The views below are submitted by registered users of evertonfc.com and do not necessarily reflect the views of Everton Football Club. View the Blueroom acceptable usage policy.
-
Posts: 3,202January 31OGV said:
I'm talking about discovering things that lead to meaningful employment mate.
-----------------
Such as? That you're a dramatic tw@ and should have been an actor? :p -
Posts: 909January 31Deus Ex Machina said:
null
-----------------
Have you thought of working in diplomacy? -
Posts: 3,202January 31OGV said:
Have you thought of working in diplomacy?
-----------------
I could do with the immunity. -
-
-
Posts: 7,448January 31 Deus Ex Machina said:No problem in producing creative individuals? We're talkin'
abar exceptional individuals aren't we? Almost by definition, then, they're
rare, right? There is no educational focus on creativity as a subject, like. If
the production of such individuals could be increased, isn't tha' a good thing
like?
(1) At no point did I say exceptional and I don’t consider
them to be so rare as to be defined that way. There have been and are plenty of
creative people, more than enough for us to have reached the point we’re at now
without issue. If we have enough then by definition, they aren’t rare.
Even if in your world it's unnecessary (and this must be an
ideologically-laden premise), why shouldn't all individuals be provided with
skills to appreciate the world more fully? Must everything in compulsory
education be geared towards the wheels of industry? Smacks of philistinism
mate, no offence like.
(2) No offence taken. Why should the obligation be on
society as a whole to provide every individual with an education in what is
essentially a nonessential subject? Compulsory education should be in subjects
that children will need, not what they may find useful somewhere down the line.
You find little value in the vast majority of arts subjects,
really? If yer trace the 'istory of philosophy, yer'd realise tha' its branches
- such as logic, metaphysics (which, incidentally, is so-called because it was
deemed to be written after Aristotle's physics) - have had a profound influence
on scientific thought an' discovery, like; indeed, i' was common to call
scientists natural philosophers for centuries - even Newton's magnum opus is
called the mathematical principles of natural philosophy. Imo mate, it's
perspectives like yours tha' the tories love like, no offence.
(3) How much more is there left to learn, with regard to
philosophy, NOW? You’re obviously passionate about it, I’m not. Like a lot of
people, I enjoy a good philosophical discussion, I needed no education in the
subject to enjoy it, but it’s still of no use to me other than conversational.
Philosophy is taught in English anyway, it’s not like it would or could
disappear, those who are passionate about it, like yourself, can pay for
further education.
The Tories may love my perspective but it wasn’t born of
Tory doctrine.
-----------------
With respect mate, the article I sent was warnin' of a future whereby the UK is left be'ind, like, that's the point. I bi' more philosophical trainin' may benefit yer mate, as yer totally beggin' the question: it's your claim tha' such subjects are non-essential, I'm sayin' they are unless yer comin' from a narrowly utilitarian perspective, like. I've provided reasons for my view, the onus is now on you. Yer genuinely believe tha' literature, 'istory, geography, music may no' be useful somewhere down the line? In wha' way useful exactly? I won't respond to point three as i' seems utterly ridiculous, like, no offence. There were probably philistines sayin' the same thing in the eighteenth-century - before the development o' inter alia game theory and fuzzy logics, like... -
-
Posts: 3,202January 31IdiAminDaDa said:
With respect mate, the article I sent was warnin' of a future whereby the UK is left be'ind, like, that's the point. I bi' more philosophical trainin' may benefit yer mate, as yer totally beggin' the question: it's your claim tha' such subjects are non-essential, I'm sayin' they are unless yer comin' from a narrowly utilitarian perspective, like. I've provided reasons for my view, the onus is now on you. Yer genuinely believe tha' literature, 'istory, geography, music may no' be useful somewhere down the line? In wha' way useful exactly? I won't respond to point three as i' seems utterly ridiculous, like, no offence. There were probably philistines sayin' the same thing in the eighteenth-century - before the development o' inter alia game theory and fuzzy logics, like...-----------------
I'm actually starting to find your stand point ridiculous tbh mate, i don't mean that confrontationally, just that either i'm not being clear enough or you're so far entrenched in your opinion that you're not getting where i'm coming from. I'm suggesting a complete overhaul of the system far in excess of what Gove is implementing, i'm obviously mixing his ideas with my own and not making much sense.Subjects like, history, geography and music etc. should take a back seat to 'core' subjects, of that i have no doubt. If you wish to be a professional in one of those subjects you'd be passionate about them, right? Go out and learn them for yourself, there are more than enough free resources that won't burden what is already an over burdened system. -
Posts: 1,100January 31 putting the emphasis on parents to provide creative outlets to their kids doesnt really work though when the parents dont value it or even want their kid to be creative because they think they are faffin about .... putting the emphasis on the kids to pursue their own creativity doesnt really work either as the way that you do that is with resources not available to kids of meager means so the way that happens is by putting it into schools (sorry for butting in deus and idi haha)
-
-
Posts: 3,202January 31IdiAminDaDa said:
-----------------
I didn't have to get past the first paragraph to see that they were promoting arts education in formal AND informal settings. Educating children in the arts obviously has its place outside the confines of formal education, who's to say it couldn't be done that way exclusively? -
Posts: 3,202January 31IdiAminDaDa said:
Ok mate.
