1895 school exam, are we dumb?

[countryboy]

Average person is somebody who is not acquainted with science or technology. Of the total population, only a small percentage have degrees in science and technology (the percentage was even lower in the old days).

It is the intellectuals who are responsible for coming up with new scientific and technological concepts for the betterment of humankind, and so far they have done a spectacular job.

So entrepreneurs and business people who took risks and financed many of these "sorcerers of progress" are just "average" people? I think you have a rather narrow view of what societal progress means and how things all fit together. Science is just one piece of the puzzle.

 

[CDNBear]

That is the generally prevalent view in Ontario and Quebec. Sure, he wasn’t perfect, he put the economy into the ditch.

You're the first lefty I've ever seen admit that. Congrat's.

In USA they talk of founding fathers, it is just a figure of speech. But Trudeau may properly be called the founding father of Canada.

:lol:

From an intelligent comment to the absurd in one post, awesome, just awesome!!!

 

[darkbeaver]

I remember once going for a job interview. One of the questions asked me was, 'if I could wish for anything that would better the world, what would it be?'. I replied that I would wish that everyone would have the equivalent of a 10th grade education. The interviewer was surprised and asked why. I said that i figured that the equivalent of a tenth grade education would give people solid skills in things I figured would give them a chance at providing for themselves and their families - reading, writing, basic math skills, a basic knowledge of what was going on beyond their borders and also within their borders. To me, this in turn helps foster a sense of self-worth - giving one the confidence to not just take anothers word for something. Let's face it - if I'm a subsistence farmer someone who makes rugs or pots, I'm more likely to be able to have a say in what I can charge if I actually know how to count, how to write, and if I can read. Lack of these basic skills places us in a cage - we can'r really feed ourselves rather we are dependent on what those with the power want to feed us.

For this reason I also disagree with SJP's remark that, "Schooling wouldn’t be much good for somebody who was going to spend his entire life as a farmer". Farmers still had to buy their seed and sell their crops.Ignorance is a cage, pure and simple. We may not all need - or want, for that matter, to go to university, but a basic education is not a privilege, it's a necessity.
As far s the whole 1895 exam? I'd do well with the English grammar, history and a few others, and I'd flop with the math. But it's irrelevant. that test was based on what was felt important for that time. no doubt grade eight children from 1895 would not be able to pass an exam created in the 21st century.

"Ignorance is a cage pure and simple." I think one should struggle with ignorance every day and never surrender all the while knowing that with every answer you will think about twenty new questions. What I have learned is that it's very important to appreciate your feelings of ignorance. It's OK to be ignorant it not OK to be ignorant of our ignorance. It's a very big universe, none of us will ever know everything, with the possible exception of myself of course.:smile:

 

[JLM]

Are you saying that the scientists, engineers, architects, etc. are "above average" people? (By the way, what is an "etc.?")

Are you also saying that they're responsible for all the "progress and prosperity" since 1895? If you are, then I beg to differ - society has a lot of different components that make it all function, and if you remove any one of them, you'll have a different picture.

I think there are quite a few exceptions to your "progress and prosperity" rule too. We don't seem to have been able to eradicate wars, poverty, sickness, homelessness, and a few other maladies that continue to afflict us on an everyday basis. On top of all that, we seem to be delegating more and more of our individual thinking to governments and various professionals, on whom we can lay the blame when things don't work quite the way we envisioned. Once the infrastructure for this delegated thinking is in place (e.g., bigger government), we're entrenched in a rather cumbersome system that will continue to disallow or at least discourage individual freedom/movement/thinking to the possible extreme point that we'll end up as unthinking humans, working for the government, or both.

But if you want to call it "progress", feel free. We're all entitled to our opinions.

Right on CB- these mental giants appear to be doing a good job of screwing a lot of things up.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Are you saying that the scientists, engineers, architects, etc. are "above average" people? (By the way, what is an "etc.?")

Are you also saying that they're responsible for all the "progress and prosperity" since 1895? If you are, then I beg to differ - society has a lot of different components that make it all function, and if you remove any one of them, you'll have a different picture.

Science and technology form the spark for any new idea, any new project. The scientist studies a phenomena scientifically. Based upon his findings, the engineer applies the principle to practical application.

Thus scientist studies the thermodynamics of Carnot cycle. Based upon that, the engineer develops a heat engine, or an internal combustion engine. To implement the idea of course needs input from many people from different disciplines (it may need a Henry Ford). However, the initial spark comes from scientists and engineers. That is were the credit goes.

