 |
| |
|
|
chegitz guevara
|
 |
Ft. Lauderdale, FL Communist Party of Apolyton
Jun 2000
time: 00:21
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Asher
They don't teach you how to "sluff out code" at Calgary, they teach you how to solve problems. The problem is a lot of universities seem to be just focusing on how to "sluff out code", increasingly the US ones, which is why they're tanking in the rankings compared to other schools. |
The best professor at my uni forced students to think rather than simply learn the code. Unfortunately, when you signed up for a computer course, you had no idea who was teaching, so you got professors at random. There were two proffs I desperately wanted to study under, and I never got them.
Regardless, the proff I mentioned was really freakin' nice guy. I worked 60+ hour weeks in the comp sci lab, and he would by sandwiches for me just cuz he knew I couldn't get away for lunch, and he didn't even know my name at the time.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
GePap
|
 |
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001
time: 23:21
|
|
What is up with Ashers gapping and massive insecurity? I don't see anyone else in this forum as desperate for approval, or at least wanting to make his choice of academic study look good than Asher. You don't see DanS touting econ programs, JohnT discussing different MBA programs, Imran talking about the best lawschools, you don;t even see Agathon start threads about the top philosophy programs...
BUt poor little Asher, he can't live without trying to point out how we should all give a rats ass about his chosen line of study...
Now that I think about it, its really funny, funny not only as in Laugh at Asher, but funny overall-how those who try to point out how much "they are worth" are the ones that act like kiddies needing attention.
Oh, and as for the differences between the humanities and the sciences-the very nature of science means that most of the work of most scientists will be forgotten, left behind, or possibly found to be incorrect at some point. On the other hand, a great writer, a great poet, a great philosopher is trully immortal, since their work deals with the one unchanging value, our humanity.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Agathon
|
 |
Leafs 4TW!! - CPA
Dec 2002
time: 00:21
|
|
quote:
Look at it this way - when philosophers are of the right kind , they get out of the way of the scientists and technicians , and let them do the job of advancing science and civilisation . When they are bad , they hinder progress . Thus , the effects philosophers have had on society have , for the most part , been usually negative , thanks to them giving intellectual credence to junk . |
What planet do you live on? Are you being purposely stupid or not.
You can say the same of scientists. When they do well, we benefit; when they do badly (think eugenics) we do badly.
And you have got to be kidding about the influence of philosophers being bad for society. The principles by which our societies are organized did not arise from nowhere: most of them were thought up by philosophers. The United States Constitution is an example of something that was lifted with very little modification from Locke's political philosophy. The guiding norms and expectations of our political thinking all come from the contractarian tradition and the work of people like Locke; Hobbes; and Rousseau. Before that, the standard way of thinking about politics was in Greek philosophical terms interpreted through the lens of Christianity.
A standard feature of the ignorant is that they believe that the political and moral ideas that seem obvious now were always so. A quick check of history shows that this was not the case. You have to be some kind of ignorant son of a ***** to think that it is. What makes philosophers look strange is that they say these things for years until they finally seep into society and become the norm. I had my students read Mill this year. They agreed with almost everything he said and couldn't understand why anyone wouldn't. Yet Mill was regarded by many of his time as a radical lunatic.
Similarly for our views about what a person is. Most educated people hold to a view of the person that could be best described as Descartes mixed with Freud. But people didn't always think this way, and they probably won't in 500 years.
In short the attitude of unphilosophical people is to take these things for granted – to live an unexamined life. It's a peculiar kind of intellectual conservatism and lack of imagination. It's the equivalent of the 50s Southern redneck who just thinks it is part of the natural order that blacks must be subservient.
quote:
Computer scientists , on the other hand , have enhanced the quality of human life tremendoucly almost everywhere. |
Only by giving us gadgets. Sure they make life easier, but easier for what? To be a lazy idiot? To pursue pleasure above all else? To obey God? To seek human excellence? To do right?
