Moderator:Forum Administrators
Johanna wrote:"The classics of world literature" is a very ethnocentric concept, if not extremely so, at least they way most people think of these so-called classics.
Johanna wrote:"The classics of world literature" is a very ethnocentric concept, if not extremely so, at least they way most people think of these so-called classics.
They're also kind of stuck in time, with a disproportionately large amount of these works being from the 19th century.
vijayjohn wrote:I think a well-educated person should know how to respect both others and themselves (which implies that they shouldn't be full of themselves or act like the smartest person ever) and have the courage to decide for themselves what they should know intellectually, regardless of what anybody else thinks they should know.
Varislintu wrote: In a way I'd like to think a well-educated person has [...] learned skills to teach themselves more.
By that logic, someone who has the "courage" to decide that the only thing they should really know is what happened on the last episode of Keeping up with the Kardashians is well-educated.
IpseDixit wrote:I think you've missed the word "intellectually".
IpseDixit wrote:I see your point but at least that person really is the master of something, not just a jack of all trades...
So essentially, things that are important to you (especially math).Yasna wrote:What do you think a well-educated person should know?
Here's my opinion, and yes, I realize it's rather idealistic. I think they should be proficient in at least English and any other lingua franca of the region they live in. They should have general knowledge of chemistry, biology, physics, world history, geography, climate science, astronomy, nutrition, economics, finance, algebra, geometry, and calculus. By general knowledge I mean they should know most of what is found in a textbook covering the fundamentals of the respective field. They should be able to play at least one instrument and be proficient in at least one programming language. They should have read the majority of the classics of world literature.
I am looking at this from the perspective of education as a life-long process.
modghethanc wrote:So essentially, things that are important to you (especially math).
Without denying the importance of science, math and literature, I can think of a ton of important skills that everyone should know which are not in that list. Among them are personal finance (not business), computing (not programming), mechanical skills, sewing, cooking, first aid, and childcare. These things are probably a lot more useful to the average person than understanding how the world economy works, even if they don't lead to a high-paying job in the banking sector.
Yasna wrote:By that logic, someone who has the "courage" to decide that the only thing they should really know is what happened on the last episode of Keeping up with the Kardashians is well-educated.
mōdgethanc wrote:cooking
mōdgethanc wrote:Without denying the importance of science, math and literature, I can think of a ton of important skills that everyone should know which are not in that list. Among them are personal finance (not business)
linguoboy wrote:But more fundamental than any of these skills is critical thinking
So you think a person being well-educated is defined by whether or not they are specialized in something?
I tend to think of it more in terms of whether a person's education has made them a well-rounded person who understands the world they live in and has a strong foundation that allows them to learn new things with ease.
It might just be my interest in sexology, but I find it hard to mistake ginger for anything else.Varislintu wrote:then suddenly, a 20+-year-old woman picks up a ginger root and goes "This is garlic, right? I'm pretty sure this is garlic."
Social skills like pragmatics are definitely something I wish others paid more attention to, since few things are likely to get my blood boiling than people who interrupt me (or even worse, talk over me). This is one of the advantages of the internet: at least everyone's voice is the same volume.linguoboy wrote:It seem like physical and social skills in general are being forgotten about, perhaps because we all take them for granted? I have an object lesson in the form of my disabled older brother who nearly lost his apartment last year because he didn't understand the distinction between signalling friendliness and creeping someone the fuck out. I don't consider anyone "educated" if they don't understand basic etiquette: how to hold a conversation (turn-taking, politeness, when to change topics, etc.), how to dress properly, how to interact with service personnel, how to issue and respond to invitations, and so on and so forth.
Just yesterday, I overheard at least two conversations I desperately wanted to jump into because of all the wrongness being said, but didn't out of shyness. (One was about antidepressants, the other about water fluoridation.) It's not necessary to be a scientist to have some basic critical thinking skills and learn not to take everything you hear at face value.I also think it's necessary to understand health and wellness. What good does it do to study biology if you develop diabetes from poor diet or die of congestive heart failure before you're 40? And you don't need to play or follow a sport, but you should at least know the basics of those most commonly played around you. I don't award any points to someone who proudly brags of their ignorance of anything, and that includes football.
But more fundamental than any of these skills is critical thinking. Information is easier to find than ever, which means that the ability to filter that information and determine what is credible and what is not has never been more vital. I've seen people literally end up poisoning themselves because they believed some quackery they read on the Internet rather than accept the scientific consensus. Part of this is the ability to admit when you're wrong and learn from your mistakes. Again, it sounds basic, but I've seen people destroy their lives rather than reevaluate their ideological stances. You can't have learning be a lifelong process without getting good at being wrong.
mōdgethanc wrote:Just yesterday, I overheard at least two conversations I desperately wanted to jump into because of all the wrongness being said, but didn't out of shyness. (One was about antidepressants, the other about water fluoridation.) It's not necessary to be a scientist to have some basic critical thinking skills and learn not to take everything you hear at face value.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests