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.
I was thinking recently about how much general knowledge my parents had that I have not learnt, and how much I do know that has not been passed down to my son.
Of course, each new generation learns new things, my Dad was born in 1908 so grew up in an age of gas lights when people travelled by train or on horseback. My Dad was a young child when Bleriot flew across the English Channel - he had often watched dirigibles flying over London. I remember people of my parents' generation being struck with awe and wonder by Armstrong landing on the moon. Both my parents were deceased before the invention of the cellphone, so they knew very little of "modern technology".
But my parents and their friends could discuss knowledgeably the Crimean War, Robert Clive of India, Elgar's Enigma Variations, French impressionist artists, Italian industrial design or the Suez Canal and Egyptian politics.
I could not possibly do this, so while I feel I have a fairly broad general knowledge compared with, for example, my son, there are millions of things I know almost nothing about.
I am interested in how you guys feel the replacement of general knowledge by technical knowledge may affect future generations.
I was thinking recently about how much general knowledge my parents had that I have not learnt, and how much I do know that has not been passed down to my son.
Of course, each new generation learns new things, my Dad was born in 1908 so grew up in an age of gas lights when people travelled by train or on horseback. My Dad was a young child when Bleriot flew across the English Channel - he had often watched dirigibles flying over London. I remember people of my parents' generation being struck with awe and wonder by Armstrong landing on the moon. Both my parents were deceased before the invention of the cellphone, so they knew very little of "modern technology".
But my parents and their friends could discuss knowledgeably the Crimean War, Robert Clive of India, Elgar's Enigma Variations, French impressionist artists, Italian industrial design or the Suez Canal and Egyptian politics.
I could not possibly do this, so while I feel I have a fairly broad general knowledge compared with, for example, my son, there are millions of things I know almost nothing about.
I am interested in how you guys feel the replacement of general knowledge by technical knowledge may affect future generations.
This is how it's always been. Older generations die off, then they are replaced by younger ones with different ideas and perceptions. Information will always be lost in one way or the other, the Internet retains some of it but is literally impossible to capture all of it before it disappears into the ether.
There is an endless amount of "stuff" to know. There is not necessarily benefit in knowing all of these things.
It's not really about "how much" knowledge you have. It's more about "what" knowledge you have. Especially in this day, when you can easily go and look up any of those things you mentioned if you wish.
Knowledge has been getting more specialized for a long time now. A child born in 1908 may have had a mother who knew how churn butter and a father who knew how to shoe a horse. Very few people know how to do those things today because they don't have to.
P.S. You sound English. Americans can still knowledgably discuss the American Civil War which happened about the same time as your Crimean War. And while Eisenhower was smart enough to keep us out of your Suez Crisis, we can and do discuss current Middle Eastern wars and politics (I bet you'll find lots of Englishmen who still do, too).
Americans can still knowledgably discuss the American Civil War which happened about the same time as your Crimean War. And while Eisenhower was smart enough to keep us out of your Suez Crisis, we can and do discuss current Middle Eastern wars and politics (I bet you'll find lots of Englishmen who still do, too).
I do not think that Americans in general can still discuss these things. Americans who are interested in the Civil War and Middle Eastern politics, yes, but not most people.
Was that ever true? Time was, they kept the idiots off TV and put mostly smart people on. Now idiots are the bread and butter of TV. Just a thought regarding general perceptions.
Was that ever true? Time was, they kept the idiots off TV and put mostly smart people on. Now idiots are the bread and butter of TV. Just a thought regarding general perceptions.
True but today people are loathe to even pick up a book much less read it. I think at one time, people on the whole had at least a general understanding of these and other things, but not so now. We are very, very dumbed-down. Many people don't even own a book and could not even tell you in what century the Civil War happened or where the Middle East is.
True but today people are loathe to even pick up a book much less read it. I think at one time, people on the whole had at least a general understanding of these and other things, but not so now. We are very, very dumbed-down. Many people don't even own a book and could not even tell you in what century the Civil War happened or where the Middle East is.
Sad, but unfortunately true. The Civil War question actually came up in a conversation of mine recently, and the other person was "off" by about 100 years, and I don't think that she was "pretending", either. There were times when you could make some basic assumptions about college students, or graduates, but you really can't, anymore.
There is an endless amount of "stuff" to know. There is not necessarily benefit in knowing all of these things.
It's not really about "how much" knowledge you have. It's more about "what" knowledge you have. Especially in this day, when you can easily go and look up any of those things you mentioned if you wish.
It is a peculiar situation in a lot of ways. On the one hand all knowledge is not equally important. But a person's paradigm of reality affects what they think is important. A Christian and an atheist could have very different ideas about what information is important.
So what you know can affect what you think you should know.
Paradigm Shifts are a pain in the ass. Read the right/wrong book and find out you have been living your life all wrong.
I work with many teachers and it is shocking what many of them do not know. Especially some of the younger ones. I won't go into it, but is not good.
I'm in my late 40's and I remember lots of learning and discussion going on growing up. I remember my granddad (a WWII vet) reading history books about Europe and atlases and other things. I remember him discussing world events with his cronies. My grandmother read sewing books and other household things and discussed them with her friends. My parents read and talked about things. I remember my dad and uncles sitting around the table talking about politics and other subjects.
When a society no longer values learning, they are in real trouble.
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.
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.
