"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote in message
...
Matt Barrow wrote:
"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote in message
...

But the rest of your statement basically boils down to not wanting to
learn something complex. And that can be further reduced to instant
gratification.

It can also be related to "mental capacity". Our current learning by
rote does not prepare one for learning complexity, nor for expanding
on what we do learn.

How old are you Matt? I had you pegged at around my age, 45, maybe a
little older.

52


When I was in school we learned lots of things by rote memorization and
I'd be willing you did to.

Yup.

Multiplication, spelling and the worst of all history in which they seemed
to only care that you remembered the dates things happened not really why
they happened.

Multipliciation tables (the 9's) is a method to make the basics automatic.
Before that, though, one must get a fundemental grasp of numbers. For
spelling, one learns the rules of how words are formed. For reading, it's
phonetics (26 basic rules), and a dictionary for new words (ostensibly to
garner an appreciation for pretentious *******s like Bill Buckley...and me).


I know it's easy to blame all our ills on the current education system but
it is really a lazy approach to the problem.

I don't blame all the ills on modern education, just the ones pertaining to
thinking and comprehension.

I know to many recent high school grads that got perfectly good educations
despite the problems in the schools.

The why are SOOOO many HS and even college grads so half-literate at best,
and so many that can't think their way out of a paper bag? Possible because
rote only works for concretized learning, not the abstractions that lets you
build off those basics.

In history, we learned names, dates, places...but we never learned how or
why, or what made something unique, or how it carried into modern times.
That's because even history was rote learning for the past couple
generations.

So maybe we ought to blame the parents of those that don't to at least
some extent.

That's certainly a problem in that many parents know how to breed 'em, and
even if they can feed them, don't feed that critical part between the ears.
This, though, is fairly recent, within the past generation on a national
scale, though certain parts of the country were never too big on education
(i.e., the Deep South up until the recent past).

So, is education the fault of all our ills? Only from a standpoint of
methodology. Join that with parental apathy and add a strong dose of
post-modernism and the situation becomes much clearer.

We are humans, and humans have no particular strengths, such as eye sight,
or speed, or physical strength, compared to other animals -- all we have is
what's between our ears. When we forfeit that, we're at a distinct
DISadvantage from a survivability standpoint. That includes survivability as
a culture, or as a species.