Theme: Education

  • (OVER EDUCATED, UNDER EMPLOYED) About 1/4 to 1/3 of people are overeducated for

    http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2013/10/a_primer_on_mal.htmlMAL-EMPLOYMENT (OVER EDUCATED, UNDER EMPLOYED)

    About 1/4 to 1/3 of people are overeducated for their positions.(weighted toward the social sciences).

    But over-education only applies to College Level Occupations. Low and semi skilled workers are not sufficiently educated (as are germans because of their apprenticeship approach to education.)

    American society envisions that everyone can join the middle class; that education is not job preparation, but indoctrination in the cult of democracy. And that we are all capable of learning independently. All three of these assumptions are empirically and logically false.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-03 03:22:00 UTC

  • We dont need another way of thinking. We cant convince anyone to adopt it. We do

    We dont need another way of thinking. We cant convince anyone to adopt it. We dont need a new religion or belief.

    What we need is to understand why our beliefs, ways of thinking, and institutions failed to survive the extension of the franchise, and what to do about it now that they have failed.

    We cannot turn back the clock. Nor is the absurdity of the progressive fantasy either possible or survivable.

    It appears possible to reform our institutions by impending systemic collapse, or by outright insurrection.

    But it is clear that the majority favors feudal equality over entrepreneurial freedom. Numbers tell us that they do.

    So if we are to have freedom and they equality without one side conquering the other then we must sever our relations into multiple states or develop an alternative to majority monopoly rule.

    Given the value of scale in an insurer of last resort, and the virtue of a multiplicity of city states. And given the economic opportunity and cultural freedom that secession creates for each state, it may be possible to design a compromise solution which serves the moral differences and financial commonalities if each given modern technology.

    It would take a few years to implement but that time would permit demographic adjustment as well as the dismantlement of the federal monopoly, and the possibility if the solution would give vent to what is now leading to civil war.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-09-28 14:47:00 UTC

  • DISASTER OF POSTMODERNISM: TOTALITARIAN HUMANISM “Diagnoses of the malaise of th

    http://berlinbooks.org/brb/2013/09/the-humanities-are-not-your-enemy/THE DISASTER OF POSTMODERNISM: TOTALITARIAN HUMANISM

    “Diagnoses of the malaise of the humanities rightly point to anti-intellectual trends in our culture and to the commercialization of our universities. But an honest appraisal would have to acknowledge that some of the damage is self-inflicted. The humanities have yet to recover from the disaster of postmodernism, with its defiant obscurantism, dogmatic relativism, and suffocating political correctness. And they have failed to define a progressive agenda.”


    Source date (UTC): 2013-09-24 12:50:00 UTC

  • Untitled

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/05/opinion/sunday/raising-successful-children.html?pagewanted=all


    Source date (UTC): 2013-09-17 01:06:00 UTC

  • SPEAK IN A MANNER COMPREHENSIBLE TO THE COMMON PEOPLE “To speak in a manner inte

    SPEAK IN A MANNER COMPREHENSIBLE TO THE COMMON PEOPLE

    “To speak in a manner intelligible to the multitude, and to comply with every general custom that does not hinder the attainment of our purpose. For we can gain from the multitude no small advantages, provided that we strive to accommodate ourselves to its understanding as far as possible: moreover, we shall in this way gain a friendly audience for the reception of the truth.”

    – Baruch Spinoza

    He could have put a footnote in there about how damned hard it is. šŸ™‚


    Source date (UTC): 2013-09-08 13:24:00 UTC

  • SOFT SKILLS You know, I’m really proud of our “Skills” system. ( I suppose I cou

    SOFT SKILLS

    You know, I’m really proud of our “Skills” system. ( I suppose I could turn it into a personality-type system with the right questions. šŸ™‚

    We break skills into: 1) like/dislike (equally weighted), 2) soft (equally weighted), 3) hard (weighted) and 4) ‘Desirable’ (a multiplier for the skills a service company weighs most highly).

    So, I was trying to explain the weights to everyone. And I said, think of hard skills this way: for us OO Javascript is probably the most valuable hard skill. Say, desirability 10. Php is less scarce, so it’s say an 8. Unix a 7. SQL a 6, and cobol, say, 0.

    Likewise there are soft skills. In this company, I think it’s an asset to be short. Why? Do you really have to ask? THere are important soft skills like politeness and ability to dress one’s self. And those are just normal things. They don’t need to have a multiplier, but you need to have them. Say, given my incompetence with Russian, speaking English is worth a multiplier of say 5.

