Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.debian.user > #176230

Re: [OT] on education [was]: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal")

From Nicolas George <george@nsup.org>
Newsgroups linux.debian.user
Subject Re: [OT] on education [was]: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal")
Date 2017-01-01 23:50 +0100
Message-ID <sUX6V-6jO-1@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References (5 earlier) <sUO3D-JY-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <sUOZH-1ka-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <sUQoO-25U-13@gated-at.bofh.it> <sUR1w-2Aa-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <sUU93-4tl-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw


[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] - view raw

Le duodi 12 nivôse, an CCXXV, deloptes a écrit :
> No time to discuss too long with you

Well, if you took time to find exact pointers rather than links to a
huge website and a 80+ pages document, you would realize you cannot find
anything to support the theory that the average level has decreased over
a significant period of time (fluctuations over a 5-15 period of time
are of course to be expected). Instead, you shift subtly the statement
towards politics and economy.

The truth is that the level has actually increased in developed
countries: a greater proportion of people finish high school, a greater
proportion of people access to higher education. The contents is also
broader and more rewarding, people no longer learn by heart lists of
battle dates and capital cities, they learn social mechanisms and
geopolitics; they study literary works instead of minute spelling rules.
They spend less time training to do three-digits multiplications by hand
because they have calculators, and thus they have time to study
statistics.

Now, why do people think the level drops? There are several reasons.

The simplest is this: they do not realize how much they evolved, they do
not realize they were just as clueless and ignorant at the same age. If
you can, dig something you wrote when you were barely an adult and read
it: odds are you will want to slap that stupid guy.

Another reason is a combination of confirmation bias and cognitive
dissonance. The knowledge changes; without the level dropping, new
generations know less about some topics, and more about others. When old
geezers notice that a kid does not know something, they notice it, and
they take it as a confirmation that the level drops, and they slap their
forehead. On the other hand, they rarely notice when the kid knows
something they ignore; because most of the time it is the old geezers
who drive the conversations, and they will not talk about subjects they
ignore; because if that happens anyway, they will not dwell on it, their
subconscious will gloss over it to avoid the humiliation.

Another point, specific to teachers and people exposed to the same kind
of young population. A century ago, teachers beyond the level of 10-12
years-old kids saw only the elite. (Well, not exactly a century ago;
exactly a century ago, teachers saw French mud and German shells.) At
that age, kids who had neither money nor exceptional abilities were
already plowing the fields or digging the mines (I might be exaggerating
for emphasis). Nowadays, they see everybody (10-16 years) or almost
(later). The level of a century ago's elite was better than the level of
today's whole population, yes, big surprise. But if you consider the
whole population on both cases, the comparison reverses. Show a function
graph to a random 18 years-old European today, almost all of them will
know what it is about, and more than half of then will actually know how
to read it. I do not have figures, but I would be surprised if it was
even half that sixty years ago.

Now, I realize that you, the person who was contradicting me, will not
agree with anything I wrote; it does not matter, these are well-studied
facts (978-20-2012-469-0 for example) based historic statistical
analysis. I wrote this for other readers who might be fooled by your
pseudo-references.

Now, I will leave you the last word: please go ahead and reply with a
barely relevant rant laced with mystic nonsense.

Really EOT this time (sorry).

