BF2S Forums Design a new college system

Bear in mind, Cybargs, thats a bottom-first approach, and was suggested only as an "if thats what you want" sort of thing.

If improved quality of gradutates is desired, then perhaps raising academic entrance (or graduation) requirements would be a better way to go.

What we now take for granted as high school level education was once regarded as doctorate level material.

Last edited by Pubic (2012-04-08 03:45:11)

Uzique wrote:

must be some low-level repression or humiliation that he suffered at some point in his life. it has buried very deep and is wreaking all sorts of neurogenic and psychoanalytic havoc.

Pot meet Kettle. 
Kettle, Pot. 
I'm sure you two will have plenty to chat about.

I'm unsure what was meant by "psychoanalytic havoc" though.
If your psychoanalysis session is causing 'havoc', you might want to see another shrink.
Is that when your Freudian therapist does too much cocaine before a session, and gets a little manic?
(Or... what was the concept Uzique explained a while back? Cocaine benders causing Serotonin uptake issues, causing flattened affect? My minor wasn't in Street Pharmacology, so it was a bit out of my area.)

I may be wrong here, but isn't "neurogenic" more to do with physical damage or defect of nervous tissue,
and not so much to do with repression or humiliation?
Not a MD, nor do I play one on TV, but there are precious few ways to inflict neurogenic damage on a person.
Genetic defect, accident, chemical/biological warfare agents, chronic drug use, ... oh, I see.


FFS, I know Dilbert has mellowed a bit over the last few months, but.. damn..  every time I find myself favoring his side of a discussion here, I fear it's a sign of the impending Apocalypse.  Queue up Johnny Cash's When The Man Comes Around

And welcome back, Uzique.
This place wasn't the same without the distinct (figurative) odor of piss and bile you add to the forums.

no ego boosting in this thread whatsoever

oh and rdx it's funny that you talk about me 'figuratively' but then take my writing 'literally'. yes, by neurogenic i'm saying that dilbert has some nerve-disorder level problems (read: retardation) when it comes to non-science subjects. no i am not saying he literally has M.S..

But Ilo, money shouldn't be an issue for anyone! Guvment should support pure acedemia yo

Cybargs wrote:

But Ilo, money shouldn't be an issue for anyone! Guvment should support pure acedemia yo

are you stupid? these seem to be the only type of posts you EVER make in d&st and they are normally 100% distilled retardation. it's almost impressive how you can concentrate so much dumb into one laconic phrase or sentence. but, alas, not a skill that is valued here. my point about government funding pure academia isn't some idealistic "everyone that wants to do a PhD should have money thrown at them", it's a "why is higher-education being gutted by cuts and damages incurred in the last 4-5 yrs by something that had nothing to do with universities"? i.e. why is an entire generation losing out their chance of entering academia - or contributing to academia - because of some macro-economic mess caused by the entirely and evidently non-academic types? it's just another one of those small societal disasters where everyone misses out on a good, fine thing because the shit has hit the fan. nowhere am i saying there should be an infinite pot of gold, nor am i saying that the government should place academic funding above everything else entirely. though i shouldn't really even have to make this point, should i? just your dumb-ass posts.

ilo that's nice and all but just cause you 'chose' to make the pursuit of endless wealth your life-goal, doesn't mean academia is a 'lesser' thing, or something that can be just-as-easily mastered as your knack for making dollars. really your life goal just sounds like the typical egotistic pursuit of a nouveau riche or arriviste, really. which is nice and all but in the uk we got tired of the nouveau riche about 100 years ago after the first and second industrial revolutions.

I remain unconvinced of the value of the more pretentious courses, sorry.

Uzique wrote:

Cybargs wrote:

But Ilo, money shouldn't be an issue for anyone! Guvment should support pure acedemia yo

are you stupid? these seem to be the only type of posts you EVER make in d&st and they are normally 100% distilled retardation. it's almost impressive how you can concentrate so much dumb into one laconic phrase or sentence. but, alas, not a skill that is valued here. my point about government funding pure academia isn't some idealistic "everyone that wants to do a PhD should have money thrown at them", it's a "why is higher-education being gutted by cuts and damages incurred in the last 4-5 yrs by something that had nothing to do with universities"? i.e. why is an entire generation losing out their chance of entering academia - or contributing to academia - because of some macro-economic mess caused by the entirely and evidently non-academic types? it's just another one of those small societal disasters where everyone misses out on a good, fine thing because the shit has hit the fan. nowhere am i saying there should be an infinite pot of gold, nor am i saying that the government should place academic funding above everything else entirely. though i shouldn't really even have to make this point, should i? just your dumb-ass posts.

ilo that's nice and all but just cause you 'chose' to make the pursuit of endless wealth your life-goal, doesn't mean academia is a 'lesser' thing, or something that can be just-as-easily mastered as your knack for making dollars. really your life goal just sounds like the typical egotistic pursuit of a nouveau riche or arriviste, really. which is nice and all but in the uk we got tired of the nouveau riche about 100 years ago after the first and second industrial revolutions.

Really its back to situation normal, from the freak decade when everyone thought they were going to a manager or a lecturer.
In the long run it should lead to real progress.