    Then we have say, extremely important soft skills like: “Likes Nirvana”, “Drinks Hoegaarden”, “Buys beer for co-workers”, and “Attracts really hot girls” to our table. Now, these are seriously valuable soft skills that significantly contribute to workplace performance, in immeasurable ways.

    They laughed. It was fun. The feature is awesome tho. ‘Cause you could actually do it. And more. I get to tell travel around the world with Max Romanenko telling clients similar silly nonsense for a living. šŸ™‚


    Source date (UTC): 2013-09-05 07:48:00 UTC

  • AUTISM AND THINKING vs LEARNING AND EXPERIENCING I watched a video today about s

    AUTISM AND THINKING vs LEARNING AND EXPERIENCING

    I watched a video today about some young boy with autism who is an early entrant to college. His basic point is that learning isn’t the same as thinking. And if you’re motivated to think, then structured learning is really just an obstacle that gets in the way of your thinking.

    When I tell people “I learned everything on my own. School and university were just excuses to be around people, in a social environment. I didn’t learn anything in the classes, I learned everything from books.” They look at me with disbelief.

    But it’s true.

    I would go to the bookstore. Pick the classes with the books I liked. Read them. Vaguely listen in class. The ‘order’ of the classroom and the speech pattern of the teacher or professor is extremely relaxing, and until I got older and learned how to control it, the overstimulation in less organized environments was incredibly painful.

    Simple places like stores were really troublesome because, I sort of have this stress reaction when I overhear people talk about anything that is actually hurtful for them to believe. I feel like I have to save them. (Really.) So if I’m stressed I can’t go to a Costco for example. But if I bring a pair of headphones and book on tape about something that’s fairly logical then I can do it. Same way that other people use music for feedback. Music doesn’t do it for me. Only if I’m driving, and there aren’t other stimuli out there.

    I don’t really ‘work’ at anything in the tradition sense. If I just expose myself to information and my head does all the work for me. It’s like this big steam operated machine that just wants to work on problems as hard as it can or it’s annoyed and will just pick one at random. So I have to pick problems for it that are interesting. Work isn’t hard for me. It’s calming actually. But I can only handle one or two problems at a time.

    Now, it’s not a complicated concept to deal with really. If you shut down the sense of self, and shut down empathy, you still have this brain that wants chemical stimulation, but there are fewer ways of getting those chemical psychic rewards. So your brain sort of learns to specialize in the activities that give it reward. And practice makes perfect in almost everything. So you pretty rapidly get good at what you focus on: your sensory experiences in the case of normals, or gathering information in the case of people like me.

    Of course, the world is a different place now and medicine is farther along. Fifteen years ago they didn’t know what to do with me. “Curt, you have some strange obsessive focus, and we don’t have a name for it.” Even during my divorce in 08, my wife’s psychologist said ‘there is no such diagnosis’. Which, I found a really strange and meaningless thing to say, given that I got that diagnosis from one of the top three of four researchers in the field who had worked with me for years, and used me in experiments, and I was talking to some guy who counsels divorcees.

    Today a doctor takes ten minutes to say that I very mild ASD. Certain patterns are extremely fascinating and I cant let go of them. I can still jump in and out of my head, and still empathize with spoken emotions, and still read body language even if I have trouble with faces, subtle emotions, and my emotional vocabulary is smaller – and my humor more limited. I imagine for those Aspies who have it worse than I do, that they cannot reconnect with the world at all. At least for me, if I work at it, and practice, I can.

    I love people. They make no sense some of the time. Whey they are too illogical it makes me very anxious. Because I can’t save them – and they don’t want to be saved either. šŸ™‚ But I just love them. I love human beings. All of them. (Pretty common attitude for Aspies really.)

    Funny thing I like to share, is that vey educated people often have very substantial errors in their thinking that astounds me. It’s actually emotionally safer to spend time either with engineers and other very logical people, or sort of lower middle class folk, that just talk about life experiences, than their more educated peers who make catastrophic errors on a minute by minute basis.

    I still run into people that are fascinated by my sort of talents (which you really have to experience in person apparently to grasp). But I tell them “Actually, it sucks to be me. Childhood was very difficult. Adulthood is only marginally easier. And I’m only happy because I figured it all out myself – even if too late in life. So I wouldn’t wish this on anyone.

    You might want to live in a world that has us in it. We do amazing things really. But you don’t want to be one of us. We’re just a different kind of ant, a human specialization, that randomly shows up in the population and does a specific thing, so that the rest of humanity can go on without us.