Regards,

-- 
  Nicolas George

Back to linux.debian.user | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Why? -- "A Modest Proposal" Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-11-16 15:20 +0100
  Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal" Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-11-16 16:00 +0100
    Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal" Jonathan Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> - 2016-11-16 16:20 +0100
      Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal" Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-11-16 19:40 +0100
        Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal" Jonathan Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> - 2016-11-17 13:20 +0100
          Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal" Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-11-17 15:30 +0100
            Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal" Jonathan Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> - 2016-11-17 15:50 +0100
    Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal" Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-11-17 15:50 +0100
      Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal" Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-11-17 17:40 +0100
      Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal" Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2016-11-17 18:10 +0100
      Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal" kamaraju kusumanchi <raju.mailinglists@gmail.com> - 2016-11-22 06:40 +0100
  Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal" <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-11-16 16:40 +0100
    Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal" Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-11-17 16:00 +0100
      Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal" "John L. Ries" <jries@salford-systems.com> - 2016-11-17 19:00 +0100
        Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal" Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2016-11-17 22:40 +0100
        Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal" <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-11-17 22:40 +0100
        Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal" rhkramer@gmail.com - 2016-11-18 00:10 +0100
      Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal" <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-11-17 22:30 +0100
        Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal" Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2016-11-17 22:40 +0100
          Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal" <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-11-17 22:40 +0100
            Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal" Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2016-11-17 23:00 +0100
              Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal" Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> - 2016-11-18 09:20 +0100
          Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal" rhkramer@gmail.com - 2016-11-18 00:10 +0100
  Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal" emetib <chadbrabec@gmail.com> - 2016-11-18 09:50 +0100
    Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal" <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-11-18 10:40 +0100
    Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal" "Thomas Schmitt" <scdbackup@gmx.net> - 2016-11-18 11:10 +0100
      Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal" emetib <chadbrabec@gmail.com> - 2016-11-18 20:30 +0100
      Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A  Modest Proposal") cbannister@slingshot.co.nz - 2016-12-29 15:10 +0100
        Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A  Modest Proposal") Xen <list@xenhideout.nl> - 2016-12-29 19:10 +0100
        Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A  Modest Proposal") Xen <list@xenhideout.nl> - 2016-12-29 19:10 +0100
          Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A  Modest Proposal") Catherine Gramze <rhiamom@gmail.com> - 2016-12-29 19:40 +0100
            Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A  Modest Proposal") Xen <list@xenhideout.nl> - 2016-12-29 19:40 +0100
            Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A  Modest Proposal") Xen <list@xenhideout.nl> - 2016-12-29 19:40 +0100
              Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A  Modest Proposal") Catherine Gramze <rhiamom@gmail.com> - 2016-12-29 19:50 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A  Modest Proposal") Xen <list@xenhideout.nl> - 2016-12-30 02:40 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal") rhkramer@gmail.com - 2016-12-30 03:30 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal") Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-12-30 03:40 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal") Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2016-12-30 15:40 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? --  "A Modest Proposal") Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> - 2016-12-30 18:00 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? --  "A Modest Proposal") Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> - 2016-12-30 15:40 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal") rhkramer@gmail.com - 2016-12-30 15:50 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal") rhkramer@gmail.com - 2016-12-30 15:50 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal") Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-12-30 16:00 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal") John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2016-12-30 17:20 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A  Modest Proposal") Xen <list@xenhideout.nl> - 2016-12-31 08:30 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A  Modest Proposal") Xen <list@xenhideout.nl> - 2016-12-31 09:50 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal") Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-12-31 10:40 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A  Modest Proposal") Catherine Gramze <rhiamom@gmail.com> - 2016-12-31 17:20 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A  Modest Proposal") Xen <list@xenhideout.nl> - 2017-01-01 13:00 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A  Modest Proposal") Xen <list@xenhideout.nl> - 2017-01-01 13:20 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A  Modest Proposal") Xen <list@xenhideout.nl> - 2017-01-01 14:00 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A  Modest Proposal") Nemeth Gyorgy <friczy@freemail.hu> - 2016-12-31 10:40 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? "Thomas Schmitt" <scdbackup@gmx.net> - 2016-12-31 12:00 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? Xen <list@xenhideout.nl> - 2017-01-01 12:40 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? "Thomas Schmitt" <scdbackup@gmx.net> - 2017-01-01 14:10 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? Xen <list@xenhideout.nl> - 2017-01-01 19:10 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? "Thomas Schmitt" <scdbackup@gmx.net> - 2017-01-01 20:50 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2017-01-01 15:10 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? "Thomas Schmitt" <scdbackup@gmx.net> - 2017-01-01 20:50 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2017-01-02 