-----------------
People aren't passionate about those subjects? The resources aren't there? The system isn't over burdened? -
Posts: 1,100January 31
Deus Ex Machina said:Subjects like, history, geography and music etc. should take a back seat
to 'core' subjects, of that i have no doubt. If you wish to be a
professional in one of those subjects you'd be passionate about them,
right? Go out and learn them for yourself, there are more than enough
free resources that won't burden what is already an over burdened system.-----------------
the way that people find out what they want to do is by going into the subject to a certain extent to see if its something they want to do and the introduction to that subject is comprehensive and structured in a way that fosters excitement for those that it grabs and provides easy avenues to extend your information search
-
Posts: 3,202January 31EvertonfcNSNO said:
the way that people find out what they want to do is by going into the subject to a certain extent to see if its something they want to do and the introduction to that subject is comprehensive and structured in a way that fosters excitement for those that it grabs and provides easy avenues to extend your information search
-----------------
It doesn't need to be a core subject to be well structured though, a comprehensive introduction just needs to provide enough information to grab the attention of those that may find it their thing. It doesn't need to last X years, to the detriment of those that would be better off learning more about core subjects. -
Posts: 1,100January 31 but its the point that it takes kids a while to settle into a subject they like so its allowing for the most possibilities
-
Posts: 3,202January 31EvertonfcNSNO said:
but its the point that it takes kids a while to settle into a subject they like so its allowing for the most possibilities
-----------------
At the expense of core subjects. A decision would have to be made, is it more important for children to have a basic understanding of all subjects or a full understanding of core subjects with introductions into the rest, with the obligation being on them to follow up their interest. Personally i'd go with the latter, but luckily for Idi, i'm not in charge. -
Posts: 1,100January 31Deus Ex Machina said:
At the expense of core subjects. A decision would have to be made, is it more important for children to have a basic understanding of all subjects or a full understanding of core subjects with introductions into the rest, with the obligation being on them to follow up their interest. Personally i'd go with the latter, but luckily for Idi, i'm not in charge.
-----------------
haha fair enough ... at loggerheads
-
Posts: 2,154January 31Deus Ex Machina said:
I have to agree with sidelining the arts tbqh mate. Imo, creativity isn't taught, it's inherent. All the arts in schools do is provide an outlet for that creativity, an unnecessary and expensive outlet that should be indulged elsewhere.
If it were up to me I'd shorten the school day significantly and focus exclusively on math, the sciences and English. Everything else would be the responsibility of parents to provide. Maybe turn the current trend for free schools into a provision for the subjects not covered and parents can choose which one provides the education their child needs for their personal interpretation of a rounded education.-----------------
Ffs like, education isn't a one size fits all romper suit. Gove seems to be stuck in a world where only his own experience of education was the right way. My own education was s**t (secondary) but most would consider me well educated (I have post graduate qualifications) this does not mean mine was the right education for everyone, indeed most of my peers were failed by my school and as a result suffer as adults. Gove is a victim of the sample space problem where he considers nothing but his own position in relation to the right education, he thinks because he has done alright everyone would if they followed his model this is not true. -
Posts: 7,448January 31mikraz said:
Ffs like, education isn't a one size fits all romper suit. Gove seems to be stuck in a world where only his own experience of education was the right way. My own education was s**t (secondary) but most would consider me well educated (I have post graduate qualifications) this does not mean mine was the right education for everyone, indeed most of my peers were failed by my school and as a result suffer as adults. Gove is a victim of the sample space problem where he considers nothing but his own position in relation to the right education, he thinks because he has done alright everyone would if they followed his model this is not true.
-----------------
Tbh mate I agree with yer like, bu' I've set out me stall. Think Deus is either bein' disingenuous or incapable of followin' me argument, either way it's fruitless to continue like...
Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Forum
- All Discussions19,133
- Sport
- ↳ Everton Talk4,411
- ↳ Transfer rumours392
- ↳ General Sport470
- Non-Sport
- ↳ General Chat1,950
- ↳ Introductions36
- ↳ Competitions38
- Moderator Area
Poll
No poll attached to this discussion.In this Discussion
- blue32years January 31
- Deus Ex Machina January 31
- EvertonfcNSNO January 31
- IdiAminDaDa January 31
- mikraz January 31
- OGV January 31