|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
All's not fair in love and science
|
Ads |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
All's not fair in love and science
On Saturday, May 6, 2017 at 1:37:33 PM UTC+1, AMuzi wrote:
On Thu, 4 May 2017 14:32:22 -0700 (PDT), Andre Jute wrote: Back in the 1960s/70s it probably cost the same as an average American family's income, $25K, to send a kid to a benchmark university for one year. $25,000.00 40 years ago? On what planet? One might pick and choose data points but I started at $139 per semester, cash on the line, at a large school. Quit at $250 and not over the price. I expect my first university cost about as much as yours but I don't actually know because I was on a full scholarship from the government paid directly to the college, and my living expenses were taken care of by an insurance company which thought they'd found their next actuary (dullest job in the world but very well paid). But after that I attended overseas universities, where they charged (and still do) foreign students the full whack. It's expensive pulling yourself up by your bootstraps. Note that Jeff and I are not talking about fees alone, nor merely a semester, but all the expenses of being a student for a year. Have I told you the heartrending story of how I was so poor, I never had long trousers until I walked the 300 miles to my first university with my boots around my neck to save the soles for best wear? p.s. Here's a pithy analysis I enjoyed greatly: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8utmmWoBSBY Absolutely. A Ph.D. qualifies one to -- study for another one. -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org/ Open every day since 1 April, 1971 For that much I received an education that did, and does, okay by me, especially considering it didn't cost me a penny, nor did I ever hear a single complaint from those whom it cost plenty. I have faith that enough kids will come out of the identity-minefields of present-day colleges with the makings of successful careers. Survivors survive. I've never heard a really successful man regret his education. Andre Jute If words fail you, your education has failed you |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
All's not fair in love and science
On Sat, 06 May 2017 07:37:23 -0500, AMuzi wrote:
p.s. Here's a pithy analysis I enjoyed greatly: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8utmmWoBSBY The problem is why people go to college. Conventional wisdom suggests that it's to obtain a diploma, which is considered a guarantee of success in future employment. This is totally wrong. College was original where the upper classes sent their sons to receive instruction in how to act like a proper gentlemen and member of the upper class. That meant a classical education: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outline_of_classical_studies which included proficiency in ancient Greek and Latin. There were also classes in history, from the perspective of the elite. Etiquette, propriety, dueling, dance, proper dress, etc were taught so that they would know how to act at social events. Overall, such an education worked well for the intended purpose. Things started to go astray when members of the GUM (great unwashed masses) noticed that wealthy children were going to college. They logically deduced that if they also went to college, they too would become wealthy. Interchanging cause and effect is a problem among the GUM. So, they attended college, paid dearly for the privilege, and were predictably disappointed with the expected wealth did not magically materialize upon graduation. Not wishing to admit that they had screwed up and did not achieve their expected goals, they perpetuated the myth to other members of the GUM, who promptly repeated the original logic error. The mistake would have been easily discovered were it not for the substantial number of sons and daughters of the wealthy, who continue to attend college. "23 Famous Dropouts Who Turned Out Just Fine" https://www.buzzfeed.com/ashleyperez/23-famous-dropouts-who-turned-out-just-fine "8 Hugely Successful People Who Didn't Graduate College" https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/249683 -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
All's not fair in love and science
On Sat, 06 May 2017 20:47:00 -0700, Jeff Liebermann
