Maybe you're just wrong?
Backwards looking research which produces nothing - is that really what a PhD is supposed to be about?
Backwards looking research which produces nothing - is that really what a PhD is supposed to be about?
Fuck Israel
Oh ffs.
you clearly don't understand how looking at the materials of the past can help reconsider the present and shape the future. the basic teleology of humanities and intellectual study from time immemorial. how exactly do you 'make a new discovery' or 'a leap-forward breakthrough' in history or philosophy? you are imposing a scientific notion of 'progress', i.e. linear, inventive, technical, on subjects that have no truck with it. but yes, okay, all the work done in the vast majority of the university for over a thousand years has been useless. now the engineers have arrived in the university, post-1940, everything else is bunk. anything that doesn't conform to a model that produces clear, material results is 'not good for anything'.Dilbert_X wrote:
Maybe you're just wrong?
Backwards looking research which produces nothing - is that really what a PhD is supposed to be about?
you are so intelligent.
I don't think he understands anything outside his very narrow field of personal experience.
this is literally the last time i am going over this with dilbert. i think i've probably typed about 10,000+ words on the topic, all first-grade exposition for retards, just to hammer it home to you. and yet you still cling to this false dichotomy between 'science' and 'humanities'. you still completely ignore the counsel and corrections of this forum's science academics. you still ask questions and make demands of humanities study that nobody else with a modicum of good sense does. it is exasperating in the extreme. and at no point do you look like you're 'winning', or making a good point. it's like bashing your head against a brick-wall. the smug arrogance you have about yourself only highlights the delusion. you are confusing both science and humanities types alike. and you keep bringing it up, and dragging the forum down, spamming up the topics, again and again... with relish. you just can't let it go. it's an idée fixe for you. it seems borderline unhealthy, to be honest. the world is going to continue on, you know, quite regardless of your rantings and ravings. your anger and bitterness only makes me more certain that i am going on to do good work in my life, and surely am on the right path - not the opposite. i know that if my intellectual activity is making some stay-at-home somewhere angry about my "being smart in essays", i am hitting all the right marks. you are a strange and conflicted little man.
Last edited by Uzique The Lesser (2013-04-26 06:27:39)
- globefish23
- sophisticated slacker
- +334|6683|Graz, Austria
Ever heard of metastudies?
That's when people read through and compare all the studies, papers and releases of a certain topic they find.
And, oh wonder, they can gain completely new results and insights, although they only looked backwards in their research.
Why have they ever discontinued Grünenthal's thalidomide?
Oh, those silly backwards looking researchers, finding it to be a teratogen.
That's when people read through and compare all the studies, papers and releases of a certain topic they find.
And, oh wonder, they can gain completely new results and insights, although they only looked backwards in their research.
Why have they ever discontinued Grünenthal's thalidomide?
Oh, those silly backwards looking researchers, finding it to be a teratogen.
no, dilbert is sure that all science research produces new, novel results for an outstanding future of invention and progress. the "majority" of university studies do this, apparently (even though this forum's own science academics say they don't). nothing ever good comes from looking at the past. reconsidering and reflecting on the knowledge we have is a meaningless tautology. we must only look forward, into the ever-new. dilbert knows best. he should probably start sending letters to the deans of universities with his radical new educational policy.globefish23 wrote:
Ever heard of metastudies?
That's when people read through and compare all the studies, papers and releases of a certain topic they find.
And, oh wonder, they can gain completely new results and insights, although they only looked backwards in their research.
Why have they ever discontinued Grünenthal's thalidomide?
Oh, those silly backwards looking researchers, finding it to be a teratogen.
I just don't know he continues to "debate" one of the most profoundly stupid things I have ever heard.
- globefish23
- sophisticated slacker
- +334|6683|Graz, Austria
Indeed.Uzique The Lesser wrote:
nothing ever good comes from looking at the past. reconsidering and reflecting on the knowledge we have is a meaningless tautology. we must only look forward, into the ever-new.
And now excuse me, I just had a great idea.
I'm gonna write a book, then march on Berlin and prepare for some elections in 2033.
god bless science research, it's all so relevant and all leads to direct human gain. so much more valued than humanities. medical research, too, the absolute pinnacle of what the university should be about! if only academia could reform to suit dilbert's vision: all scientists 'useful' and generating 'progress', all humanities toffs kicked to the curb where they belong.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/brain … hy-i-drink
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/brain … hy-i-drink
oh dilbert's reality flickers and fades! perhaps he should listen to people who are actually involved in academia, instead of spouting verbiage. and that's an academic working in cancer and genetics, at a top university department can you imagine how much of a 'master race' is it outside of his precious medicine example!Please allow me to introduce myself, I am Dr Kayleigh Dodd, once a hard working, enthusiastic young science graduate preparing myself for an illustrious and distinguished career in medical research. Five years on, my job hangs by a thread, my future somewhat questionable and the best thing that's happened to me this year was a fortuitous meeting with Dr Dean Burnett leading to this very outburst of frustration.
I may be exaggerating ever so slightly. I never really expected to have an illustrious or distinguished career, it was the super-geek within which drove me down this career path. However, the sentiment remains the same; basically, SCIENCE SUCKS.
Last edited by Uzique The Lesser (2013-04-26 08:40:33)
well, there you are.That's the model society has chosen. In fact this whole issue goes to the heart of the key problem with capitalism. It doesn't distinguish quality over quantity.
