Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[kingfisher1112]

Yes, but in general these are used to kill people with greater efficiency, not to better humanity.

Yes, but it does trickle down, and the competition of an arms race is much better than that of a space race. One, prestige is at stake, the other, hundreds of thousands of lives.
Oh yes, maybe we should have another space race! Drives forward public support of NASA funding among other benefits.

[Loud Whispers]

Not art

Art is an expression of ethics, emotions. It's not something that can be taught. However, meddling in early ethical development can lead to problems. I.E, what if a socialist teacher was to show only protest art to a class? Shape their future political views?

It's possible, but that's why parents should get involved to make sure the trust invested in a teacher is well spent and teachers should be trained and screened to be teachers, not shills. If you're not going to take the chance to better the next generation for fear that someone's going to abuse the system somewhere no matter what, you're declaring the venture forfeit without actually viewing its merits.

No comment, as I sit in my picturesque house surrounded by a city of brutalist, renaissance and post-modern architecture. A POX ON YOU
But seriously, you're wrong on this one for the lesser reasons.

Dirty peasant. Surrealism is where it's at. Melting Big Ben at twelve bong? Wonderful.

Actually, I would disagree. Due to indoctrination by socialist art teachers...

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I DECLARE MIGHT OF SOVIET REALISM SUPREME

Here I was saying simply how the schoolyard, socialising, all that can do wanders for those two attributes.

True enough. Art for empathy's really just an additional benefit, not a basis for implementation.

Ideas are easy, expressing them can sometimes take some help. What should teachers be able to do?

That's the thing. I don't know. Maybe a centralised curriculum from some art authority to prevent government meddling.

Like a board of education founded by teachers? That'd be how I would do it, at least from the start.

Not a lot more. They accomplished incredible things, but they can't just " More tanks! More troops!" They could make lots of incredible things, but just not really incredible things.

NASA has sent a rover where?
The only reason why a spacebot harvesting minerals with lasers seems normal is because NASA has made it seem normal to us. They're really underfunded.

Yes, but in general these are used to kill people with greater efficiency, not to better humanity.

Technology sought after to better kill humanity will also result in technology sought after to better counter the technology used to kill humanity. Arms races result in leaps of innovation and applied technology.
Generally R&D is an area of institutions that I would put as much as would be sensible into, no matter if it be say; medical or military. To say all military R&D is for killing is a massive overstatement, a lot of this stuff will end up in the civilian markets and a lot of our survival orientated tech. comes from guys with guns, glasses and labcoats.

[kingfisher1112]

I agree with most of the stuff you posted. I still think that politically charged areas of education should be watched over by external authorities on that subject. I had a brainwashing teacher once. I'm glad I actually began reading up on stuff and learned what she was saying was completely false.

I also think NASA is underfunded, and that it really has no short term goals. It got the wow factor of the rover, the question is now where to next? I reckon helium mining on the moon.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

I also think NASA is underfunded, and that it really has no short term goals. It got the wow factor of the rover, the question is now where to next? I reckon helium mining on the moon.

Well, I'm glad to see you're so well informed on NASA mission specs. The rover is not for wow factor. The rover is for the collection of vital data concerning the geological and meteorological status of Mars, data that it would be fortunate to know before sending anybody living there. Radiation levels, pressure and temperature changes, present materials, what it would take to keep a human alive on the red planet.

We aren't even close to helium mining the moon. That's going to take multiple manned and unmanned missions before even being on the radar. Got to go back to the moon, got to survey for H3 deposits, got to have the tech on Earth for that to even be useful to us, got to set up at least a semi-permanent settlement, got to have advanced enough autonomous processors to extract the H3, probably got to have a rail driver on the surface of the Moon to launch that shit to Earth, probably got to have better orbital infrastructure in order to ease the Moon-Earth transition.

Then, if nothing goes wrong, you can go mine helium on the moon.

[scriver]

My head is now firmly being hit against my desk. I am sorry, but I disagree so very strongly with so much of that last post, I dont even know how to begin wording a rebuttal.

Please do actually word a response other than " LOLO I'M HEADESKING"

Let me try then. Art, as in the creation of music, sculpture, painting, poetry and literature, has been humanities means of comminicating its desires, fears, thoughts feelings and emotions through the ages - from cave paintings up to bisected sharks in formaldehyde. Art tells a story of the place it was made and who by. As a scientist I dont claim to understand art or the process by which it is made, but I understand its purpose and benefits. Art allows for the establishment of cultural identites and practices, and the exchange of these ideas through the medium by which works are created. Art spills over into science, enigeering and the media. Things like the traits you claim need no fostering in this manner are not inherent properties of humanity - they are fostered and tought by the community an individual finds themselves in, fostered by both the people the interact with and the substance of thier society - its works of art, its pop music, its buildings, its myths and legends. Its morals. Should an individual find that they fit with what they are exposed to, then fab. If they dont, then by giving them a footing in these schools of thought allows them to identify why they do not, and to go off and find a sector where they do or to go create thier own identity. Ethics are not set in stone rules. They are guidelines as to decide how to think, and are as artificial a construct as a bridge. People will not know how to choose to act right if they can not identify what is right and wrong. Every young person deserves to be exposed to a range of science, art, music, engineering, math, sport in order to appreciate humanity, and to decide what is best for them. This is a rambling collection of ideas that I have not put much time into, and I am typing on the fly as I think, but I think my feelings are clear.

