?" Yes, it's called power.

Is the "value" you're referring to really intrinsic? Might it just not be like a compulsive collector who finds "intrinsic" value in having lots of things they will never use. In which case, it's more like a mental illness. Or couldn't it actually be that you might need it sometime in life but in fact, want to present it as being a love of intrinsic knowledge until that's the case? Or, actually, you wish you needed it because it's so much fun, in which case, it's just the equivalent of amusement, entertainment? Or perhaps like the billionaire above, in which case, the value really isn't intrinsic, it's practical and you really have no right to be proud of it. Or perhaps it's so you feel you're better than everyone, in which case, it really isn't intrinsic either but a matter a pride. I would conjecture that "intrinsic knowledge" is really always channeled into one of those.

This is probably above other entertainment or pack-ratism in that sometime, somewhere, the knowledge you collect might be useful sometime, but not likely.

And I'm not saying that all of those are bad, they just aren't actually "intrinsic."

Lastly, you're not really on topic, which is about teaching essential knowledge. Intrinsic knowledge is fine, but people must have essential knowledge first. Algebra is essential.

[patrice]

201. Value of some sort is part of what constitutes the "importance" to which OP refers. And

It is possible to infer from OP's objection to anecdotal value statements that OP would object to a statement which takes the anecdotal form, "I have never used algebra in any job I have ever held, ergo, algebra either has no value or is of less value than knowing who was on Oprah yesterday."

[caseymoz]

214. Sorry, I have trouble understanding you.

Try as I might, I can only get the vaguest idea of what you're saying here and how it might connect with my statement and the OP's.

[patrice]

224. Please see #223 below

[patrice]

219. It could be any of the derivative values that you cite and/or it could be an intrinsic value.

Perhaps the difference in our perspectives is about who defines whatever value.

You have found Algebra to be essential; others don't. No matter how much I might disagree with either perspective, there's nothing I personally can do about that disagreement. Beyond effectively providing relatively authentic, relatively reliable support for whatever my perspective is, you are the ONLY one who can IDENTIFY the relative validity, derivative or intrinsic, of the value in question.

And, of course, all of that IS relative, because right or wrong/true or false it is what it is, no matter what a truest truth, an ultimate reality/equation, if there is such a thing, is.

By way of reference, my perspective on the question is influenced by Thomas R. Kuhn's The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, the whole question of "the nature of proof" and Process philosophy.

[patrice]

223. Thomas R. Kuhn's The Structure of Scientific Revolutions

http://des.emory.edu/mfp/Kuhn.html

[Odin2005]

208. I truly DESPISE that attitude. It's a legacy of Calvinism.

Knowledge for knowledge's sake is reviled in our society, part of the workaholic "free time is the devil's plaything" mentality.

[patrice]

218. Honest Rationalism would recognize the NECESSITY of qualifying such a

statement, rather than implying the absolute: "There is no knowledge that has any value in and of itself."

Aside from missing the whole question as to what constitutes the empirical truth known as Beauty, such statements also miss the FACT that Rationalism does not produce absolutes, though people unfortunately pretend that it does all of the time.

[patrice]

221. BTW, I pretty much DESPISE it too! nt

[Lucian]

189. I don't want to get rid of it.

I just want it to be an elective. If a kid can't do math, why make him/her? Have him/her build up their strengths, not make them take classes that play on their weaknesses. If a kid can't get algebra, they're not going to get it, no matter if you try teaching it a hundred different ways. Other classes can build up critical thinking and logic. Algebra isn't the only class. Geez.

Edit: This has nothing to do with anti-intellectualism.

[Odin2005]

209. truly not being able to do math is a learning disability, discalculia, and should allow exemption...

from math requirements.

[prete_nero]

190. I have to respond to this, even though I'm mostly a lurker.

I wrote paragraphs on this and I want to simplify it down as much as possible. I have never been good at algebra, I put a lot of effort into it when I was in school...but I was still not 'good at math!'. I take offense to any comment that would suggest I wasn't good at it because I didn't try hard enough. Effort doesn't not always equal ability.

This reminds me of what I would say when I was getting my teaching degree: "EVERYONE can play the piano...see?" *walks over to piano an plunks one or two keys".

Everyone CAN do algebra...but not everyone is good at it.

(I do think basic algebra should be taught to most students)

[GoCubsGo]

195. At least you TRIED to do it, and that's the whole point.

You aren't the one those comments were aimed at. It's not about being "good at it", or being dyslexic or dysgraphic or whatever. It's about people flat out not even making an attempt at algebra because they have been told it is "too hard". The ones that want to get rid of algebra don't even want to try it. That is what people are finding so horrifying. There ARE lazy people out there, and unfortunately, it seems as if there are more and more of them every day.

[patrice]

203. Yep! Give anyone the answer book and s/he can "teach"!

just in case . . . :sarcasm:

[XemaSab]

212. As someone in the natural sciences

I am very depressed by how many people are incapable of identifying 10 native birds in their area.

As an editor, I am depressed by how many people are incapable of using an apostrophe.

[kittykitty]

213. Where I live, people think any plural ends in 's n/t

[patrice]

220. And if you say anything about it they say, "Well, we know what is meant, so it doesn't matter."

"English is a 'living' language. Gotta celebrate it."

:puke:

Screw the whole idea that the communication context can become UN-NECESSARILY more complex and, thus, yield a higher MORE EXPENSIVE probability of error. That doesn't matter when you're a member of the right clique; all such errors are explained away and blamed on _______________, even when that costs people their lives or well being.

[fatbuckel]

225. It`s easier to control stupid people.

[patrice]

226. When it comes to Education, I think the issues you raise are best addressed by Paulo Freire

http://books.google.com/books?id=xfFXFD414ioC&printsec=frontcover&dq=paulo+freire+pedagogy+of+the+oppressed&source=bl&ots=sWUbb8iWV7&sig=lbEutJGPMahzsebn-zK9DyX7xnQ&hl=en&ei=Ru4cTaW0MsSAnQe6oeXfDQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CDAQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q&f=false

[Warren DeMontague]

228. It's less work to believe that the earth is flat, the night sky is papier mache with pin holes

and the universe is only 6,000 years old, than to attempt to try to contemplate the truth, for some people.