About math and science

[Distracted]

Ah. So the argument men have used for years about how women are too valuable to be risked in combat is unpatriotic, is it? Hmmmm. Interesting.

[Elessar]

Ah. So the argument men have used for years about how women are too valuable to be risked in combat is unpatriotic, is it? Hmmmm. Interesting.

I've never heard this argument. If there's an official argument, I don't know what it is. There's the whole "strength" thing... but... the moment you meet a female Marine gunny... that kinda goes out the window

Btw, I'm not going to be doing technical work really...anyway... lol. But it also takes a brain to properly process the intelligence that comes off the battlefield. Ground commanders rely on intelligence officers to take in real, physical intelligence from the ground such as, "We saw ____ loading AK47's into the trunk of his car, but this guy might be PKK [a Kurdish militia allied w/ the U.S.] or he might be an insurgent. Now he is driving to a meeting place... is he an insurgent or an ally?" do you tell the ground commander that they should airstrike the area? You could possibly kill 40 allies, jeopardizing America's ability to unite rival militias, or you do nothing you might let a truckload of AKs and PKMs into the hands of insurgents, costing Marines' and soldiers' lives.

Though the media portrays the ground war as a place where only muscle meets meat, there's a head game going on too, in fact far more important if you ask me. The various assets of the Marine Corps exist to assist the infantry, but an infantry with no intelligence is just a wax museum arsenal. It's not just back in the lab that intelligence, logical intuition and critical thinking skills build a better war machine... It's also down in the mud where the artillery commander is told to fire or to hold, where the sniper is waiting to pull the trigger on an enemy or an innocent, where entire wars can be caused or won by the mistakes in judgement and comprehension. The brain is just as important on the ground as in the lab.

Btw, that stuff is basic calc. Just ask Bookworm.

[Distracted]

Hoo-rah.

But I still think you're about 200,000 times smarter than the average grunt and WAAAAY too valuable to waste. Stay safe, 'kay?

[CX]

Ah. So the argument men have used for years about how women are too valuable to be risked in combat is unpatriotic, is it? Hmmmm. Interesting.

I'm not one of those men, and yes, it is unpatriotic that women should have to fight for the right to fight for their country.

[Elessar]

Hoo-rah.

But I still think you're about 200,000 times smarter than the average grunt and WAAAAY too valuable to waste. Stay safe, 'kay?

I will, thank you

[Alelou]

Slightly off topic, but does it make any sense at all to worry about gene pools when you're talking about warring humans? Aren't we all pretty much swimming in the same gene pool?

We should worry a lot more about the quality of the schools we're educating our citizens in. I think we're letting many of our traditional enemies get ahead of us on that front. And THAT'S unpatriotic.

[Distracted]

I was very well educated. I even consider myself somewhat above average in intelligence. But the math that Elessar is capable of is totally beyond me. I'm completely incapable of comprehending calculus... and believe me, I've tried.

Education is important, don't get me wrong, but only a very small percentage of the population is capable of the type of abstract thinking necessary for higher mathematics. I have a feeling that that population is somewhat overrepresented on this site by the very nature of its subject matter, but inherited mental capacity varies. Just putting Joe Blow in a better school will not necessarily make him a genius. There IS a role, in my view, for protecting the "brain trust" of our nation. This is one reason why the wholesale abortions that go on in this country are a bone of contention for me. Moral issues aside, how much POTENTIAL are we destroying?

On the other hand, what about the urban ghettos? One of these young gang members you hear about getting murdered all the time might have been the next Einstein or Picasso in a different environment. A person's functional ability as an adult is a product of both innate intelligence and environment. Focusing entirely on one aspect of the situation is shortsighted, IMHO.

[justTripn]

Way off the topic thread, but I'm copyediting an interesting paper about the quality of education in the United States. While U.S. high school students rate at the bottom of a list of literacy performance scores for high-income countries, interestingly the the performance of US 24-year-old falls right in the middle of the pack. Great gains are made between 17 and 24, presumably because such a large proportion of U.S. students go onto college and graduate. In many countries students are tracked into vocational programs and do not have the opportunity to proceed to college.

Also in many countries were college is highly subsidized and publicly provided, the slots are also rationed--so the outcomes are not as good for the average person.



Well, that is my unofficial summary. GO USA--We're AVERAGE!!!! YES!

[blacknblue]

Education is important, don't get me wrong, but only a very small percentage of the population is capable of the type of abstract thinking necessary for higher mathematics. I have a feeling that that population is somewhat overrepresented on this site by the very nature of its subject matter, but inherited mental capacity varies. Just putting Joe Blow in a better school will not necessarily make him a genius. There IS a role, in my view, for protecting the "brain trust" of our nation.