It is a very good summation of why art is a cornerstone in society, though. A shame kingfisher decided to just ignore it.

Oh, and the three things most likely to keep young people out of crime? Sports, music, and art.

[MonkeyHead]

The trouble with any body overseeing education is that it inevitably ends up under pressure from political bodies looking to manpulate education for its own ends - OFSTEAD in the UK is a good recent example.

[kingfisher1112]

But it is equally for wow factor. Guess what? Walk up to a regular guy on the street. Ask him about NASA's recent accomplishments. He wouldn't know a thing. The rover is something iconic, something that's memorable. Like the moon landing. It's special. It was a dual-purpose PR and info-collection mission.

The trouble with any body overseeing education is that it inevitably ends up under pressure from political bodies looking to manpulate education for its own ends - OFSTEAD in the UK is a good recent example.

Yes, but the same goes with government. It's constantly under more push and pull, more so than an external body.

My head is now firmly being hit against my desk. I am sorry, but I disagree so very strongly with so much of that last post, I dont even know how to begin wording a rebuttal.

Please do actually word a response other than " LOLO I'M HEADESKING"

Let me try then. Art, as in the creation of music, sculpture, painting, poetry and literature, has been humanities means of comminicating its desires, fears, thoughts feelings and emotions through the ages - from cave paintings up to bisected sharks in formaldehyde. Art tells a story of the place it was made and who by. As a scientist I dont claim to understand art or the process by which it is made, but I understand its purpose and benefits. Art allows for the establishment of cultural identites and practices, and the exchange of these ideas through the medium by which works are created. Art spills over into science, enigeering and the media. Things like the traits you claim need no fostering in this manner are not inherent properties of humanity - they are fostered and tought by the community an individual finds themselves in, fostered by both the people the interact with and the substance of thier society - its works of art, its pop music, its buildings, its myths and legends. Its morals. Should an individual find that they fit with what they are exposed to, then fab. If they dont, then by giving them a footing in these schools of thought allows them to identify why they do not, and to go off and find a sector where they do or to go create thier own identity. Ethics are not set in stone rules. They are guidelines as to decide how to think, and are as artificial a construct as a bridge. People will not know how to choose to act right if they can not identify what is right and wrong. Every young person deserves to be exposed to a range of science, art, music, engineering, math, sport in order to appreciate humanity, and to decide what is best for them. This is a rambling collection of ideas that I have not put much time into, and I am typing on the fly as I think, but I think my feelings are clear.

It is a very good summation of why art is a cornerstone in society, though. A shame kingfisher decided to just ignore it.

Oh, and the three things most likely to keep young people out of crime? Sports, music, and art.

I know art is important. Not as important as " the big 4" History/geography, maths, English, and science. I'm not saying that we should abolish all art ever, but just better regulate art education. I didn't need a lengthy explanation as to why art is important. Again, I'm an art student, I know it is important.

Also, ignore all my posts on the matter because hypocrisy doesn't apply to you.

[Loud Whispers]

The trouble with any body overseeing education is that it inevitably ends up under pressure from political bodies looking to manpulate education for its own ends - OFSTEAD in the UK is a good recent example.

Yes, but the same goes with government. It's constantly under more push and pull, more so than an external body.

Right. It's also a whole mass better than not having any overseeing body to ensure corruption isn't abound, manipulation isn't occurring and cheating isn't rife.

[BerenErchamion]

But it is equally for wow factor. Guess what? Walk up to a regular guy on the street. Ask him about NASA's recent accomplishments. He wouldn't know a thing. The rover is something iconic, something that's memorable. Like the moon landing. It's special. It was a dual-purpose PR and info-collection mission.

The trouble with any body overseeing education is that it inevitably ends up under pressure from political bodies looking to manpulate education for its own ends - OFSTEAD in the UK is a good recent example.

Yes, but the same goes with government. It's constantly under more push and pull, more so than an external body.

My head is now firmly being hit against my desk. I am sorry, but I disagree so very strongly with so much of that last post, I dont even know how to begin wording a rebuttal.

