What do you hate the most?
- Thread starter John_Cage
- Start date
John_Cage said:
John, I am happy to see that you enjoyed my post so much that you quoted it in two different threads. I already responded in the other thread and I really think this exchange is becoming tiresome, but since you posted this here, I can't help but laugh at your beautiful way with words. In a post ostensibly finding fault with my writing skills, you actually saw fit to create the immortal sentence "If you want to nitpick, then two to can that game." That was - and IS - priceless, John, absolutely priceless. I rest my case.
joelcairo said:
Allow me to present to you what actually happened:
I was debating to someone else about IQ test, you joined in with some useless crap about spelling.
I don't care about spelling and rereading when I am trying to get complicated points across, but apparantly you don't understand that.
Fine, I decide to play it your way. You cared about your precious spelling and your little mistakes; yet I caught you (badly) and OWNED you at your own little game.
Fact remains that, when I write seriously, I also reread my works and perform spell checks. Anything that gets past that will be the jobs of my editors. When you tried to "correct" a writer's "writing", make sure you know enough about what you are talking about, for I deal with far tougher editors than you (on a monthly basis).
I am not going to start a debate about "spelling", since I just established that you are not someone who's qualified to mutter objections to my writing. If you have something to contribute to the actual discussion, please do so. Otherwise, do something else constructive.
To others:
I cannot believe I am actually arguing like a teenager with these people, I apologize for my lack of tact.
Intelligence and plywood
Basically, you're saying that someone claiming that tape measures are imperfect tools is also claiming that wood has a relative status of existence.
Once we took all these parameters into account and answered all the questions, have we said anything about intelligence being either innate or not? - Not a word.
My opinion, provided that I have one, is not informed enough to contribute to the advancement of cognitive science, therefore why bother? The question you're raising is far outside the realm of practicality and, therefore, should be left to specialists.John_Cage said:
I'll repeat what I wrote earlier: you're confusing intelligence with the measurement of intelligence. Someone who questions the reliability of IQ tests, doesn't necessarly question the ontological value of intelligence. The same way, a carpenter who questions the accuracy of the measurements he took, doesn't necessarly question the ontological value of plywood.John_Cage said:
Basically, you're saying that someone claiming that tape measures are imperfect tools is also claiming that wood has a relative status of existence.
Because intelligence is not the only prerequisite to perform well on IQ tests. Pass an IQ test on a day you had ten hours of sleep and pass the same test after a night of insomnia, results might differ. Motivation also comes into play: two candidates with the same maximum score potential, one really wants to do well, the other one doesn't give a damn, who do you think will score higher? Take two kids, they both have the same maximum score potential, one with a balanced diet, the other one not: how will nutritional deficiencies and toxicity identification will affect the score?John_Cage said:
Once we took all these parameters into account and answered all the questions, have we said anything about intelligence being either innate or not? - Not a word.
Certainly various forms of intelligence and various combos of parameters affecting performance including, yet not limited to, personal motivation, state of fatigue or health, nutritional factors, cultural background,gender and, yes, language skills.John_Cage said:
It can also be that she doesn't know, doesn't care, would rather explore the gray zone, is reluctant to use terminologies she's not comfortable with, like self-appointed experts often do, not understanding half of what they're repeating like parrots...John_Cage said:
Last edited:
i didnt read to much of the previous threads..the topic is "things i hate most" i beleive? i am not an intelectual. i hate that i can not figure out if people who use big words and quote things from history are smart and accurate or if they are just pompus and self indulgent.
i also kinda hate when a fat whore calls herself a reubenesque cortisian...hope i spelled those last two big words correctly?
i also kinda hate when a fat whore calls herself a reubenesque cortisian...hope i spelled those last two big words correctly?
Matter at Hand
Let's tighten this up because bandwidth is somewhat precious. Simply ontology is the study of being(from the Greek philosophers, audit a Philosophy 101 class or google and you will get the general drift).
Evaluations in general and in this case IQ have to be viewed from at least three perspectives - validity,reliability and application.PSATs are valid,reliable and applicable as part of the process for determining college or university admissions.Rather useless when choosing Sherpa guides to lead an expedition up Mt Everest.