I think there are quite a few exceptions to your "progress and prosperity" rule too. We don't seem to have been able to eradicate wars, poverty, sickness, homelessness, and a few other maladies that continue to afflict us on an everyday basis. On top of all that, we seem to be delegating more and more of our individual thinking to governments and various professionals, on whom we can lay the blame when things don't work quite the way we envisioned. Once the infrastructure for this delegated thinking is in place (e.g., bigger government), we're entrenched in a rather cumbersome system that will continue to disallow or at least discourage individual freedom/movement/thinking to the possible extreme point that we'll end up as unthinking humans, working for the government, or both.

But if you want to call it "progress", feel free. We're all entitled to our opinions.

These are all details, countryboy, you are simply quibbling. We have had this argument before. Look at the overall picture. The world population is healthier, wealthier than at any time in history and lives longer.

Now, it may be that things are going in reverse in some isolated spots, especially in Africa. But take the world population as a whole and it is much better off today than in 1895, science and technology have been tremendously beneficial to humankind.

Indeed, 100 years ago the very thought that the world could support 6 billion human beings would have been considered absurd. Now we are supporting that many easily and the population is still growing. Humanity owes a tremendous debt to science and technology (and to scientists and technologists, or engineers).

 

[SirJosephPorter]

So entrepreneurs and business people who took risks and financed many of these "sorcerers of progress" are just "average" people? I think you have a rather narrow view of what societal progress means and how things all fit together. Science is just one piece of the puzzle.

Those people come later, after scientists and engineers. Without scientists and engineers, the entrepreneurs won't have any ideas to develop. The important thing is to study the phenomenon and come up with a practical application. Once that is done, an entrepreneur will inevitably come along, if not one, then another, if not him, then somebody else. But without the initial spark of science and technology, nothing is possible.

 

[Johnnny]

YouTube - Two Plus Two Is Four

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Two plus two is not always four, Johnnny.

 

[Johnnny]

You mean like 2 halves plus 2 halves = 2?

 

[darkbeaver]

An engineer frequently is his/her own entrepreneur.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

You mean like 2 halves plus 2 halves = 2?

No, in theory of relativity, 2 plus 2 literally does not equal four. Let me give you an example.

Suppose two trains are traveling towards each other at a speed of 200 kilometers per hour each. That means that they are approaching each other at a combined speed of 400 kilometers per hour (200 + 200 = 400).

Now suppose two spaceships are traveling towards each other at a speed of 2X10^10 cm/ sec. Then their effective speed of approach in NOT 4 X 10^10 cm/sec (that would be greater than the speed of light). In this instance, 2 plus 2 does not equal 4.

 

[JLM]

Those people come later, after scientists and engineers. Without scientists and engineers, the entrepreneurs won't have any ideas to develop. The important thing is to study the phenomenon and come up with a practical application. Once that is done, an entrepreneur will inevitably come along, if not one, then another, if not him, then somebody else. But without the initial spark of science and technology, nothing is possible.

So S.J. give us the answer to a simple question- Who is the most important, the scientist and engineer who design and build a bridge or the maintenance people who do the periodical inspections, washing, painting etc. to ensure the bridge doesn't eventually collapse?

 

[SirJosephPorter]

So S.J. give us the answer to a simple question- Who is the most important, the scientist and engineer who design and build a bridge or the maintenance people who do the periodical inspections, washing, painting etc. to ensure the bridge doesn't eventually collapse?

Definitely the scientists and engineers. Without them there will be no bridge. Without maintenance people, the bridge will exist at least for a short time.

All kinds fo people are needed to complete a project. However, the one who thinks of it in the first place usually gets the credit, he is usually considered to be the architect of the project.

Thus we say that Trudeau gave us the Charter. Does that mean that he actually did all the work and gave us the completed Charter? No, there were plenty of other people involved, who did substantial, valuable work. We would not have the Charter without them.

But the idea originated with Trudeau, and he gets the credit for it (or blame for it, if you belong to the small minority who doesn't like the Charter).

 

[SirJosephPorter]

You mean like 2 halves plus 2 halves = 2?

Another instance would be if they are vectors. If there are two vectors with a magnitude of 2 each, then their addition won’t necessarily come to four. 2 + 2 = 4 holds only for scalars.

 

[Avro]

"Higher education, does not necessarily mean smarter, that's for sure. "- Actually most often the reverse is true, it almost seems as soon as they open a book, half their brain cells disappear. One of the most intelligent peope I knew and worked with for many years has a grade 5 education - not so much in the sense that he knew all his cosines, but just in the way of conducting his life - very methodical and sensible.

Thanks...you just described me from about grade 10...the year I dropped out.

 

[Downhome_Woman]

Re #7.

darkbeaver, when I was a kid and the question: "What do you want to be when you grow up" came up, it was a given that teaching was a vocation, not a profession, like a lawyer and certainly not just a job, like janitor.