02:10 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2017-01-02 02:30 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-01-02 16:00 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? rhkramer@gmail.com - 2017-01-02 17:30 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-01-02 18:20 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? rhkramer@gmail.com - 2017-01-02 18:50 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? Eike Lantzsch <zp6cge@gmx.net> - 2017-01-01 18:00 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? Xen <list@xenhideout.nl> - 2017-01-01 19:30 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal") rhkramer@gmail.com - 2016-12-31 15:20 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A  Modest Proposal") Xen <list@xenhideout.nl> - 2017-01-01 12:40 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? --  "A Modest Proposal") David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-01-02 15:50 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal") rhkramer@gmail.com - 2017-01-02 17:20 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? --  "A Modest Proposal") David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2017-01-02 18:10 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal") rhkramer@gmail.com - 2017-01-02 18:50 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A  Modest Proposal") Jörg-Volker Peetz <jvpeetz@web.de> - 2017-01-02 19:10 +0100
        Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A  Modest Proposal") Xen <list@xenhideout.nl> - 2016-12-30 02:40 +0100
          Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal") Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-12-30 03:30 +0100
            Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal") deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2016-12-30 18:30 +0100
              Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? --  "A Modest Proposal") Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> - 2017-01-01 12:40 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? --  "A Modest Proposal") Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2017-01-01 12:50 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal") deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2017-01-01 14:10 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? --  "A Modest Proposal") Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2017-01-01 15:10 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal") deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2017-01-01 16:40 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? --  "A Modest Proposal") Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2017-01-01 17:20 +0100
                [OT] on education [was]: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal") deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2017-01-01 20:40 +0100
                Re: [OT] on education [was]: Do have programs have poor  documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal") Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2017-01-01 23:50 +0100
                Re: [OT] on education [was]: Do have programs have poor  documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal") Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2017-01-02 01:30 +0100
              Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A  Modest Proposal") Rob van der Putten <rob@sput.nl> - 2017-03-12 17:50 +0100
            Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A  Modest Proposal") Xen <list@xenhideout.nl> - 2016-12-31 08:30 +0100
              Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal") Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-12-31 10:30 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A  Modest Proposal") Xen <list@xenhideout.nl> - 2017-01-01 13:00 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal") Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2017-01-01 13:00 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A  Modest Proposal") Xen <list@xenhideout.nl> - 2017-01-01 13:30 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal") deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2017-01-01 14:20 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A  Modest Proposal") Xen <list@xenhideout.nl> - 2017-01-01 18:00 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A  Modest Proposal") Xen <xen@dds.nl> - 2017-01-01 20:10 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? --  "A Modest Proposal") Bob Holtzman <holtzm@cox.net> - 2017-01-02 20:40 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? --  "A Modest Proposal") cbannister@slingshot.co.nz - 2017-03-11 10:00 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A  Modest Proposal") Martin Read <zen75502@zen.co.uk> - 2017-03-11 12:50 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal") deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2017-03-11 14:30 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A  Modest Proposal") Doug <dmcgarrett@optonline.net> - 2017-03-11 19:30 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? --  "A  Modest Proposal") Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> - 2017-03-13 13:10 +0100
          Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A  Modest Proposal") Catherine Gramze <rhiamom@gmail.com> - 2016-12-30 04:40 +0100
            Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A  Modest Proposal") Xen <list@xenhideout.nl> - 2016-12-31 08:40 +0100
          Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal") Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-12-30 12:40 +0100
            Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A  Modest Proposal") Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-12-30 13:30 +0100
              Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? --  "A  Modest Proposal") Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> - 2016-12-30 15:50 +0100
            Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal") rhkramer@gmail.com - 2016-12-30 15:50 +0100
              Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal") deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2016-12-30 20:50 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal") Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-12-31 00:20 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal") deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2016-12-31 01:10 +0100
                Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal") Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-12-31 01:50 +0100
                [OT] Antikythera mechanism [was Re: Do have programs have poor  documentation?] Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@meetinghouse.net> - 2016-12-31 03:20 +0100
                Re: [OT] Antikythera mechanism [was Re: Do have programs have poor documentation?] deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2016-12-31 10:20 +0100
        Re: Do have programs have poor documentation? (was ... Re: Why? -- "A  Modest Proposal") Rob van der Putten <rob@sput.nl> - 2017-03-11 22:50 +0100
  Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal" kamaraju kusumanchi <raju.mailinglists@gmail.com> - 2016-11-22 07:10 +0100
    Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal" Darac Marjal <mailinglist@darac.org.uk> - 2016-11-22 13:00 +0100
    Re: Why? -- "A Modest Proposal" Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-11-22 13:30 +0100

csiph-web