1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Science!

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Natalie, Feb 12, 2012.

  1. Perun

    Perun Climbing like a monkey Staff Member

    My thought about the current anti-education movement is that it could be seen as a reaction to the unwarranted hype that high-degrees get. Not everybody can achieve a BA, MA or PhD, not everybody wants to, and not everybody needs to. But many people feel pressured to do so, because there is a certain atmosphere in society that devalues a person who has not been to university, and that pays lower wages to lower-educated individuals. The logical reaction to this by people who cannot take the pressure is to demonise anything that has to do with science and higher education, and to fight a war against them that involves alternate science, conspiracy theories and the likes, because nothing feels more liberating to them than to say "the scientists are lying to you! Don't believe what you are taught!" because that provides a rationale for their failure to meet expectations that are too high and unfair.
     
  2. Natalie

    Natalie Insect of Terror Staff Member

    I think it's especially important here to point out that not everybody needs a 'higher' education because most jobs (let's be real here) don't require it. It's simply not necessary and yet for some reason there is a very real societal pressure to continue in academia, thereby devaluing degree's and wasting both time and money. Perhaps it's not so much about failure to meet expectations but setting the wrong expectations entirely.
     
  3. The Flash

    The Flash Dennis Wilcock did 9/11

    Well put, though I'd argue that it's not merely a rationale but also a false equivalent. The whole "woke" crowd equates their conspiracy theories to the skepticism of scientists and philosophers. I think it's a way of saying "Hey, I'm smart too!" for people who aren't willing to dedicate themselves to scientific research.
     
  4. Natalie

    Natalie Insect of Terror Staff Member

    I don't think we should put scientists on this kind of pedestal. There's different kinds of smarts. Succeeding in academia is a matter of dedication, a drive to keep learning, being in the right place at the right time (opportunity), and being more or less a nerd. That doesn't make you smart.

    On the subject of opportunity, one critique leveled at academia's door is that it's an ivory tower, the province of the rich, privileged, male, and above all, white.
    What say you?
     
    jazz from hell likes this.
  5. The Flash

    The Flash Dennis Wilcock did 9/11

    Meh, if that doesn't make you smart, then the word smart doesn't matter. Would you like intellectual or knowledgeable instead?

    The point was about the intention anyway so semantics don't really mean anything here.

    I don't live in the West so I only have an outside perspective, but I don't think anybody is stopping females or non-whites from advancing in academics. Less of them strive to do so, and that has to do with equal opportunity problems at lower levels of education, not academia.
     
  6. Forostar

    Forostar Conjure the Death Star again

    By this reasoning I am not sure about seeing people not meeting expectations as their failure.
    If the expectations are wrong, these could be seen as some sort of failure in the first place. Then again, in advance, it's not always clear to see if such expectations are correct or not. People can do better and better while studying and the other way around as well.

    This is a big problem:
    "a certain atmosphere in society that devalues a person who has not been to university,"

    We need people for lots of work that is not connected to university. So the demonizing of these people should stop, indeed.
     
  7. Perun

    Perun Climbing like a monkey Staff Member

    That was my point, actually.
     
    Forostar likes this.
  8. Brigantium

    Brigantium Work Geordie for hire Staff Member

    The BBC treads a narrow path, and knows it'll lose the TV licence before too long.

    It's under attack from people of all political persuasions, who each accuse it of bias in favour of an opposing standpoint. Planet Earth II was light on environmental messages, yes, but when TV viewers are obliged to pay for the BBC and a not insignificant chunk of the population dislikes feel-bad prime time TV, and many disagree with what they see as the preaching of environmentalists, I can see why the BBC kept it bland.
     
  9. Perun

    Perun Climbing like a monkey Staff Member

  10. The Flash

    The Flash Dennis Wilcock did 9/11

    Actually no, the ship is called Sir David Attenborough. :( They gave the name Booty McBoatface to one of the underwater vehicles on it.
     
  11. Natalie

    Natalie Insect of Terror Staff Member

    This bit from the above article is key: "But in a nod to the democratic process it allowed silliness to prevail by preserving the name [Boaty McBoatface] for the remotely operated sub-sea vehicle."

    Which cracks me up because is it technically even a boat when it's a sub-sea vehicle?
     
  12. LooseCannon

    LooseCannon Yorktown-class aircraft carrier Staff Member

    All sub-sea vehicles are boats by definition.
     
  13. Dr. Eddies Wingman

    Dr. Eddies Wingman Brighter than thousand_suns

    You may have to make an argument with the Oxford Dictionary on that one:

    "Boat: A small vessel for travelling over water [my emphasis], propelled by oars, sails, or an engine."
     
  14. LooseCannon

    LooseCannon Yorktown-class aircraft carrier Staff Member

    Ask any submariner what their vessel is called, and they'll tell you it's a boat.
     
  15. Dr. Eddies Wingman

    Dr. Eddies Wingman Brighter than thousand_suns

    That's because they've been watching Das Boot.
     
    Forostar and frus like this.
  16. LooseCannon

    LooseCannon Yorktown-class aircraft carrier Staff Member

    I think it's been in use since the 1910s. They certainly aren't ships.
     
  17. Dr. Eddies Wingman

    Dr. Eddies Wingman Brighter than thousand_suns

    I'd say they are vessels, and that boat has a narrower meaning. But hey, it's not my language :)
     
  18. LooseCannon

    LooseCannon Yorktown-class aircraft carrier Staff Member

    The term submarine comes from a contraction of the original term - submarine boat, that was in use when the type was first created. So yes, I would think so.

    Vessel is good for any watercraft that carries people, though. And if there's one thing I've learned in my life - never screw with a submariner.
     
  19. Zare

    Zare Dream of broken citadels

    This is correct. Even for a Typhoon.
    Besides, naval terminology isn't quite specific. It doesn't account for evolution, and that's why you call a giant nuclear sub "a boat.". Other example is "Destroyer" and what it means in 1917 and 2017.
     
  20. LooseCannon

    LooseCannon Yorktown-class aircraft carrier Staff Member

    Oh, absolutely, but try telling naval people that.
     

Share This Page