Variables in evaluating(not parameters), some that were listed above,cannot be avoided unless all environmental factors are controlled.Argued to an extreme unless all subjects being tested were born at exactly the same time and place from the same parents, variables will always exist.
Ziggy Montana said:
Let's tighten this up because bandwidth is somewhat precious. Simply ontology is the study of being(from the Greek philosophers, audit a Philosophy 101 class or google and you will get the general drift).
Evaluations in general and in this case IQ have to be viewed from at least three perspectives - validity,reliability and application.PSATs are valid,reliable and applicable as part of the process for determining college or university admissions.Rather useless when choosing Sherpa guides to lead an expedition up Mt Everest.
Variables in evaluating(not parameters), some that were listed above,cannot be avoided unless all environmental factors are controlled.Argued to an extreme unless all subjects being tested were born at exactly the same time and place from the same parents, variables will always exist.
Si tel était vraiment le souci, il y aurait alors eu avantage à ne citer que partiellement mon commentaire.eastender said:
L'usage, depuis au moins le début du XVIIIe siècle, a fait en sorte qu'il s'est opéré un glissement sémantique. Il est d'usage aujourd'hui, dans la langue spécialisée, d'employer "valeur ontologique" (ontological value) pour désigner le statut existentiel et spécifique d'objets, animaux, concepts ou encore l'être humain. J'aviserais qu'il existe un monde de significations passé les cinq premiers résultats dans Google. Pour ne citer qu'un seul exemple, les spécialistes en évaluation économique de projets urbains emploient souvent des expressions telles que "ontologie d'objets géographiques" dans leurs publications.eastender said:
Last edited:
Marché conclu! Est-ce que je peux prendre livraison du G-string directement?traveller_76 said:This whole debate with Chomsky and Piaget is very interesting. I have not read either authors and may accept the g-string proposition if you add on two more books to your pile
Je serais enclin plutôt à les qualifier de "théoriciens des têtes vides".traveller_76 said:It reminds me of the story of the birth of 'social sciences', which your debate is a part of. I will not go into it extensively (to make a long story short...) but one of the sides did win. The behavioralists you mentionned. I call them the Empiricists
Ma question n'a qu'un rapport indirect avec ce que tu dis mais as-tu lu White Noise de Don Delillo (ok, je l'ajoute dans l'échange contre ton G-string)? Le narrateur - me souviens plus de son nom - enseignait justement Hitler dans un collège (dont j'ai oublié aussi le nom fictif)traveller_76 said:The 'study' of politics was out. Not that long a history
C'est une perception qui vaut ce qu'elle vaut, mais je crois que les cerveaux européens ont trouvé et trouvent encore, en Amérique du Nord, une niche stimulante pour laisser cours à leurs pérégrinations extra-disciplinaires.traveller_76 said:The wave hit Canada a little later in the 1960s. A new paradigm was established. Then Charles Taylor was relegated to the Philosophy department because he no longer 'belonged' in political science. I think it was 1967. The Chair at McGill's political science department cried when people in Europe and the States started calling Taylor a genius. Then he won that 1.5 million US dollar Templeton Prize. Oh well. Reminds me a saying about prophets
Michel Serres l'a dit, je me souviens, lors d'une signature de livres, qu'il avait quitté Paris pour Stanford justement parce qu'il voyait là une ouverture d'esprit que les européens, cantonnés dans leurs frontières disciplinaires, n'avaient pas.
IQ Evaluations - The Topic at Hand
Sticking to the subject at hand - IQ evaluations and not Urban Geography, the following has to be appreciated. There are a wide range of IQ evaluations available in the educational marketplace. The difficulty is not with the evaluation but with the post evaluation interpretation and application.
Suppose a standard IQ evaluation is given to a 1000 students and 10 score exactly 160. The temptation is to conclude superficially that all ten are equally intelligent.This is pointless and defeats the purpose of the evaluation. Likewise it would be pointless to debate that a certain candidate may have done better if they had more sleep, a better meal,etc. The results are what they are.