You wanted to be a teacher, because you wanted to educate children, unselfishly, and because you believed their generation deserves to be better than their parents and your own.

All that went by the wayside with the totally regrettable rise of UNIONS. Teaching became - at least according to UNIONS - is equivalent to unloading ships, shovelling coal and cleaning mall bathrooms.

Strike, and the Hell with kids! Slow down and screw the kids! Work to rule and F**k the kids!

I think, though, that if there was a secret vote among teachers as to who want to be part of a union, the decent ones would want to have absolutely NOTHING to do with the incompetant unionist free-loaders.

Jack, teachers in Canada have been advocating for better working conditions since the 1800.s Here are a few facts from the Canadian Encyclopedia,
"In 1910 annual salaries for women elementary-school teachers in urban schools were in the $300-$1000 range, while those for men ranged from $600 to $1400. In the secondary schools, salaries ranged from $800 to $1800 for women and $1000 to $2100 for men. Job security was virtually nonexistent. Conditions were particularly harsh in rural areas, where poorly paid teachers were assigned to spartan, ill-equipped, one-room schools and were often obliged to function as janitors and to accept primitive and isolated accommodation.Teacher dissatisfaction finally came to a head in the years during and immediately after WWI. Teachers' salaries had remained static, but the cost of living had nearly doubled. In one area after another, teachers formed provincial associations to fight for improvements in salary, tenure and pensions. A national body, the Canadian Teachers' Federation, was founded in 1920, by which date there was at least one association in every province. Much of this organizational activity took place in secret because of the general hostility towards labour unions at that time. Although a majority of the modern teacher associations existed by 1920, the profession was not in fact completely organized in the provinces and territories until 1955. In 1995-96 the 13 provincial and territorial associations which are members of the CTF represented more than 245 000 teachers."
I went through the Canadian xchool system - my parents weren't impressed. My children went through the system and I wasn't impressed. I recognise that the union was needed at one time, but I feel that now it works against the needs of both the teachers and the students. My children were in school when they went on strike siting prep time and extra hours worked. I could understand that. They had families they needed down time just like the rest of us but between coaching teams , overseeing detentions after school, the team tripos, the school drama productions - and all on their own time - away from their families. i constantly hear people talking about how teachers get paid 12 months for 190 months of work - they actually get paid for 10 months of work spread out over 12 months - and they have to constantly take courses to upgrade their credentials. with all that, the union could have had the teachers actually work the hours that they were paid to do. That would have impressed upon the public the actual contribution that teachers make but what did they do? They struck.To me, the union leadership took a big step backward.
It used top be an organization that ensured that its members made a living wage, that both male and female teachers were paid fairly - that women teachers weren't forced to resign when they got married . They dropped the ball big time when they struck over prep=time and extra curricular non-paid work.
As far as curriculum? blame the school boards - they're the ones that decide what's being taught.

 

[Downhome_Woman]

Average person is somebody who is not acquainted with science or technology. Of the total population, only a small percentage have degrees in science and technology (the percentage was even lower in the old days).

It is the intellectuals who are responsible for coming up with new scientific and technological concepts for the betterment of humankind, and so far they have done a spectacular job.

My great-great grandfather had a 6th grade education but could solve higher mathematical problems. My father had a high school education but could converse in Latin, Greek French and English. One of my uncles also 'just' had a high school education but was instrumental in the development of one of the first hydrofoils.
One does not necessarily need a degree to be 'more than average'.

 

[TenPenny]

Average person is somebody who is not acquainted with science or technology. Of the total population, only a small percentage have degrees in science and technology (the percentage was even lower in the old days).

Hmm.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

My great-great grandfather had a 6th grade education but could solve higher mathematical problems. My father had a high school education but could converse in Latin, Greek French and English. One of my uncles also 'just' had a high school education but was instrumental in the development of one of the first hydrofoils.
One does not necessarily need a degree to be 'more than average'.

That was possible in the old days. These days it would be rare for somebody who doesn’t have high school diploma to be able to solve higher mathematics problems or converse in Latin, French or whatever. If he has those gifts, these days he would get a university education.

University education is more accessible today compared to previous generations. There are more university spots available, more opportunities to get loans to finance the education. Besides, in the old days, one could get a good job without university education, that is very difficult today. So the examples you give would be rare in today’s world.

 

[JLM]

"Definitely the scientists and engineers. Without them there will be no bridge. Without maintenance people, the bridge will exist at least for a short time."


I guess you never heard the story about the brain, the heart, the eyes, the hands and the rectum arguing about which was the most important.