|
The more books you read, the more you learn.
However, since most people don't actually read beyond secondary school (and definitely not beyond University) it is quite possible that you will know things that the unread do not know.
However, since there are more unread people than people who have actually researched and learned you will be in the minority.
And since the minority is aka "The Fringe" your ideas will be considered garbage.
And, since the unread mass is a mosh-pit of humanity, it is statistically probable that one of those unread people will be your manager.
That manager will tell you what to do and then you will question it since you've read 4 books on the subject. Then you'll argue and say, "but, Ive read 4 books on the subject"
That's when the manager will look down his nose and say, "But who's in charge here?"
Much better to just sit back and doom scroll. 
|
|
|
|
|
Actually, there's a lot of truth to this. To just assume for now that an intelligent person reads... If you're too far on the high end of the intelligence spectrum and speak in a manner that would be commensurate (as defined by whatever markers society tends to agree on insofar as to what intelligence is), then you're going to lose most people.
They say genius and crazy are two sides of the same coin. Both are not understood by the average person, so for all intents and purposes it may as well be. Since human relationships are all about a connection, good luck with that.
The trick is to learn to communicate with those who do not poses the same markers anyway and just accept the fact the role of a real genius is a lonely one. Maybe you'll get lucky and every now and again run into someone you can fully engage with. Don't hold your breath. The vast, vast majority of folks all assume they're smart.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, it is definitely the paradox of humanity.
The people who are smartest and know what best to do may not be the people who can communicate it clearly.
The people who communicate things clearly may only be able to do so because they glide over the complexity of the issue.
I'd rather have the surgeon who is lower on communication and better on skills. 
And, besides, my belief is...
someone said If you can't explain it clearly, then you don't understand it.
|
|
|
|
|
raddevus wrote: If you can't explain it clearly, then you don't understand it.
Touché, my good man. Ther person I attribute that line to (right or wrong) is Einstein btw.
Einstein wrote: If you can't explain it to a six-year-old, you don't understand it yourself.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
The great Richard Feynman said that.
|
|
|
|
|
The trick is learning to "talk" at all levels, depending on the audience.
Give me coffee to change the things I can and wine for those I can not!
PartsBin an Electronics Part Organizer - An updated version available! JaxCoder.com
Latest Article: Simon Says, A Child's Game
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Hankey wrote: The trick is learning to "talk" at all levels, depending on the audience.
Agree 100%!!!
It's just that you can't beat the Belief-System the person holds.
If they "think" a thing is caused by "thing1" you cannot convince them otherwise.
Because they've read it on the Internet and they know. 
|
|
|
|
|
raddevus wrote: It's just that you can't beat the Belief-System the person holds.
No matter what they say, all humans need a sense of continuity on par with whatever their intelligence perceives. Things can change. But the further down (or up) the st00pid scale you go the harder it is because the last thing a person who doesn't exercise their mind will do... is exercise their mind. 
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
The true measure of intelligence is the ability to explain clearly to laypeople.
|
|
|
|
|
"They say genius and crazy are two sides of the same coin."
Who are "they" anyway. Passive voice opinions couched as received wisdom make me grind my teeth. I find genius and crazy to be very different coins.
|
|
|
|
|
[Late to this thread, sorry]
Jeremy Falcon wrote: The vast, vast majority of folks all assume they're smart.
That's because that same vast, vast majority of folks really isn't.
I came to a realization at some point in my life: The more you know, the more you realize how little you know. And it only gets worse. Not because you then tend to forget things as you get older, but because you realize there's even more stuff you never knew about.
The majority of people remains blissfully ignorant of entire fields.
I think it really comes down to being dumb and acknowledging it, and being dumb and not even realizing it.
[Edit]
"Dumb" might be too harsh. Being ignorant about something doesn't make one dumb. Donald Rumsfeld was onto something when he said something about "known unknowns and unknown unknowns".
|
|
|
|
|
On my phone so can’t do fancy quotes, but totally agree all fronts.
Intelligence requires looking inwards. Which means that dumb / ignorant folks are rarely introspective.
As an aside, I don’t define intelligence as being able to regurgitate something read in a book either, with no deeper understanding of the material. That’s just being a fancy parrot.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy Falcon wrote: I don’t define intelligence as being able to regurgitate something read in a book either, with no deeper understanding of the material. That’s just being a fancy parrot.
Agreed as well, one can own an impressive library and have read it all, but ultimately if you don't understand the subject matter at least to the point where you can summarize what you just read, it's entirely irrelevant.
|
|
|
|
|
It's way more than just corporate world.
Governments cannot completely control the people it governs if they are:
-- Educated
-- Gun owners
It is my opinion that most Governments at least mine, wishes everyone was retarded. They are already in the process of removing gun ownership.
Welcome to the new age.
|
|
|
|
|
Preach brother. A government's worst nightmare is an insurrection. However, things do not change without conflict. Can't get your conflict on if you're weak, dependent, and stupid.
