That’s …. ridiculous. No you are not producing an equal product with equal testability with an equal outcome that producing equal consequences, and importantly equal externalities.
In fact I am all but certain that if I sat your classes I would struggle to keep up with taking notes on your faults, and would produce at least one article per class that explained what you had misunderstood, misrepresented, and the consequential harms you had produced, just teaching something as trivial as literature.
And I’m all but certain each argument would consist of something that hadn’t even occurred to you, because you lacked sufficient education in cognitive science, logic, economics, and law – and that’s without touching physics, – so you were in fact teaching ideology under cover of literature. Literature the profound meaning of which is almost certainly lost upon you – because if not you would easily explain how the message conveyed related the european group evolutionary strategy and how that strategy compared to the other surviving civilizations of the world.
I know this because only someone who would make such a nonsense statement as your origional post, could do so if she was also teaching nonsense in her career, and practicing that nonsense in daily life – wholly unaware that it’s nothing but nonsense.
Here is the important question: given we know there is zero durable value to everything other than the STEM+Law series, that warrants anything other than one year of study, (and even that among stem courses there are only two to four that require four years), and given that we know that education is a high cost substitute caused by nothing mre than the prohibition on IQ testing that’s all that employers require for hiring, and training by apprenticeship (doing) rather than the universally outdated nonsense they are taught in undergrad.
And given that the endebtedness caused by wasting four years of income and career, four years of maximum intersexual relationship adaptability, delaying home ownership, delaying reproduction, and therefore producing the decline in reproduction cause almost entirely by childless women, who, because of that behavior, are not reproducing enough citizens to offset women’s consumption of seventy percdent of government services, nor ensuring there are is an economy to support them in old age, thus parasites on those that do produce families, and all while the present technolgical advancement will cause vast unemployment among white collar clericals causing what will now be called unskilled workers, whose income was only made possible for a brief period during the first three generations of democratized computing.
Are you sure you even have the vaguest idea what you are talking about, and it’s consequences? Or are you another product of the postwar academy’s combination of the false promise of endless growth, the abandonment of responsibilty for the commons, the deprioritization of the family as capitalization between generations for the individual hyperconsumption of built up behavioral and physical capital without contributing to its replacement, and the mandatory indoctrination into social pseudoscience with the consequential devolutionary influencde not seen since the Christian destruction of the Roman ampire by the same means?
Such prideful arrogance in such profound ignorance is revolting. You should never be permitted public speech, and even less so participating in the indoctrination of a generation, already the least competent, and most physically, emotionally and psychological unfit in our history.
Fin.
Reply addressees: @JessicaCalarco @epopppp