+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 16 of 16

  1. #1
    Fizban "The Fabulous" Guest

    education and trust

    What was the treaty of Adrianople?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    5,324

    Re: education and trust

    The Peace Treaty of Adrianople (also called the Treaty of Edirne) concluded the Russo-Turkish War, 1828-1829 between Russia and the Ottoman Empire. It was signed on September 14, 1829 in Adrianople by Russia's Count Aleksey Orlov and by Turkey's Abdul Kadyr-bey.

    The Ottoman Empire gave Russia access to the mouths of the Danube and the fortresses of Akhaltsikhe and Akhalkalaki in Georgia. The Sultan recognized Russia's possession of Georgia (with Imeretia, Mingrelia, Guria) and of the Khanates of Erivan and Nakhichevan which had been ceded to the tsar by Persia in the Treaty of Turkmenchay a year earlier.

    The treaty opened the Dardanelles to all commercial vessels, thus liberating commerce for cereals, live stocks and wood, although it took the Treaty of Hünkâr İskelesi (1833) to settle the Straits Question between the signatories. The Sultan granted autonomy to Serbia, promised autonomy for Greece, and allowed Russia to occupy Moldavia and Wallachia until the Ottoman Empire had paid a large indemnity.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Adrianople

  3. #3
    Fizban "The Fabulous" Guest

    Re: education and trust

    Quote Originally Posted by kazza
    The Peace Treaty of Adrianople (also called the Treaty of Edirne) concluded the Russo-Turkish War, 1828-1829 between Russia and the Ottoman Empire. It was signed on September 14, 1829 in Adrianople by Russia's Count Aleksey Orlov and by Turkey's Abdul Kadyr-bey.

    The Ottoman Empire gave Russia access to the mouths of the Danube and the fortresses of Akhaltsikhe and Akhalkalaki in Georgia. The Sultan recognized Russia's possession of Georgia (with Imeretia, Mingrelia, Guria) and of the Khanates of Erivan and Nakhichevan which had been ceded to the tsar by Persia in the Treaty of Turkmenchay a year earlier.

    The treaty opened the Dardanelles to all commercial vessels, thus liberating commerce for cereals, live stocks and wood, although it took the Treaty of Hünkâr Ýskelesi (1833) to settle the Straits Question between the signatories. The Sultan granted autonomy to Serbia, promised autonomy for Greece, and allowed Russia to occupy Moldavia and Wallachia until the Ottoman Empire had paid a large indemnity.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Adrianople

    Our aim,
    One hundred percent entry
    One hundred percent pass
    Speed learn, a three year course in three minutes
    It can be done. Trust me

    scams is still celebrating the fruits of learning.
    you're never too old to learn


    can you benefitted from this education/information ?
    we just have it.
    making you/we just knowledgeable cabbages !


    Do you place your trust in science?
    and do the students place their trust in the Professor ?







    It seems there are some who are in need of some special coaching!

    This is the fiz speaking, you are being tricked. 'education' is an abomination. It is slavery, if you want to be free, there is only one way. Destroy The General. Learn this and learn it well, The Machine must be destroyed

    I'm a doctor; trust me.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    5,324

    Re: education and trust

    Quote Originally Posted by Fizban "The Fabulous"
    Our aim,
    One hundred percent entry
    One hundred percent pass
    Speed learn, a three year course in three minutes
    It can be done. Trust me
    A three year course in three minutes? In three minutes I couldn't even list all the topics you would have to cover in a three year physics course.

    scams is still celebrating the fruits of learning.
    you're never too old to learn


    can you benefitted from this education/information ?
    we just have it.
    making you/we just knowledgeable cabbages !


    Do you place your trust in science?
    and do the students place their trust in the Professor ?
    No, I don't place my trust in science. I go out, and I do the science myself. I have measured the speed of light, I have observed single photon diffraction, I have measured many of the fundamental constants. Students don't "trust" their professor, in fact if you ever came to any of my lectures you would see just how little trust they have. If the lecturer doesn't justify his assertions he will be pulled up on it almost immediately.