I had planned on leaving this thread alone after my last post, because it was getting under my skin. The contention that one person could be inherently more valuable than another, for any reason... I will stop right there before I say something that I cannot take back. But I implore you to re-read and reconsider your words that I have quoted above. I cannot disagree with your position on wholesale abortion. There, we are on the same page, for much the same reasons. Nor do I deny that that everyone is inherently different. Some people are born strong, some weak, some tall, some short, etc. However, given that my father, and his father, and every male ancestor I have - as well as the vast majority of the male relatives in my family, were included in the ranks of those that were considered expendable enough to be sent to the front lines, I am not sympathetic to the idea that some people are too inherently important to risk.

[CX]

Yeah, it's kind of bothering me too, because it kind of reminds me of this incident:


Now these guys managed to make light of it, but if you can imagine one of these sand crunchers reading what you've said, how do you think they'd feel to see you or anyone else asserting that because they aren't as skilled at math or as "intelligent" as someone else, that they are inherently more expendable. This is the same reason I get upset at people asserting that women are somehow too valuable to serve in combat roles, because that also asserts that I, as a male, am less valuable and more expendable, which is just as sexist as anything else. Anyway, that's my $0.02.

[Distracted]

It was not my intention to imply that any individual is of more or less value than any other. My point was that it is inherently stupid to waste assets that would much better be employed somewhere else.

[Elessar]

Well if there's a goal to our civilization, then some people are more expendable simply because the reality is that some people won't further that goal as effectively as others. No matter what that goal is, the general population at large is not going to be homogenously useful to that end. Some people will be good at some things, others good at other things. Whether we like the idea or not it's cold hard logic.

Now, for nobody to be expendable, then there must be no overall goal to our civilization. If the overall goal to our civilization is technological perfection, then in the ends to that goal, less intelligent people are more expendable. Obviously they are not completely expendable because they're capable of other things that are peripherally necessary to technological imperfection also - it's going to sound harsh probably, but things like labor, breeding people who ARE intellectually valuable, and a number of other things. But there IS a hierarchy to usefulness if we're being honest with ourselves in the pursuit of goal X. It just depends on what the goal is. Not that I'm personally saying I think that is our goal, but we should realize and not shy away from the facts because they're emotionally inconvenient.

If the goal of our civilization is a non-warring one, then I think it's fair to say men are more expendable, because biochemically women are less aggressive.

Goal-orientedness mandates a willingness to sacrifice, and a hierarchy by which some are considered less necessary to the objective of achieving that goal than others.

[Distracted]

Why, Elessar, how tremendously logical of you.

[Elessar]

Why, Elessar, how tremendously logical of you.

Yeah, I have Vulcan phases

[Alelou]

Education is important, don't get me wrong, but only a very small percentage of the population is capable of the type of abstract thinking necessary for higher mathematics. I have a feeling that that population is somewhat overrepresented on this site by the very nature of its subject matter, but inherited mental capacity varies. Just putting Joe Blow in a better school will not necessarily make him a genius. There IS a role, in my view, for protecting the "brain trust" of our nation. This is one reason why the wholesale abortions that go on in this country are a bone of contention for me. Moral issues aside, how much POTENTIAL are we destroying?

On the other hand, what about the urban ghettos? One of these young gang members you hear about getting murdered all the time might have been the next Einstein or Picasso in a different environment. A person's functional ability as an adult is a product of both innate intelligence and environment. Focusing entirely on one aspect of the situation is shortsighted, IMHO.

This is my point. Yeah, only some people are gifted at mathematics, but a whole lot of kids in this country will never know what they are capable of because the expectations for them by their schools, their parents, and their communities are so low. It doesn't surprise me that high school kids in the US suck but at 24 they're average -- I've taught both high school and college and the big difference is that kids -- even bright kids -- can slide through to high school graduation without doing much of anything but when they get to college they're expected to actually work. And why is it so many of the scientists and engineers in this country and the students in those fields actually come from outside the country? That's something we ought to be a little more concerned about. Are we going to have to rely on immigrants for the innovation that used to fuel the American economy? What happens when high-skills immigrants decide they're just as well off staying home?

Of course, maybe I'm missing the point. Maybe this country has ALWAYS relied on immigrants or their first-generation children to fuel innovation. I remember seeing a presentation about demographics once that said the first-generation American is by far the highest achiever. By the second generation achievement starts falling back to average levels. Apparently once people are comfortably assimilated they stop pressuring their kids.