wrote: On Sat, 06 May 2017 07:37:23 -0500, AMuzi wrote: p.s. Here's a pithy analysis I enjoyed greatly: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8utmmWoBSBY The problem is why people go to college. Conventional wisdom suggests that it's to obtain a diploma, which is considered a guarantee of success in future employment. This is totally wrong. College was original where the upper classes sent their sons to receive instruction in how to act like a proper gentlemen and member of the upper class. That meant a classical education: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outline_of_classical_studies which included proficiency in ancient Greek and Latin. There were also classes in history, from the perspective of the elite. Etiquette, propriety, dueling, dance, proper dress, etc were taught so that they would know how to act at social events. Overall, such an education worked well for the intended purpose. Things started to go astray when members of the GUM (great unwashed masses) noticed that wealthy children were going to college. They logically deduced that if they also went to college, they too would become wealthy. Interchanging cause and effect is a problem among the GUM. So, they attended college, paid dearly for the privilege, and were predictably disappointed with the expected wealth did not magically materialize upon graduation. Not wishing to admit that they had screwed up and did not achieve their expected goals, they perpetuated the myth to other members of the GUM, who promptly repeated the original logic error. The mistake would have been easily discovered were it not for the substantial number of sons and daughters of the wealthy, who continue to attend college. Given that of the 56 signers of the U.S. Declaration of Independence some 29 had attended collage and 27 had not. So apparently starting a rebellion doesn't necessarily require a collage education. George Washington received the equivalent of an elementary school education while General Howe entered the army when he was 17 by buying a cornet's commission in the Duke of Cumberland's Dragoons in 1746 at the age of 17, which would seem to preclude any higher education. It is apparent that in the world of Real Politics collage is not necessarily an advantage :-) But I believe that you have missed a significant point in the great Gentry - GUM debate. One attends a collage, just as one dresses for dinner, not as a matter of education, but rather because that is simply what a gentleman does. Just as one does not formally introduce one's mistress to one's wife. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
All's not fair in love and science
Andre Jute wrote in
: I've never heard a really successful man regret his education. +1 -- Andrew Chaplin SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTINO (If you're going to e-mail me, you'll have to get "yourfinger." out.) |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
All's not fair in love and science
On Saturday, May 6, 2017 at 5:37:33 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 5/5/2017 8:40 PM, Andre Jute wrote: On Friday, May 5, 2017 at 6:50:31 PM UTC+1, Jeff Liebermann wrote: On Thu, 4 May 2017 14:32:22 -0700 (PDT), Andre Jute wrote: Andre Jute Curiosity and enthusiasm will carry a young man beyond even the best education money can buy -- I beg to differ. Curiosity and enthusiasm are not suitable replacements for ability and perseverance. Back when I was educated, you didn't need a college degree to apply for a job as a shoe salesman. It was assumed that the able and the persevering were the ones who matriculated into college. I was talking about a young man chosen for his ability, educated, and carried by curiosity and enthusiasm beyond merely having his ticket punched. I'm big on perseverance too, but it's another thing I assume axiomatically to be in the armory of winners. However, once one is will and able to learn, and to keep at it without giving up, then curiosity and enthusiasm are quite valuable and important. Money also helps in today's diploma factories. For our local state college per year: http://financialaid.ucsc.edu/costs/undergraduate-costs.html I'm not so sure. Back in the 1960s/70s it probably cost the same as an average American family's income, $25K, to send a kid to a benchmark university for one year. Today the average family's income is around $75K, so the $60K the college you cite costs every years falls short of inflation by a whopping fifth, if I have the numbers right. Or maybe they were cheaper back in the day and have just kept pace. Curiosity and enthusiasm are not going to help much with tuition expenses. However, if you're suggestion that curiosity and enthusiasm are suitable replacements for a college education, I would agree, but only if your mythical young man has ability, perseverance, some business sense, a good mentor, and possibly some rich backers. Can't do any harm to know rich people. One meets them at university. Incidentally, this is somewhat contradictory with "The secret to engineering is to know when to give up and stop engineering". This might explain why most engineers make terrible CEO's. I was too polite to say so, but now that you have admitted it... -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 Andre Jute The problem is too much "education" -- and not enough quality teaching $25,000.00 40 years ago? On what planet? One might pick and choose data points but I started at $139 per semester, cash on the line, at a large school. Quit at $250 and not over the price. p.s. Here's a pithy analysis I enjoyed greatly: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8utmmWoBSBY You know, I was going to drop out of Harvard and start a multi-billion dollar tech company, but instead I decided . . . oh, wait, I didn't get into Harvard. I just got back from my son's graduation from University of Utah. I