Where else but in philosophy do you see the question of what makes a life run well asked? "Whatever you like" is not much of an answer because it invites the question "should you really like what you like?"
quote:
**How would you feel about driving a car designed by a team of people chosen for "people skills" , versus one designed by nerds/geeks/(negative asocial stereotype) who were geniuses in car design ? |
How would you feel about living in a country run by people who had no "people skills"? 
quote:
A telling case in point is this discussion itself - you can have it without philosphers ( though then the topic would not have come up ) , but not without the computer scientists who designed the systems that made it possible . |
Really? The moral positions that people take on these things can usually have their origin traced back to some philosopher. Even relativism.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Asher
|
 |
Calgary, Alberta
Nov 1999
time: 22:21
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by GePap
What is up with Ashers gapping and massive insecurity? |
You're the one in here trolling to compensate for other emotions you're feeling.
quote:
Oh, and as for the differences between the humanities and the sciences-the very nature of science means that most of the work of most scientists will be forgotten, left behind, or possibly found to be incorrect at some point. On the other hand, a great writer, a great poet, a great philosopher is trully immortal, since their work deals with the one unchanging value, our humanity. |
Indeed.
People like Newton are forgettable, while people such as Walt Whitman will be forever worshiped by humanity for their stunning achievements.
It's time for a reality check, GePaP.
Their "work" may deal with humanity, but their accomplishments are meaningless in comparison -- especially people like poets.
What is up with GePap's gapping and massive insecurity? I don't see anyone else in this forum as desperate for approval, or at least wanting to make his choice of academic study look good than GePap. You don't see me trolling threads about political science/whateverthehellyoutook and mocking your achievements at finding new ways to corrupt government.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
GePap
|
|
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001
time: 23:21
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Asher
You're the one in here trolling to compensate for other emotions you're feeling. |
Like my pity for you?
Indeed.
quote:
People like Newton are forgettable, while people such as Walt Whitman will be forever worshiped by humanity for their stunning achievements.
It's time for a reality check, GePaP.
Their "work" may deal with humanity, but their accomplishments are meaningless in comparison -- especially people like poets. |
Achievement in what? THOUGHT? Science is just another outcome of philosophy. Newton made up rules. But it was others using those rules that made things. The problem asher, is that things vanish-they get lost, they corrode, they collapse, they can be destroyed.
None of these things are true for thought or ideas. This is why Newton is remembered, but you know what? So is Walt Whitmann. In fact, the fact YOU, obviously an anti-intellectual, actually knows about Whitmann shows just what kind of an impact he did have.
quote:
What is up with GePap's gapping and massive insecurity? I don't see anyone else in this forum as desperate for approval, or at least wanting to make his choice of academic study look good than GePap. You don't see me trolling threads about political science/whateverthehellyoutook and mocking your achievements at finding new ways to corrupt government. |
:LOL:
Ah, its cute to see poor little Asher react with a badly strung together little immitative rant.
Whats next Asher? Putting your fingers in your ears? Loud screeching?
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Lul Thyme
|
|
Quebec, Canada
Aug 2000
time: 05:21
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by GePap
What is up with Ashers gapping and massive insecurity? I don't see anyone else in this forum as desperate for approval, or at least wanting to make his choice of academic study look good than Asher. You don't see DanS touting econ programs, JohnT discussing different MBA programs, Imran talking about the best lawschools, you don;t even see Agathon start threads about the top philosophy programs...
BUt poor little Asher, he can't live without trying to point out how we should all give a rats ass about his chosen line of study...
Now that I think about it, its really funny, funny not only as in Laugh at Asher, but funny overall-how those who try to point out how much "they are worth" are the ones that act like kiddies needing attention.
Oh, and as for the differences between the humanities and the sciences-the very nature of science means that most of the work of most scientists will be forgotten, left behind, or possibly found to be incorrect at some point. On the other hand, a great writer, a great poet, a great philosopher is trully immortal, since their work deals with the one unchanging value, our humanity. |
I agree somewhat with you statement about Asher.
I think your last paragraph is wrong in some respects though.
First you are comparing "most" scientist to "great" humanists.