Weak people seek power. History repeats because we don't learn as a species so easily. It's just human nature... Just like the markets human nature is cyclic.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Slacker007 wrote: Governments cannot completely control the people it governs if they are:
-- Educated
-- Gun owners
Unfortunately, these are often two disjoint sets. 
|
|
|
|
|
StarNamer@work wrote: UnFortunately, these are often two disjoint sets. 
FTFY
Mircea
|
|
|
|
|
Slacker007 wrote: most Governments at least mine, wishes everyone was retarded
They would rather people be idiots savant - highly educated, but totally uninvolved in politics. This gives the Government the best of both worlds: a high GDP that can be taxed, and no interference from the Great Unwashed.
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
You have to be stupid to believe that gun ownership is actually a good thing.
|
|
|
|
|
2A supporter and absolutist here. The problem with removing all of the guns is 1.) there's too damn many of them, and 2.) people intuitively understand that removing them is exactly the sort of tyranny the 2A was designed to prevent. I think the government will chip around the edges, but I'm not worried about losing my gun rights, including the ability to carry one concealed most everywhere. Canada, Australia and the UK have done us a favor by showing us the playbook ahead of time, and I think we'll be able to prevent it.
In RE: reading books, being educated and unable to connect with other people. I think the problem might have something to do with the most studious among us being introverted by nature. There certainly are well educated communicators among us; they may be the exception rather than the rule, but they exist.
|
|
|
|
|
One exception - the teaching profession.
|
|
|
|
|
I've known quite a few teachers who were educated beyond their abilities. They may have read the book, but they sure as hell didn't understand it. 
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
Daniel Pfeffer wrote: I've known quite a few teachers who were educated beyond their abilities
I have known a couple that had to shut up because they could not continue arguing against me and another co-student. One even said sorry and gave me a "you are right" in front of the class (making me speechless, due to the surprise), this one earned my respect and we were in contact even after finishing college for some years.
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Dont count on it!!
I decided some years ago to have a crack at teaching here in the UK, so I started doing the required courses and exams towards becoming a full time teacher, initially in post 21 and adult education.
As part of one of the courses, I was placed for some "work experience" in one of the local colleges, teaching I.T. and helping adult learners who'd had very little exposure to computers at that point, learn how to use them in a productive means in general life.
Up to this point, it's worth noting, I'd already been in the I.T industry for about 20 years, I already have a BSC with honours in various computing subjects (One of which is digital electronics & robotics), and among the jobs I'd had to that point so far, I'd worked in a "System Admin" role, "Computer Shop Technician" role and "Software Development".
Point here is, I had a very good grasp on a number of different I.T related disciplines AND I was used to dealing with "Non Technical" people (Managers and the general public alike), so my plan was very obviously to go in with the intention of teaching I.T subjects.
When I got to the college I'd been assigned too, I was stuck in front of a class, told NOT to bother creating a lesson plan, and that everything I'd been taught would be thrown out the window.
I had a large A4 binder dumped in front of me, and was clearly told... you start at the beginning, you teach everything the binder tells you to teach, how it tells you to teach it when it tells you to teach it, no exceptions.
One of the learners in my class has severe arthritis in one of her hands, so I came up with a better way for her to hold a mouse that was more comfortable for her, she even commented this was the first time in forever she was able to make use of a computer comfortably, I even made a plastic bracket and modified the mouse slightly... the college management hauled me over the coals for it.
On another occasion, I had an existing teacher interrupt me and correct me repeatedly in front of my class, when I tried to answer questions asked of me, using my own knowledge, this other teacher (who followed the college rules) tried to make out that I had no idea what I was on about.
I was supposed to be placed at this assignment for 6 months, I walked after just 3.
I was talking to a friend who was a secondary school teacher, some weeks later, and he basically said to me, this is not at all uncommon, even in secondary school level, and junior & infant school teachers don't even get picked on subject/skill level, only on class control and instruction following prowess.
and that was that....
I walked away from teaching, and went on to do 5 years in the mobile comms industry as an engineer instead.
That was about 20 years ago now, maybe it's changed since, I don't know but back in the early 2000's, the UK education sector was full of this type of attitude, you DON'T READ, YOU DON'T DEVIATE FROM THE INSTRUCTIONS....
|
|
|
|
|
I've had a different experience in India.
Mine is a similar case, about 20 years in the technology industry, and after that, taught a few semesters in an autonomous institution - three subjects - Medical Imaging, Biomechanics and Dynamics of Machines (I have a Mechanical Engineering background). In two of the cases, I had the freedom to decide the syllabus, in consultation with the Head of the Department, and teach and evaluate the students. I was the person deciding each slide of the PPT presentations, and the seminar topics which the students had to present for 15 minutes each, as part of the assessment. There was a lot of academic freedom in conducting the courses.
Now, I'm leading a retired life (since 2018), and teaching high school mathematics to students near my house, and have full freedom in what problems to teach them, as per the overall guidelines set by the Curriculum committee. Of course I make sure that they are able to answer well in their class and board exams.
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