pushed him to get a degree for a number or reasons, but mostly so he would have more career options. Not a guaranteed income, but options. He went to a state school, and I had been saving for his tuition since he was born -- so he's getting out debt free. The great thing about Utah is that residency is easy to achieve, and in-state tuition is available after the first year. The price of tuition is less than the University of Oregon -- and its not Oregon. It's Alta and Snowbird and Solitude and Deer Valley (really cheap passes through the U)! And riding up endless canyons and going to bike races (yesterday) and getting eaten alive by brine flies on Antelope Island. I loved my son's college education! I was sitting at the graduation ceremony next to a guy who was also from Oregon and who, amazingly, knew my wife's family in Hillsboro. His daughter was getting a masters in accounting. He will never again have to rely on Turbo Tax. One word: accounting. It's the future. -- Jay Beattie. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
All's not fair in love and science
On 5/6/2017 11:47 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
"23 Famous Dropouts Who Turned Out Just Fine" https://www.buzzfeed.com/ashleyperez/23-famous-dropouts-who-turned-out-just-fine "8 Hugely Successful People Who Didn't Graduate College" https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/249683 I believe very strongly that there are many people in college who should not be there, either because they lack the intellectual horsepower, or because there are other pursuits that would do them and us much more good. But to examine your lists in context, we should compare with the list of people who dropped out of college and did badly. Also with the list of people who never started college and did badly. I'm thinking those are longer lists. -- - Frank Krygowski |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
All's not fair in love and science
On Saturday, May 6, 2017 at 8:47:06 PM UTC-7, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sat, 06 May 2017 07:37:23 -0500, AMuzi wrote: p.s. Here's a pithy analysis I enjoyed greatly: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8utmmWoBSBY The problem is why people go to college. Conventional wisdom suggests that it's to obtain a diploma, which is considered a guarantee of success in future employment. This is totally wrong. College was original where the upper classes sent their sons to receive instruction in how to act like a proper gentlemen and member of the upper class. That meant a classical education: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outline_of_classical_studies which included proficiency in ancient Greek and Latin. There were also classes in history, from the perspective of the elite. Etiquette, propriety, dueling, dance, proper dress, etc were taught so that they would know how to act at social events. Overall, such an education worked well for the intended purpose. Things started to go astray when members of the GUM (great unwashed masses) noticed that wealthy children were going to college. They logically deduced that if they also went to college, they too would become wealthy. Interchanging cause and effect is a problem among the GUM. So, they attended college, paid dearly for the privilege, and were predictably disappointed with the expected wealth did not magically materialize upon graduation. Not wishing to admit that they had screwed up and did not achieve their expected goals, they perpetuated the myth to other members of the GUM, who promptly repeated the original logic error. The mistake would have been easily discovered were it not for the substantial number of sons and daughters of the wealthy, who continue to attend college. "23 Famous Dropouts Who Turned Out Just Fine" https://www.buzzfeed.com/ashleyperez/23-famous-dropouts-who-turned-out-just-fine "8 Hugely Successful People Who Didn't Graduate College" https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/249683 I'm a high school drop-out that joined the Air Force. They put me through about 3 months of electronics and another 3 month learning "systems" which was the electro-mechanical computers that we used in the bombing, navigating and radar systems in a B-52D. My first job on leaving the Air Force was at Physics International and was the number two man on B^2 (B Square) facility using high energy nuclear physics to generate particle streams to radiate semiconductors and then engineers would study the effects of this. We would generate Gamma Rays or electron streams. The machine used 20 million volts to operate so it was a little difficult to repair. B^3 used 200 million. From there I went on to Berkeley Computer Company as a technician. But Archey Stanley was the head engineer and he wasn't about to have anyone working for him that didn't know exactly what we were doing and why and he explained to us everything we were doing. We built the base leg of the Pacific coast Internet. The computer would handle 33 times more traffic than the most powerful IBM they had. It was installed at UC Berkeley and we went promptly out of