Please do actually word a response other than " LOLO I'M HEADESKING"

Let me try then. Art, as in the creation of music, sculpture, painting, poetry and literature, has been humanities means of comminicating its desires, fears, thoughts feelings and emotions through the ages - from cave paintings up to bisected sharks in formaldehyde. Art tells a story of the place it was made and who by. As a scientist I dont claim to understand art or the process by which it is made, but I understand its purpose and benefits. Art allows for the establishment of cultural identites and practices, and the exchange of these ideas through the medium by which works are created. Art spills over into science, enigeering and the media. Things like the traits you claim need no fostering in this manner are not inherent properties of humanity - they are fostered and tought by the community an individual finds themselves in, fostered by both the people the interact with and the substance of thier society - its works of art, its pop music, its buildings, its myths and legends. Its morals. Should an individual find that they fit with what they are exposed to, then fab. If they dont, then by giving them a footing in these schools of thought allows them to identify why they do not, and to go off and find a sector where they do or to go create thier own identity. Ethics are not set in stone rules. They are guidelines as to decide how to think, and are as artificial a construct as a bridge. People will not know how to choose to act right if they can not identify what is right and wrong. Every young person deserves to be exposed to a range of science, art, music, engineering, math, sport in order to appreciate humanity, and to decide what is best for them. This is a rambling collection of ideas that I have not put much time into, and I am typing on the fly as I think, but I think my feelings are clear.

It is a very good summation of why art is a cornerstone in society, though. A shame kingfisher decided to just ignore it.

Oh, and the three things most likely to keep young people out of crime? Sports, music, and art.

I know art is important. Not as important as " the big 4" History/geography, maths, English, and science.

Sure it is.

At the end of the day, after all, everything is subordinate to human development.  If anything, artistic expression is one of the products of human development--so, if anything, those "big 4" are merely subordinate to art.

[kingfisher1112]

But it is equally for wow factor. Guess what? Walk up to a regular guy on the street. Ask him about NASA's recent accomplishments. He wouldn't know a thing. The rover is something iconic, something that's memorable. Like the moon landing. It's special. It was a dual-purpose PR and info-collection mission.

The trouble with any body overseeing education is that it inevitably ends up under pressure from political bodies looking to manpulate education for its own ends - OFSTEAD in the UK is a good recent example.

Yes, but the same goes with government. It's constantly under more push and pull, more so than an external body.

My head is now firmly being hit against my desk. I am sorry, but I disagree so very strongly with so much of that last post, I dont even know how to begin wording a rebuttal.

Please do actually word a response other than " LOLO I'M HEADESKING"

Let me try then. Art, as in the creation of music, sculpture, painting, poetry and literature, has been humanities means of comminicating its desires, fears, thoughts feelings and emotions through the ages - from cave paintings up to bisected sharks in formaldehyde. Art tells a story of the place it was made and who by. As a scientist I dont claim to understand art or the process by which it is made, but I understand its purpose and benefits. Art allows for the establishment of cultural identites and practices, and the exchange of these ideas through the medium by which works are created. Art spills over into science, enigeering and the media. Things like the traits you claim need no fostering in this manner are not inherent properties of humanity - they are fostered and tought by the community an individual finds themselves in, fostered by both the people the interact with and the substance of thier society - its works of art, its pop music, its buildings, its myths and legends. Its morals. Should an individual find that they fit with what they are exposed to, then fab. If they dont, then by giving them a footing in these schools of thought allows them to identify why they do not, and to go off and find a sector where they do or to go create thier own identity. Ethics are not set in stone rules. They are guidelines as to decide how to think, and are as artificial a construct as a bridge. People will not know how to choose to act right if they can not identify what is right and wrong. Every young person deserves to be exposed to a range of science, art, music, engineering, math, sport in order to appreciate humanity, and to decide what is best for them. This is a rambling collection of ideas that I have not put much time into, and I am typing on the fly as I think, but I think my feelings are clear.

It is a very good summation of why art is a cornerstone in society, though. A shame kingfisher decided to just ignore it.

Oh, and the three things most likely to keep young people out of crime? Sports, music, and art.

I know art is important. Not as important as " the big 4" History/geography, maths, English, and science.

Sure it is.

At the end of the day, after all, everything is subordinate to human development.  If anything, artistic expression is one of the products of human development--so, if anything, those "big 4" are merely subordinate to art.

But isn't science a product of human development? Isn't literature? Or history?

[kaijyuu]

I know art is important. Not as important as " the big 4" History/geography, maths, English, and science.

I presume you meant "language" instead of "English", 'cause holy crap ethnocentrism otherwise.

[10ebbor10]

[Quotesnip please]

Besides, it's not like you can't use any of these big four for indoctrination...
It's probably easier, as few people expect it.

I know art is important. Not as important as " the big 4" History/geography, maths, English, and science.

I presume you meant "language" instead of "English", 'cause holy crap ethnocentrism otherwise.

This arts tangent is a result of an US military debate, so ...

[Vector]

You definitely can't indoctrinate through history.

[Dutchling]

You definitely can't indoctrinate through history.

Math, on the other hand...

[Vector]

You certainly can't use math as a vehicle to explain why various races or genders are inferior, since math is the highest intellectual creation of our species and Certain People just can't hack it.