What is important is interpreting each result and applying the interpretation
to get the best possible outcome for all concerned.If all ten that scored 160 are interested in medicine then it becomes incumbent on the people in the interpretation process to determine what medical fields each is best suited for. Choosing the appropriate schools,programs, teachers,etc.
Sticking to the subject at hand - IQ evaluations and not Urban Geography, the following has to be appreciated. There are a wide range of IQ evaluations available in the educational marketplace. The difficulty is not with the evaluation but with the post evaluation interpretation and application.
Suppose a standard IQ evaluation is given to a 1000 students and 10 score exactly 160. The temptation is to conclude superficially that all ten are equally intelligent.This is pointless and defeats the purpose of the evaluation. Likewise it would be pointless to debate that a certain candidate may have done better if they had more sleep, a better meal,etc. The results are what they are.
What is important is interpreting each result and applying the interpretation
to get the best possible outcome for all concerned.If all ten that scored 160 are interested in medicine then it becomes incumbent on the people in the interpretation process to determine what medical fields each is best suited for. Choosing the appropriate schools,programs, teachers,etc.
Le sujet original n'avait rien à voir aver les tests de QI et, pourtant, c'est là qu'on a abouti. Un autre sujet qui a été abordé est celui de la valeur innée de l'intelligence. Dans ce cadre d'idées, il était pertinent de parler d'ontologie et d'en définir correctement la signification.eastender said:
At Hand..........
Never said it was the original subject nor was I trying to trace the path of the thread.
Just want to clarify certain perceptions about IQ evaluations that are independent of topics that you hold dear. Specifically the proper interpretation and application of IQ evaluations does not depend on the topics in your quote.
Ziggy Montana said:
Never said it was the original subject nor was I trying to trace the path of the thread.
Just want to clarify certain perceptions about IQ evaluations that are independent of topics that you hold dear. Specifically the proper interpretation and application of IQ evaluations does not depend on the topics in your quote.
Ultimate Democracy
Ultimate democracy. Never advocated that the students have an obligation to follow the recommendations.
Notice I distinctly stated for ALL concerned which would include the student. Unfortunately the student is often neglected in this process as schools tend to recruit the best possible students just like they recruit athletes. Interests of the students are often secondary to their ability to fit into research programs,etc.The prevailing approach is that if they don't make it in one program they will slip into another.
Knowledge is the ultimate test of democracy and the more the student knows about their capabilities and how these capabilities fit into various university programs the more democratic the system becomes.
Ziggy Montana said:
Ultimate democracy. Never advocated that the students have an obligation to follow the recommendations.
Notice I distinctly stated for ALL concerned which would include the student. Unfortunately the student is often neglected in this process as schools tend to recruit the best possible students just like they recruit athletes. Interests of the students are often secondary to their ability to fit into research programs,etc.The prevailing approach is that if they don't make it in one program they will slip into another.
Knowledge is the ultimate test of democracy and the more the student knows about their capabilities and how these capabilities fit into various university programs the more democratic the system becomes.
Monkey off his back
C'est une perception dont la contrepartie propose que l'auditeur acquiesse à tout même s'il n'y comprend que dalle, le but étant soit de ménager les susceptibilités du locuteur, soit, comme on le fait avec les singes accrochés à notre cou, de s'en débarrasser.eastender said:
Last edited:
À qui appartient le choix?
En Russie communiste, très différemment, évaluateurs, professeurs, orientateurs, etc., prenaient sur eux le choix qui, en démocratie, reviendrait à l'étudiant, ce dernier y ayant peu ou pas à dire.
Très différent.
eastender said:
La proximité syntaxique de "choosing" et des sujets qui s'y rapportent suggère que tous les participants sont parties prenantes du choix. Or, en démocratie, celui-ci appartient ultimement à l'étudiant, les autres participants - évaluateurs, professeurs, orientateurs, etc. - remplissant chacun des rôles visant à créer un environnement qui permet à l'étudiant de faire des "choix éclairés".eastender said:
En Russie communiste, très différemment, évaluateurs, professeurs, orientateurs, etc., prenaient sur eux le choix qui, en démocratie, reviendrait à l'étudiant, ce dernier y ayant peu ou pas à dire.
Très différent.
Last edited:
Similar threads