In your particular case the quality of what you do is irrelevant if it can't be sold to the marketplace.
You capture that perfectly in the juxtaposition of your plight and the reality tv phenomenon. In this society there is no onus on the individual to develop and become more enlightened, cultured etc. And not only that, there is constant pressure to hide any degree of enlightenment above the norm. Getting above yourself is a much greater sin than getting cheap laughs.
Recently I was a dinner table and 3 of us had PhDs and the other guy had a "business" which consists of going around villages in the summer providing bouncing castles and similar gear for plainly moronic carry-on. Not only were the 3 PhDs far poorer than the other guy but we had to bite out tongues and listen as he served up the profound inner workings of his brain on how he was a success while repeating over and over "why should I have to pay all these taxes for the unproductive" ...
The model of society we now have is deeply philistinic. And it is structurally so. As it stands the balance is weighted towards celebrating the likes of Jedward and not towards the engagement with, say, the history of humanism. But given that now competition rules all, we are gradually eroding the heritage of the latter in favour of the former.
On top of that in the universities the Orwellian 'duckspeak' of business mumbo-jumbo has now invaded everything and the patient research and reading needed for profound knowledge has been outlawed. As well as being abetted by a general philistinic demand for academics and scholars to 'do stuff' and 'produce stuff', it is incredibly difficult to have to put up with the extraordinary degree of hostility out there to academics. So many people who work in these absolutely alienating commercial companies, where like automatons they churn out utterly robotic vacuous business-speak, seem far more concerned about measuring the amount of work scholars do than about changing the frightening worlds which have destroyed their ability to think and become enlightened citizens etc.
Why can't we just let people continue to go to college taking courses for what they want to do? I wouldn't want to be treated by a doc who just wanted to be a lit teacher but couldn't because people thought science and medicine were more important and dropped humanities to "make room."
you can't say that here, college is for job training and that's it. if you go and study something you want, for the sheer pleasure of acquiring the knowledge, you are either a toff or a hipster. and you should be exterminated from the modern world. no room for you. engineers, engineering a brighter future.
And then what about points where STEM and humanities meet like, I dunno, ethics. Well, that doesn't have much to do with doing actual genetics, so maybe we should shut it down, too.
ethics is normally always posited as the philosophical aegis under which all good science takes place. but in dilbert's new university, all forms of reflection and looking backwards will be discounted, a posteriori truth is invalid. ethics is a foible for rich kids and people who eat organic foods. it is time to make progress.
When you think about it the theory of evolution would also be impossible without some level of critical, abstract philosophizing. Its not like Darwin just memorized a bunch of birds and then it just came to him one day. Its not like there was any serious mathematics or engineering involved. Not like he knew about genetics or anything. But now its one of the hottest fields, or so I hear.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
And then what about points where STEM and humanities meet like, I dunno, ethics. Well, that doesn't have much to do with doing actual genetics, so maybe we should shut it down, too.
most of science research/academia is abstract and theoretical. not 'making stuff' or 'leading to cures or inventions'. dilbert consistently names medicine and engineering, because they are pretty much the only two 'core' disciplines interested in practical results. dilbert conveniently ignores the other scientists on this forum when they tell him that academic science is just as abstract and intellectualized as the humanities he so decries.Spearhead wrote:
When you think about it the theory of evolution would also be impossible without some level of critical, abstract philosophizing. Its not like Darwin just memorized a bunch of birds and then it just came to him one day. Its not like there was any serious mathematics or engineering involved. Not like he knew about genetics or anything. But now its one of the hottest fields, or so I hear.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
And then what about points where STEM and humanities meet like, I dunno, ethics. Well, that doesn't have much to do with doing actual genetics, so maybe we should shut it down, too.
Engineers are so vehement in proclaiming the preeminence of engineering because they are trying to oppress the sad reality that they spent their college education on a course of study that didn't require the broad and abstract thought necessary for true intellectual advancement.
Last edited by nukchebi0 (2013-04-26 14:45:13)
nukchebi0 wrote:
Engineers are so vehement in proclaiming the preeminence of engineering because they are trying to oppress the sad reality that they spent their college education on a course of study that didn't require the broad and abstract thought necessary for true intellectual advancement.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
RWF Hegel by Jay Schubert, PhDJay wrote:
nukchebi0 wrote:
Engineers are so vehement in proclaiming the preeminence of engineering because they are trying to oppress the sad reality that they spent their college education on a course of study that didn't require the broad and abstract thought necessary for true intellectual advancement.
Piling shit on humanities is stuff I used to see high schoolers do to impress their conservative, blue-collar parents. I guess some of it sticks around into adulthood. I don't see how it's any less elitist than the snobbery humanities scholars are accused of.
Who even is an engineer here? I think cowami or someone was in aero.
You have your engineers and then you have your hangers-on.
I am, dilbert is, ilocano is, rdx is...DesertFox- wrote:
Who even is an engineer here? I think cowami or someone was in aero.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
The District of Columbia is looking to ban abortions(locally in the District itself, not Federally. Congress is in charge of District legislature as well as Federal I think)
http://cnsnews.com/blog/craig-bannister … ection-act
http://cnsnews.com/blog/craig-bannister … ection-act
Last edited by _j5689_ (2013-04-26 16:37:44)