U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Education
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-09-2008, 09:05 AM
 
Location: Carlsbad
105 posts, read 611,208 times
Reputation: 123

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by NVplumber View Post
I didn't think I was trying to portray myself as some kind of super intellect....just a confused parent that was educated in a different system and time. But I don't consider myself "stupid". That may be a tad strong of a word. I just want what every other parent wants for their kids...to help them get the most out of school. With the "modern" methods it's hard for an old schooler, such as myself, to adjust. Not impossible, just a little tougher than the average bear.
Sorry NV I didn't mean for the post to be directed to you- I totally understand what you're saying/asking- it's a valid thing to question. My comment was just poking fun at some of the responses. And I agree, stupid is a strong word to call someone....see Fanklyn's post to me above. I see some people not only lack in the intellectual category, but in the class/tact category as well.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-09-2008, 09:21 AM
 
9,856 posts, read 12,027,157 times
Reputation: 5430
Quote:
Originally Posted by New2Oro View Post
Ohhh...let's start a thread where everyone competes to see who can write the most "intellectual" post about why everyone else is stupid. Nevermind, looks like it's already been done.

Consider this, being intellectual is relative. We're all intellectuals compared to the cavemen- see, problem solved.

Besides, Anti intellectualism in America= Job security for me.

Bring on the stupids.
It is not relative. Lets look at a few Presidential Inaugural Addresses. I would hold that the president's speeches cater to the american people, and in turn, reflect the intellectual capabilities of all of us.

Here is the first part of John Adams Address, from 1797

"When it was first perceived, in early times, that no middle course for America remained between unlimited submission to a foreign legislature and a total independence of its claims, men of reflection were less apprehensive of danger from the formidable power of fleets and armies they must determine to resist than from those contests and dissensions which would certainly arise concerning the forms of government to be instituted over the whole and over the parts of this extensive country. Relying, however, on the purity of their intentions, the justice of their cause, and the integrity and intelligence of the people, under an overruling Providence which had so signally protected this country from the first, the representatives of this nation, then consisting of little more than half its present number, not only broke to pieces the chains which were forging and the rod of iron that was lifted up, but frankly cut asunder the ties which had bound them, and launched into an ocean of uncertainty."

you can see he spoke as an essay is written, it is spoken in an intellectual tone.

Lets look at the start of Clinton and Bush's first addersses

Clinton:
My fellow citizens:
Today we celebrate the mystery of American renewal.
This ceremony is held in the depth of winter. But, by the words we speak and the faces we show the world, we force the spring.
A spring reborn in the world's oldest democracy, that brings forth the vision and courage to reinvent America.
When our founders boldly declared America's independence to the world and our purposes to the Almighty, they knew that America, to endure, would have to change.
Not change for change's sake, but change to preserve America's ideals—life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness. Though we march to the music of our time, our mission is timeless.


and Bush:
President Clinton, distinguished guests and my fellow citizens, the peaceful transfer of authority is rare in history, yet common in our country. With a simple oath, we affirm old traditions and make new beginnings.
As I begin, I thank President Clinton for his service to our nation.
And I thank Vice President Gore for a contest conducted with spirit and ended with grace.
I am honored and humbled to stand here, where so many of America’s leaders have come before me, and so many will follow.
We have a place, all of us, in a long story—a story we continue, but whose end we will not see. It is the story of a new world that became a friend and liberator of the old, a story of a slave-holding society that became a servant of freedom, the story of a power that went into the world to protect but not possess, to defend but not to conquer.


In modern times, the language is simpler, the sentences shorter, essentially, the speeches are less intellectual. New2Oro, I think you are looking at intellectualism as the amount of knowledge someone has. That isn't what I mean. Intellectualism is how someone looks at the world. We can't say we are more intellectual now than 200 years ago just because we have more advanced technology. The question is do we want to be entertained, or do we want to learn? Is school just job training, or is it to gain knowledge?

The Lincoln-Douglass debates gave both Lincoln and Douglass three hours to speak, with an hour break in between. There were seven of these. Everyone came to watch these. It was their 'entertainment'. In fairs of the time, there were debates. Two people would get on a stage and debate much like a modern presidential debate (but with no moderator). This would take a couple of hours, and everyone watched. Somehow I don't think that would go over so well at a modern day fair, or amusement park. Would we really sit through 42 hours of debates in modern times? The common person did 150 years ago... How many people today can't even sit through a 90 minute debate, much less one that takes six hours?

I am just as much at fault as anyone else, I am not claiming to be above all of this, but I do see a major shift away from intellectual thought among mainstream culture. It is not relative.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-09-2008, 09:31 AM
 
Location: Carlsbad
105 posts, read 611,208 times
Reputation: 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by hnsq View Post

New2Oro, I think you are looking at intellectualism as the amount of knowledge someone has. That isn't what I mean. Intellectualism is how someone looks at the world. We can't say we are more intellectual now than 200 years ago just because we have more advanced technology. The question is do we want to be entertained, or do we want to learn? Is school just job training, or is it to gain knowledge?