If we switch it around "great" scientists are and will be remembered more than "most" humanists, so thats not really an argument.
Now about the intrinsic unchanging value, take mathematicians and their work.
It is more unchanging that our humanity will ever be.
Schoolchidren still learn Pythagorean's Theorem as part of almost any basic education, and this will never be found incorrect or left behind.
Look how much knowledge of the greek classics (Eschyle etc...) has faded from the culture in the last centuries, and will continue to do so because it IS becoming less and less actual.
To quote G.H Hardy :
"Archimedes will be remembered when Aeschylus is forgotten, because languages die and mathematical ideas do not. “Immortality” may be a silly word, but probably a mathematician has the best chance of whatever it may mean."
EDIT: and please don't use the same trap as you used for replying to Asher.
That was mathematicians do is in fact THOUGHT and so is humanities and not science.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
GePap
|
|
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001
time: 23:21
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Asher
I also know of Michael Jackson and Kobe Bryant. What is your point? |
I didn't know those two guys had died centuries ago. I should check the news more often....
quote:
And calling me an anti-intellectual does nothing to help your case. Not only are here you trolling a thread that has nothing to with you or your field -- desperately trying to rationalize your decision to study what you did without provocation -- you're using ad hominems and "LOL" smilies in your argument against scientific fields.
You're a child. |
One: given That i have said 0 in this thread about my chose field of study, or the place I studied, I am mystified as to the source of your assertion. Interstingly enough, if we expand to the many threads that we have had any sort of discussion in, I rarely speak about my chosenm field, and this is because I hardly need the approval of people here or anywhere to justify studying what I love. This is fact is the basic difference I pointed out, and which seems to hav struck such a shallow nerve with you:
You seem to be one of the very few people hre who appears to have some narcissistic need for affirmation from strangers. And I do find that sad.
You also seem unable to accept you own self-worth without thinking of money or the acclamation of others, or being connected to what is popular or powerful. I on the other hand accept my self-worth and know it ceoms from within, not without. And again, I find this characteristic in you sad.
quote:
Do you realize what you just inadvertently admitted?
That "rant" was yours with the names changed, to make a point.
Oh GePap.  |
Yet again. Sad.
Actually, unless you noticed, you changed far more than just names.
Lets compare:
quote:
What is up with Ashers gapping and massive insecurity? I don't see anyone else in this forum as desperate for approval, or at least wanting to make his choice of academic study look good than Asher. You don't see DanS touting econ programs, JohnT discussing different MBA programs, Imran talking about the best lawschools, you don;t even see Agathon start threads about the top philosophy programs...
BUt poor little Asher, he can't live without trying to point out how we should all give a rats ass about his chosen line of study... |
vs:
quote:
What is up with GePap's gapping and massive insecurity? I don't see anyone else in this forum as desperate for approval, or at least wanting to make his choice of academic study look good than GePap. You don't see me trolling threads about political science/whateverthehellyoutook and mocking your achievements at finding new ways to corrupt government. |
You in fact had to change the point of it in you attempt to defect the charge.
The difference Asher is in the empirical evidence. One just needs to compare the threads you styar and the ones I start and compare the amount of navel gazzing in them, or the amount of narcisissim.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
JimmyCracksCorn
|
|
Macedonia - Sovereign country north of Greece.
Dec 2002
time: 05:21
|
|
Asher, I really think you're getting in over your head here.
Of course computer science is useful and has benefited us all... if it weren't for you guys I wouldn't be sitting at this computer.
But if it weren't for philosophy, I'd still be living on the savannah somewhere in Africa. Its philosphical knowledge of society and of progess which has been propagating within our specieis for hundreds of thousands of years (maybe even millions) that separates us from our distant ancestral past... and also this kind of thinking which spawned tool use - ultimately something that CS is an offshoot of.
In other words, you can't separate CS from the social conditions that have been evolving for our entire existence as a species that have allowed for such specializations to come about in the first place. CS depends on philosophy, philosophy doesn't depend on CS.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:21.
Apolyton Time is 00:21. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
21-04-2005 20:32
|