business. From there each job I went to I moved up. Senior Technician, Jr. Engineer, Engineer, Sr. Engineer. Project Leader, Department Manager. Each time I achieved these promotions in a very simple way - by using my mind instead of trying to impress people with my education. In one meeting the two PhD engineers told the project leader that they would need 2 of IBM's supercomputers to achieve what he wanted. ($3 Million at the time) I responded that I could do it with one or two microprocessors for virtually the cost of labor. I completed the job on time and on budget and the Chief Chemist with success in hand won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry. Education doesn't come from a diploma since most people with degrees cease learning the second they get that paper in hand. It comes from the will to succeed. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
All's not fair in love and science
On Saturday, May 6, 2017 at 8:47:06 PM UTC-7, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sat, 06 May 2017 07:37:23 -0500, AMuzi wrote: p.s. Here's a pithy analysis I enjoyed greatly: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8utmmWoBSBY The problem is why people go to college. Conventional wisdom suggests that it's to obtain a diploma, which is considered a guarantee of success in future employment. This is totally wrong. College was original where the upper classes sent their sons to receive instruction in how to act like a proper gentlemen and member of the upper class. That meant a classical education: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outline_of_classical_studies which included proficiency in ancient Greek and Latin. There were also classes in history, from the perspective of the elite. Etiquette, propriety, dueling, dance, proper dress, etc were taught so that they would know how to act at social events. Overall, such an education worked well for the intended purpose. Things started to go astray when members of the GUM (great unwashed masses) noticed that wealthy children were going to college. They logically deduced that if they also went to college, they too would become wealthy. Interchanging cause and effect is a problem among the GUM. So, they attended college, paid dearly for the privilege, and were predictably disappointed with the expected wealth did not magically materialize upon graduation. Not wishing to admit that they had screwed up and did not achieve their expected goals, they perpetuated the myth to other members of the GUM, who promptly repeated the original logic error. The mistake would have been easily discovered were it not for the substantial number of sons and daughters of the wealthy, who continue to attend college. "23 Famous Dropouts Who Turned Out Just Fine" https://www.buzzfeed.com/ashleyperez/23-famous-dropouts-who-turned-out-just-fine "8 Hugely Successful People Who Didn't Graduate College" https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/249683 Fully 80% of college graduates NEVER work in their field of studies. Perhaps because most of them have time-killing studies such as BA's, But success is not becoming a billionaire as Steve Jobs or the rest. It's having a good life without too much want. My father was pretty smart but was satisfied to work for the Railroad for his entire life because it was so much better than being a cook in a hash house. |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
All's not fair in love and science
On 5/7/2017 10:53 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/6/2017 11:47 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote: "23 Famous Dropouts Who Turned Out Just Fine" https://www.buzzfeed.com/ashleyperez/23-famous-dropouts-who-turned-out-just-fine "8 Hugely Successful People Who Didn't Graduate College" https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/249683 I believe very strongly that there are many people in college who should not be there, either because they lack the intellectual horsepower, or because there are other pursuits that would do them and us much more good. But to examine your lists in context, we should compare with the list of people who dropped out of college and did badly. Also with the list of people who never started college and did badly. I'm thinking those are longer lists. Education is a fine thing, as are discipline, curiosity and perseverance. The University system is not equivalent to education, although they may sometimes overlap, however coincidentally. -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org/ Open every day since 1 April, 1971 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
I love Usenet almost as much as I love bicycles. | Zoot Katz | General | 7 | April 8th 08 07:36 AM |
I love Usenet almost as much as I love bicycles. | Zoot Katz | Social Issues | 7 | April 8th 08 07:36 AM |
I love Usenet almost as much as I love bicycles. | Zoot Katz | Techniques | 6 | April 6th 08 09:35 PM |
I love Darren Bedford! (But I love Danielle more!) | drewation | Unicycling | 6 | January 28th 05 08:58 PM |
science fair | Rob-the-unrepentant | Unicycling | 5 | January 6th 04 02:25 PM |