It is not relative.
Actually, I am not looking at intellectualism as the amount of knowledge someone has. I am looking at intellectualism as the capacity to process complex information to arrive at intelligent conclusions...the ability to analyze, sort, and comprehend information.

With that said. I still think it's relative. I believe everything is relative. We'll have to agree to disagree.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-09-2008, 09:38 AM
 
Location: Floriduh
164 posts, read 821,844 times
Reputation: 268
video games made kids fat and stupid
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-09-2008, 10:35 AM
 
Location: SW Missouri
14,851 posts, read 26,964,980 times
Reputation: 19512
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dwatted Wabbit View Post
The only presidential candidate who was grounded in the constitution, showed he understood and respected it, and referred back to it for guidance time and again, was dissed and ignored and made fun of.
Yet he was the most serious intellect on the trail.
Forgive me for being uninformed but I did begin following the presidential race until very recently. Of which candidate are you speaking?

20yrsinBranson
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-09-2008, 12:09 PM
 
Location: Midwest
2,485 posts, read 5,940,835 times
Reputation: 2427
Quote:
Originally Posted by 20yrsinBranson View Post
Forgive me for being uninformed but I did begin following the presidential race until very recently. Of which candidate are you speaking?

20yrsinBranson
Rep. Ron Paul, M.D.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-09-2008, 12:43 PM
 
Location: Midwest
2,485 posts, read 5,940,835 times
Reputation: 2427
Quote:
Originally Posted by marieb View Post
Here in the UK it appears to very much the same, a general dumbing down of education.
I agree with the poster about the baby sitter in the corner.

We have a grandson who was 7 in August, doing well at school, he can read. He was taught using phonics - but the way they taught it was - they would bring a new letter home every day, starting with "s" and there would an accompanying action to help them remember, after about 3 months of this, when he brought a book home he recognised the letters and knew the sounds they made and could sound out a word and generally get it right. It also helped a lot with spelling - he knew the letters, he knew the sounds. is this the type of phonics you have in the US.

My own children learned to read using word recognition - 2 of them were fine, one of them really struggled.

Below is the phonics method used in GS's school

Untitled Document (http://www.jollylearning.co.uk/jp.htm - broken link)
My wife says that in the cultural and intellectual capital of the western world, San Francisco, the kids are first taught block lettering/printing, as many of us were taught in past decades.

They are not taught cursive handwriting, they go from printing A B C a b c straight to the keyboard.

Pitiful, utterly pitiful.

Goodbye, letter writing!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-09-2008, 12:47 PM
 
Location: Texas
26,668 posts, read 14,166,016 times
Reputation: 15475
Quote:
Originally Posted by New2Oro View Post
Ohhh...let's start a thread where everyone competes to see who can write the most "intellectual" post about why everyone else is stupid. Nevermind, looks like it's already been done.

Consider this, being intellectual is relative. We're all intellectuals compared to the cavemen- see, problem solved.

Besides, Anti intellectualism in America= Job security for me.

Bring on the stupids.

I see...

You must work in advertising.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-09-2008, 12:54 PM
 
Location: Texas
26,668 posts, read 14,166,016 times
Reputation: 15475
Quote:
Originally Posted by Franklyn View Post
Or they see their kids graduate from these same schools and come home without the necessary skills to succeed in whatever their chosen fields may be and discover that there IS SOME TRUTH to these charges. You may consider the charges fertilizer, but in many cases [agreeably not all] it is true.

So let's deal with the parts that can be corrected and not make a blanket denial that sticks our heads even further down in the sand. I challenge you to use your analytical skills to devise solutions, not defenses.
What defense do you see me offering, and for whom?

Quote:
And I agree the charge is too general but I disagree that the radio airwaves are "filled" with that message. I do hear both sides where I live, but I have to make the effort to turn the dial once in a while.
Where I live, there's a station that has all right-wing radio kooks all the time, and another that right-wing radio kooks during the day, and sports talk at night. That probably isn't all that different in many other parts of the country.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-09-2008, 12:58 PM
 
Location: Texas
26,668 posts, read 14,166,016 times
Reputation: 15475
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigdave01 View Post
Great post, and it is partially true. Honestly, I don't know if America has ever been an intellectual place. The agressors and jocks have always been the popular ones. What were these kids doing in the 50s and 60s that made them so much smarter? Keep in mind I am only 17, but from what my dad tells me, things really weren't all that different when he was younger. I have taken many more advanced classes than either of my parents, and they are always stating I know so much more than they did when they were kids. I still know much more than than about politics.(Ron Paul)
Keep in mind they are both college grads and have well-paying jobs.
Every generation thinks the current one is terrible, and that the future is so bleak.

What may reinforce the perception that America is getting dumber (I mean, besides Bush serving two terms) is the prevalence of mass communication, especially the internet. With easy, inexpensive access, people who are barely literate can display their "skills" to a wide audience. Take this forum, for example.


In past decades, their grammar and tortured logic remained largely hidden from view, outside of their family and coworkers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Education

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2017, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 - Top