homeGeek CultureWebstoreeCards!Forums!Joy of Tech!AY2K!webcam

The Geek Culture Forums!


  New Poll  
my profile | directory login | | search | faq | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Geek Culture Forums!   » The Archives   » The Big Archives   » Convert me, i want to see the light! (Page 2)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!  
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2 
 
Author Topic: Convert me, i want to see the light!
Elvermere
Geek
Member # 2456

Member Rated:
2
Icon 1 posted December 02, 2003 20:40      Profile for Elvermere     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Geez, I'm only new and I sound like an evangalist! Please don't mistake my zeal for religion or the scientification of religion, that's not my aim.

Spoongirl, I think that it's probably the school that is to blame (like several of the other posters) if not the teacher. But please believe me when I say that school is not about teaching you science. It's about forcing you to memorise facts in anticipation of a test/exam. It's about getting you to regurge predefined and existing knowledge on paper; and you get bonus marks if you can do it word for word. In addition, this is across pretty much all subjects, not just science.

[Please note that I am not bitter at all.....NOOOOOO and never ever EVER sarcastic] [Big Grin]

I'll give a bit of my history as well. I was a pretty indifferent learner. Yes, I did physics, chemistry and computing at school. Didn't learn a whole lot, but managed to memorise enough to get through to uni. There I did Biological Science (very Multidisciplinary) and thoroughly enjoyed it. Very practical, very investigative and you were expected to think about problems. Graduated and have been working since. Still didn't get into the true kernel (pun intended) of what science was. I was forced to go back and start my Masters in Environmental Management to do that.

During this we discussed more about politics, sociology and philosophy than science. Why? Because it's all interelated. This is something that schools miss, and even most undergrad courses miss. This is the reason why science is a way of thinking, at not purely subjects.

If you want a bit of a different perspective on science, try hunting for some books with the Dalai Lama. I haven't got the title of the one that I just read, but it featured the DL with a bunch of scientists. Links meditation with modern Psychology very intriguingly.

But to understand this I then had to go and do some background reading, otherwise I wouldn't have got the full understanding of the book. Yes, it was back to the textbooks and facts to gain the understanding.

I do appreciate your view about science though. My wife was/is similar. She's the one about to go and do her doctorate in literature. That's why, at a high enough level, it all becomes research and subjects become an arbitary line in learning.

Geez, talk about a long one for a second post.

I'll be quiet now and go back to lurking [Wink]

Cheers

--------------------
Duct Tape is like the force.
It has a light side and a dark side and it holds the universe together.

Posts: 113 | From: Perth, West AU | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged
d3m057h3n35
Mini Geek
Member # 2378

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted December 05, 2003 16:05      Profile for d3m057h3n35     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
is there such a thing as "converting to science?" it makes it sound more religious than it is. i can understand that you don't find anything in science particularly interesting. dive in, and you'll find something that you like if you truly "want to see the visible electromagnetic radiation."

what i said about it being incredibly easy to create a piece of art that's unique, i forgot to emphasize that most of those unique things aren't worth looking at. i'm of the belief that scribbles on paper, ashes in an ashtray, a spill on the floor, etc. are all art, along with paintings and sculpture, etc. however, there're only so many interesting scribbles, ashes, or spills, even though they're all unique.

not so with science, because if it's incorrect and disproven, it is ugly and not unique; it shares this distinction with an infinity of other ideas (earth is flat). if it is beautiful and the jury is out, it is in the elite unique few. so it is about as easy to create unique, worhtwhile things in science as in art. thus my argument really was somewhat pointless. sorry [Smile] .

for me, sciences such as chemistry, mathematics, and physics are ways to visualize things you will never really be able to see, like atoms, forces, the far past, the future, etc. why do this? to be able to judge those things on an aesthetic level, just like everything else. does a molecule not deserve the right to be seen individually in your mind's eye?

i'm tired. i don't know what i'm saying. but i know that science creates knew worlds of imagination instead of extinguishing others. it doesn't bring new ways of understanding; those cannot be written down or recorded. it provides extra modes of vision. it is up to you to understand what you see in what ways you wish.

Posts: 54 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged
Cap'n Vic

Member # 1477

Icon 1 posted December 05, 2003 17:48      Profile for Cap'n Vic     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by d3m057h3n35:
is there such a thing as "converting to science?"

Yes, it is called $25,000 in student loans....God didn't help me pay red cent of those things off.

--------------------
(!) (T) = 8-D

Posts: 5471 | From: One of the drones from sector 7G | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged


All times are Eastern Time
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2 
 
  New Poll   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | Geek Culture Home Page

© 2018 Geek Culture

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.4.0



homeGeek CultureWebstoreeCards!Forums!Joy of Tech!AY2K!webcam