Like many of my fellow college students, I'm looking into the necessary textbooks for the coming semester, and once again I'm struck by a blow of disgusted helplessness. We're essentially at the mercy of a non-competitive, non-structural monopoly that exists to prevent us from learning.
That's correct. I firmly believe that college is as much an institution of anti-learning as it is of learning. Consider that no effort is made to assign good professors to incoming students who naturally will have difficulties transitioning to college education. The opposite is true: some of the worst professors are assigned to teach 100-level classes. People who have had doctorates longer than their students have been alive fail to understand their students' frustrations dealing with the basic concepts that the professors had memorized when their students' parents were on honeymoon. To add insult to injury, many of these professors then actively work to fail students, because they have to "weed-out" those who aren't up to standards, but that's like using size to separate apples from oranges: plenty of oranges will get through, and plenty of apples won't.
Colleges mostly benefit when students fail courses. If they fail enough, the students will loose scholarships and/or have to pay for extra semesters. Instead of doing their best to help students, in many cases, colleges actively work against them. (Side speculation: this is a product of the "everyone goes to college" meme in circulation, and failing students is necessary because state schools cannot easily raise admission standards.)
Textbook companies benefit from this. Fail a course enough times, and the student will have to buy a new textbook even though they're still in Chemistry 101. Said companies actively create new editions which usually vary in little more than font and color scheme, containing almost identical information.
Online homework, integrated with the textbook, is a further difficulty. I've experienced this several times, and it's frustrating to think that the schools are too incompetent to built their own homework interface. Where else are my $30,000 a year going? But that's another rant.
Textbooks companies are a parasitic industry, dependent on colleges for their source of income. Colleges give them monopolies in essence, by mandating that their students purchase a specific book, no matter that any other book from the last 40 years contains essentially identical information in many cases. Colleges are the cause of the problem, textbook companies vultures that swoop in and eat the scraps of savings leftover after the all-but-theft of tuition payments.
I must say one more thing however: this is not the fault of capitalism. Proper, laissez-faire capitalism would prevent this monstrosity from forming, and still has the power to kill it. Capitalism would not create state-funded colleges: all institutions of learning would be paid for entirely by philanthropists and the students. Consequently, their would be competition between schools to keep tuition low in hopes of attracting the best students. Furthermore, students would be given options about what textbooks are sufficient for courses, and would not be bound to buying a book to complete a course.
Well. I hope that wasn't too all-over-the-place. You don't have to live in my brain.
P.S. I think that textbook companies are in cahoots with schools to fail us, because they're atrociously written. I would have gotten a much better grade in Calc 2 if I could have just read the bloody thing, but it was insultingly vague.
31 December 2012
30 December 2012
Some Thoughts on Maturity
I've no intention of watching Emily Owens M.D., as I've neither the time nor the interest, but I saw a small portion of the pilot this evening. In essence, I walked out (or rather climbed off the couch) after it appeared that this was going to be a show about how adults are just as vindictive and immature as high school students.
Don't you think we've have enough of that?
I've spent the last 9 years or so waiting to finally surround myself with rational people, to no avail. People just won't grow up. I was told to "act my age, and lighten up" by someone 2 or 3 years older than me when I was 13. A few weeks ago, we had a literal overgrown schoolyard bully show his true colors in my dorm.
People are irrational. They don't have to be, but being irrational is irrational, and consequently you cannot simply "convince" them to be rational. You have to ease them into it, helping them eliminate minor contradictions until finally they eliminate the major ones.
Growing up is in some ways an extension of this process. The young mind has plenty of contradictions, many of them planted (intentionally or unintentionally) by adults. But the young child has the ability to resolve these contradictions. Growing up is the process of resolving both internal contradictions and contradictions with reality.
An individual is "mature" when they have resolved all of the major contradictions with them-self and the world around them.
This is not, however, the way the term "mature" is generally used. In my experience, the word "mature" is used to mean "bowing to societal expectations, regardless of their rationality."
Thus, a mature individual is one that behaves the way they're supposed to. Who sets the rules? A collection of somewhat to largely irrational individuals from John Dewey back to Moses. There's no one to argue with (that's another issue entirely), you're just supposed to accept despite the fact that their is no reason nor satisfactory justification.
Thus, we find that to be mature is good, but for others to think you mature is probably bad.