Dilbert_X wrote:

Uzique wrote:

Cybargs wrote:

But Ilo, money shouldn't be an issue for anyone! Guvment should support pure acedemia yo

are you stupid? these seem to be the only type of posts you EVER make in d&st and they are normally 100% distilled retardation. it's almost impressive how you can concentrate so much dumb into one laconic phrase or sentence. but, alas, not a skill that is valued here. my point about government funding pure academia isn't some idealistic "everyone that wants to do a PhD should have money thrown at them", it's a "why is higher-education being gutted by cuts and damages incurred in the last 4-5 yrs by something that had nothing to do with universities"? i.e. why is an entire generation losing out their chance of entering academia - or contributing to academia - because of some macro-economic mess caused by the entirely and evidently non-academic types? it's just another one of those small societal disasters where everyone misses out on a good, fine thing because the shit has hit the fan. nowhere am i saying there should be an infinite pot of gold, nor am i saying that the government should place academic funding above everything else entirely. though i shouldn't really even have to make this point, should i? just your dumb-ass posts.

ilo that's nice and all but just cause you 'chose' to make the pursuit of endless wealth your life-goal, doesn't mean academia is a 'lesser' thing, or something that can be just-as-easily mastered as your knack for making dollars. really your life goal just sounds like the typical egotistic pursuit of a nouveau riche or arriviste, really. which is nice and all but in the uk we got tired of the nouveau riche about 100 years ago after the first and second industrial revolutions.

Really its back to situation normal, from the freak decade when everyone thought they were going to a manager or a lecturer.
In the long run it should lead to real progress.

if by "situation normal" you mean "the uk now has the second lowest social mobility in the advanced western world" then yep, normal. but i think we could do better.

Dilbert_X wrote:

Uzique wrote:

well then it's a good job someone as narrowminded and limited as you are will never be redesigning the college system, eh.

"pretentious" is a term that the uneducated hastily use to describe something they don't understand. it's a word rarely deployed properly.

pretentious - making claim to or creating an appearance of (often undeserved) importance or distinction; "a pretentious country house"; "a pretentious fraud"; "a pretentious scholarly edition"

Nope, I think I've got it just fine, thanks.

are some scholarly editions pretentious? oh yes, certainly. without doubt. i can ascertain that from the first introduction or preface. are all scholarly editions pretentious? no, far from it. that's what you'd claim, though, just by the virtue of them being scholarly in the first place. "pretentious twaddle". are all country houses pretentious? no. some are tasteful, wonderful achievements in architecture - arch expressions of a style or period. although of course the guy living in the cowshed on an uncomfortable bed would call all grandiose country houses "pretentious". it's a matter of perspective. in this case you're out in the stables of humanities/arts academia and you therefore think the whole inaccessible lot is pretentious. it's that simple, really. hence my comment about the word often being used by the small-minded or educationally deficient to conveniently dismiss something outside of their own narrow purview.

Last edited by Uzique (2012-04-09 06:54:12)

Dilbert_X wrote:

The stats on social mobility will take a while to come through, not funding PhDs for hipsters wouldn't affect those figures at all I would imagine.

that above-referenced stat was taken in the last 2 years, iirc. after the funding changes. funding academia is one of the strongest and best ways to better social mobility - education is at the absolute core of helping people to get out of the ghetto and find jobs for educated people, or enter academia itself (which is about as middle-class a professional world as you can get). i hardly see how slashing education to pieces in response to a banking crisis is going to help anyone, idealistically or pragmatically speaking. you're strangling an entire upcoming generation's chances of actualizing themselves in a hastily and rubbishly applied bandage to a wound that isn't going to heal, anyway. restricting the education of millions of young people in the country isn't going to reform the banking system. unless you intend to fix it in the roundabout way, where in 20 years time nobody will enter banking because they won't have the qualifications...

Uzique wrote:

hence my comment about the word often being used by the small-minded or educationally deficient to conveniently dismiss something outside of their own narrow purview.

I don't give a toss, I've made my comment about being bored by people who claim you have to be educated in a specific way to appreciate something which otherwise has no discernible value.

You're welcome to go off into your strange, incestuous academic (adj: theoretical or speculative without a practical purpose or intention/scholarly to the point of being unaware of the outside world/having no practical purpose or use) world, but don't blub if the govt doesn't shower you with money to do so.

i'm fine if the government want to cut academia with a justified reason. i think it's a tragedy that people are having their education, earned by personal merit, now denied to them because of a crisis and external imperative. i think there are a lot of other things that should be cut before you start taking away things from the kids and younger generation. as if the society that youngsters are growing up in now isn't already riddled with enough social ills. then they take the big emergency cutting scissors to education, too. it doesn't help when our current government and cabinet - people with finance degrees and all the right sort of practical education - clearly don't have a fucking clue what they're doing. teacher unions and the entire academic staff of oxford have made votes of no confidence in our education minister. twice.  they're destroying funding with very little given rationale or real replacement plan in place. it's worryingly short-sighted.

Last edited by Uzique (2012-04-09 07:03:35)