Test

This is a test to see if another author can write on my blog.  By the way, is there a limit to how many authors can be on a single blog?

Advertisements

Teaching

Many of today’s teachers aren’t very good at teaching.  The reasons I see are

1.  They don’t completely understand the material they are teaching.

2.  They can’t interest students into the material.

3.  They discourage questions.

4.  They don’t understand what problems the students are having or don’t address them.

5.  They don’t get the students’ respect.

If you’re going to be a teacher, you had better understand what you’re teaching.  If you don’t understand what you’re teaching, how can you expect the students to understand?  For example, my science teacher had a basic understanding  of physical science or whatever basic physics is called, but she really knew nothing about anything that slightly deviated from the course.  Many times when a question was asked, she said something to the tune of, “Well now you’re getting into the real complex stuff.  We’re just giving the basics.”  The problem with that was most questions weren’t even close to complex.  Also, why can’t you get into complex stuff.  If students don’t understand it there’s no harm done and there was no time constraint (at least at the moment).

Many students just aren’t interested in learning.  Even though I was in a gifted class filled with nerds, there was still people that just swallowed up information without thinking about and just memorizing it.  When people do that they don’t truly understand what their learning, and they can’t apply what they learn to future uses.

While most teachers say you should always ask questions, many teachers answer questions with ridicule or anger.  If a student still doesn’t understand something they just get angry and frustrated, which leads students to stop asking questions.

Let them eat cake and all.   Teachers often don’t understand the problems of students.  This partly has to do with the the lack of communication because of discouraging questions.  Some teachers don’t even address there is a problem simply by giving extra credit or making tests easier.  One reason might just be because they don’t care about children’s education and just about getting paid.

If students don’t respect a teacher, they won’t listen to him.  Although the respect of some smarmy adolescent is hardly something that’s worth working for, it is necessary to have if a teacher plans on teaching them something.  If a teacher is considered a bad teacher by the mob of children’s standards, nobody’s going to learn anything.  It’s not about the quality of teaching, but about how cool a teacher is.  Then again, who cares about people who are going to base teaching on how much fun they have.

God Particle and Large Hadron Collider

Well, apparently the Large Hadron Collider will finish it’s research on the Higgs Boson.  Of course this will tell whether or not the Higgs Boson particle exists, but that’s not what I want to write about.  Of course this will be a monumental milestone in theoretical physics, but there there really isn’t much room to have an opinion besides believing that there will be a God particle and there isn’t a God particle, which won’t matter in a couple of months.

Before this announcement, the research was supposed to happen near the end of 2012.  That would have been too perfect.  We take fools that believe that the world’s going to end in 2012, and then we tell them we’re going to finish using a city sized machine that creates black holes and smashes atoms at the speed of light.  That would have been so wonderful.  Of course that’s not a real reason to post-pone the end date, but what a spectacle that would have been.

Do groups that encourage nonconformity and disagreement function better than those that discourage it?

How do you define functioning better?  If it just means work together better, groups that conform obviously would have more similar ideas and come to conclusions unanimously.  Groups that encourage nonconformity would have the benefit of having mixed opinions and come to a conclusion, but that conclusion would probably be some mamby pamby compromised decision that doesn’t have much of an effect.  That doesn’t necessarily mean that decision’s worse than the conformed decision.  If a conforming group decides that all people with black hair should be killed, and  a nonconforming group argue and decide all people with black hair will only get their hair cut, obviously the nonconforming group has a better decision.  In the end it all comes down to the groups’ people’s intelligence and beliefs.  Whenever dealing with beliefs, you can’t accurately judge whether or not a belief is a good belief or not, because you are being influenced by your own beliefs which could be wrong, so how well a group functions really depends on the beliefs of the person judging them.

“The price of greatness is responsibility.” -Winston Churchill

This quote reminds me of this analogy.  There are two people.  One is a mass murderer that kills a million people.  The other has done nothing, but if he presses a button one million people’s lives are saved, yet he doesn’t press it.  Are these two people equally immoral?

If we look at Spider-man, Peter Parker gains great power after he gets bitten by the irradiated spider.  Is Peter more obligated to good things than any average teenager? Not really.  Just because he could do so much more good than an average teenager doesn’t mean he is being immoral by not doing more good actions than a normal teen.  Should he be doing more good deeds?  Absolutely, but technically he is not doing anything wrong by taking the route of inaction.

If we look back at the analogy, the man with the button technically isn’t doing anything immoral by not doing anything.  He just got into a situation with great power.  Should he have pressed the button?  Yes, but to do so he would have to inflict harm onto himself.  Of course in this analogy the harm is extremely little, it’s just having to burn a couple calories to press a button, but int he case of Peter Parker, he would have to spend his own time, put his own life in danger, and put the people near him’s life in danger.

You could also look at it in terms of a transaction.  Is saving a million lives worth burning a few calories and a couple seconds?  You may say yes, but it isn’t your call.  If the person with the button says no, he isn’t obligated to save those lives.  If Peter Parker doesn’t think his time and safety is worth defeating a villain, that’s his call.

Still, if society does not agree with their decision, society will judge them for their decision.  If people don’t like how Spider-man won’t risk his life for others, people will hate Spider-man, so in a way, responsibility is the price of greatness.

Republican party and 2012 Election

I recently read an article about two G.O.P presidential candidates, Rick Perry and Mitt Romney.  It starts with a quote by another fellow G.O.P. candidate Jon Huntsman Jr.  about how the Republican party is becoming the “anti-science party”.   It goes on to basically say Rick Perry is stupid and Mitt Romney isn’t quite as stupid but is too much of a pussy to tell voters his true beliefs.  I took this opportunity to take a look at all the presidential candidates planning to run in 2012.  I thought it was very surprising to find candidate such as Fred Karger.  Fred Karger is an openly Jewish and gay Republican.  At least he has the insight to run in the Independent party.  It’s also funny how there are somewhere around 15 candidates for the Republican spot, but there are only 2 candidates for the Democratic seat.  The only person besides Obama is a pro-life, anti LBGT, recently changed to the Democratic party in 2011 man who has been arrested 40 times.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/29/opinion/republicans-against-science.html?_r=1&src=ISMR_HP_LO_MST_FB