That said, I also want to address the idea of immaturity. Immaturity, in social context, is the refusal to bow to social mores. It can mean anything from laughing with a friend when you fart in the car, to refusing to put clothes on when taken to Buckingham Palace (Sherlock, "A Scandal in Belgravia"). This sort of immaturity can be good: it is an active act of rebellion and independence against the irrational Establishment. It makes people think. It's relatively harmless when practiced among rational individuals.
The other type of immaturity is intellectual immaturity. This is incredibly dangerous.
Intellectual immaturity is the unconscious? refusal to resolve internal contradictions. The intellectually immature have in many cased damaged or destroyed their faculty of identifying contractions, or at the very least chosen not to use it. They cannot be reasoned with in the traditional sense. Handle with care.
The intellectually immature are those people who expect you to forget that they were complete monster to you in high school, or that they can initiate the use of force still be the victim (they're also likely to think that force and violence are synonyms). They are a danger to themselves and others, but are tolerated because they can put on a good facade of social maturity when necessary.
Keep these in mind next time you see someone do something "immature." It probably is, but which kind.
P.S. That overgrown bully in my dorm? I called him immature (among other unprintable things), and his response was mismanaged sarcastic answers about going to "play with his toys." Playing with toys isn't immature, at most a possibly indicator of social immaturity. Immaturity and youth are not synonyms.
Don't you think we've have enough of that?
I've spent the last 9 years or so waiting to finally surround myself with rational people, to no avail. People just won't grow up. I was told to "act my age, and lighten up" by someone 2 or 3 years older than me when I was 13. A few weeks ago, we had a literal overgrown schoolyard bully show his true colors in my dorm.
People are irrational. They don't have to be, but being irrational is irrational, and consequently you cannot simply "convince" them to be rational. You have to ease them into it, helping them eliminate minor contradictions until finally they eliminate the major ones.
Growing up is in some ways an extension of this process. The young mind has plenty of contradictions, many of them planted (intentionally or unintentionally) by adults. But the young child has the ability to resolve these contradictions. Growing up is the process of resolving both internal contradictions and contradictions with reality.
An individual is "mature" when they have resolved all of the major contradictions with them-self and the world around them.
This is not, however, the way the term "mature" is generally used. In my experience, the word "mature" is used to mean "bowing to societal expectations, regardless of their rationality."
Thus, a mature individual is one that behaves the way they're supposed to. Who sets the rules? A collection of somewhat to largely irrational individuals from John Dewey back to Moses. There's no one to argue with (that's another issue entirely), you're just supposed to accept despite the fact that their is no reason nor satisfactory justification.
Thus, we find that to be mature is good, but for others to think you mature is probably bad.
That said, I also want to address the idea of immaturity. Immaturity, in social context, is the refusal to bow to social mores. It can mean anything from laughing with a friend when you fart in the car, to refusing to put clothes on when taken to Buckingham Palace (Sherlock, "A Scandal in Belgravia"). This sort of immaturity can be good: it is an active act of rebellion and independence against the irrational Establishment. It makes people think. It's relatively harmless when practiced among rational individuals.
The other type of immaturity is intellectual immaturity. This is incredibly dangerous.
Intellectual immaturity is the unconscious? refusal to resolve internal contradictions. The intellectually immature have in many cased damaged or destroyed their faculty of identifying contractions, or at the very least chosen not to use it. They cannot be reasoned with in the traditional sense. Handle with care.
The intellectually immature are those people who expect you to forget that they were complete monster to you in high school, or that they can initiate the use of force still be the victim (they're also likely to think that force and violence are synonyms). They are a danger to themselves and others, but are tolerated because they can put on a good facade of social maturity when necessary.
Keep these in mind next time you see someone do something "immature." It probably is, but which kind.
P.S. That overgrown bully in my dorm? I called him immature (among other unprintable things), and his response was mismanaged sarcastic answers about going to "play with his toys." Playing with toys isn't immature, at most a possibly indicator of social immaturity. Immaturity and youth are not synonyms.
Into The Void
I've never blogged before. I didn't even start using Facebook until my last month of high school. I'm not a particularly social person.
But I want to do an experiment.
My mind is constantly alive with ideas, an endless monologue jumping from topic to topic, from casual whispers to impassioned rants. I think it's time I made an effort to put these into of format that's fit for public consumption. Practice, if you will.
So, here we are. Will you leap with me into the void?
But I want to do an experiment.
My mind is constantly alive with ideas, an endless monologue jumping from topic to topic, from casual whispers to impassioned rants. I think it's time I made an effort to put these into of format that's fit for public consumption. Practice, if you will.
So, here we are. Will you leap with me into the void?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)