    What I appreciate these days is the ability to talk about it without the pointed finger of leprosy. But I don’t. I just tell people that “eh… I’m a mild aspie. we are fascinated by shiny things.” And I laugh. Or I say “If I get too detailed with this topic its ok to tell me to shut up.” Or if someone asks me a question I say “do you really want to know, because I’ll tell you”. These are all devices that ask other people whether they want the aspie version of something or not. I just assume that they dont want it. And that works. ‘Cause otherwise you’re basically telling people that they’re stupid. (Really.) And then if you say you’re an aspie they kind of think it’s cute, and don’t get offended. You just can’t get too obsessed about the topic.

    Aspies are generally very nice. We seem to retain our childish charm longer, because really, we’re childish inside. Life has been a bit cruel and hard on me so that child has a more pragmatic instinct and the competitive part of me is a bit scary to others at times. But his joy at interacting with others is still easily excited.

    And the fact of the matter is, that if you are just nice to everyone you meet, don’t demand anything from them. And listen for and make use of, any opportunity to help them or compliment them, then in general, people will love you. You gotta give to get. And love is only as scarce as the time we have to give it.

    I smile a lot. I laugh a lot. And care about people. I try to be generous. And that’s about all of us really need from each other to make the world a wonderful place to live in. šŸ™‚

    Cheers


    Source date (UTC): 2013-09-01 14:01:00 UTC

  • WHY NOT BASIC ECONOMICS IN THE CORE? (Re-posted from elsewhere) You know, math a

    WHY NOT BASIC ECONOMICS IN THE CORE?

    (Re-posted from elsewhere)

    You know, math and economics can be taught as very simple stories. As narratives. Why you can get out of school reading Chaucer, but not knowing how to balance a checkbook, the power of compound interest, the basic currency system, and simple macro economics, is just …. completely beyond me. It’s like, they want us to be ignorant. (And no. I don’t mean that. I’m not a conspiracy nut. I just think it’s ideological not practical.) This stuff isn’t magic. The narrative doesn’t even require algebra. You can draw it as pictures without numbers. We’re all slaves to this system and all but a few of us are ignorant of it.

    It’s freaking criminal.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-08-29 13:51:00 UTC

  • insight: “I’m here to bat for the economics discipline. Although John Q is clear

    http://crookedtimber.org/2013/08/18/krugman-keynes-kalecki-konczal1/comment-page-1/#comment-478854Anonymous insight:

    “I’m here to bat for the economics discipline. Although John Q is clearly a card-carrying member, I doubt he’d dispute that he is far in the tail of the distribution of economists’ opinions. I don’t attribute this to anything underhanded on his part, but rather to reasonable disagreement. (I hope he’ll extend the same courtesy to me.)

    Endorsement of Kalecki’s argument (which he got via Konczal) that ā€œhatred for Keynesian economics has less to do with the notion that unemployment isn’t a proper subject of policy than about the notion of shifting power over the economy’s destiny away from big business and toward elected officials.ā€

    The ā€œhatredā€ with Keynesianism among economists I know isn’t anything to do with political bias. Consider the simple multiplier idea, that people spend some fraction (the marginal propensity to consume, MPC, e.g. 0.8) of their income each year. Taken literally, this implies that lottery winners will spend 80% of their winnings within the next 12 months. On a more general (and relevant) note, the Keynesian approach does match the empirical evidence on consumption patterns at all. Friedman’s Permanent Income Hypothesis is far more in line with the data, albeit that the perfectly rational expectations idea is clearly much too strong. So you try and mix the two, and you get something like New Keynesian or behavioral macro. That’s where 90% of macro has gone for the past twenty years. There is no hatred of Keynes, and no politics in that.

    Abandonment of the idea that the economics profession is engaged in honest intellectual debate, in favor of the conclusion that the rightwing of the profession, including leading economists, is characterized by denialism and bad faith.

    Krugman’s portrayal of the economics profession as malevolent political hacks (be it claiming that the move from Keynesianism was politically motivated, or the outrageous suggestion that Reinhart and Rogoff actively behaved dishonestly with their data) is the clearest example of bad faith that I can see.”


    Source date (UTC): 2013-08-19 03:10:00 UTC

  • Untitled

    http://mises.org/document/6995/Why-American-History-Is-Not-What-They-Say


    Source date (UTC): 2013-08-15 05:09:00 UTC