    It seems there are some who are in need of some special coaching!

    This is the fiz speaking, you are being tricked. 'education' is an abomination. It is slavery, if you want to be free, there is only one way. Destroy The General. Learn this and learn it well, The Machine must be destroyed

    I'm a doctor; trust me.
    To be educated is an abomination? Fine. Go on with your ignorance then. Keep spouting stuff like this. No one besides yourself thinks you're saying anything profound anyway.

  5. #5
    Fizban "The Fabulous" Guest

    Re: education and trust

    Freedom to learn, the liberty to make mistakes, old fashioned slogans!

    this post deals with two important questions: education and trust. The question it asks about education is that of its aim. What is education all about? One obvious answer to that is that it is the imparting of facts into a willing mind. Socrates saw the mind as a blank slate, waiting to be written on, and this theory of education corresponds to his theory. You write the required facts on the brain, and educate it. This is the main basis behind virtually all systems of education. A curriculum is laid out, a set of items that a student must know by the end of a course. if he can parrot back the information at the end of the course, then he's a great student.

    Quite. But are learning facts and education synonymous?

    Take for example Speed learning teaches students the facts in 15 seconds — but can they use the facts? The facts they know are, first, useless facts. History is all very well in its place ("Those who do not know history are condemned to repeat it," is the obvious message), but how practical is it? When the citizens have "learned" their facts, they use them simply to ask questions of each other and to rejoice in their knowledge. It's all a farce, of course — their knowledge doesn't help them, they simply know it. It is pointless knowledge. Secondly, not only is it pointless, but it is also limited. It is immutable and learned by heart — and only able to be used like that. The people have not benefitted from their education — they just have it. it makes them knowledgeable cabbages.

    This sort of learning is clearly not enough. Unless we can apply the knowledge, we may as well not have it. Education cannot simply be the imparting of facts, can it? There must be more to it than that. While I was at school, there was a girl in my class who could recall almost everything she wrote down perfectly. Yet she could not solve a simple mathematical problem. She had a great memory, but little capacity for creative thinking. Education just gave her things to remember, not a basis for her future life. She got great marks in the exams, but that was about it.

    The aim of education is "one hundred percent entry, one hundred percent pass." The final exam has become everything. This is the problem with rigid education, which doesn't test ability, just memory. Are good memories and capable people always joined? History would suggest otherwise, since many of the greatest men and women of the past have had little enough formal education — people like Edison, Einstein, Jesus, Moses, and so forth.

    Sometimes it would seem that education brings people into a single mould, and doesn't encourage them to be bright.

    This kind of education is generally very inflexible. These are the facts, and you must learn them. Why not, then, short-circuit the learning process and apply the message directly to the brain?

    In the mid-Sixties, subliminal teaching was quite the topic of the day. We all know of the cinema audiences having a message flashed on film faster than the eye can follow to buy an ice cream — and ice cream sales going up. the problem is, if you can affect people like that, where will it stop? Actually, subliminal messages are nowhere near as effective as that would suggest, but there was this horrible picture in people's minds of robotized society, all controlled by subliminal messages flashed over TVs or the cinema.

    This is what the Leaders of the Global Village
    have in mind. The benevolent information on history will soon be replaced with the messages they wish to send. We know what sort of messages those will be. But the idea of subliminal influences for education was seriously considered for a while. Any number of Sci-Fi stories about this time suggested the use of machines that implant learning into people's brains, either via computer, during sleep or whatever. It saves all that mucking about in school, so why not? Use the time properly.


    When you open your minds up to being influenced in any way (and the whole system of education is one such way), then you leave yourself wide open to being conditioned by the very system that teaches you. Schools are attempting in many ways to turn out rows of educated cabbages, which don't think as much.

    This is done through trust. A Professor places his trust in science. Science as such is neither good nor evil, but can be used either way by those in control. Many people do trust in science to solve our problems for us. Pollution, the energy crisis, overpopulation, undernourishment — science will solve them all, given time. But this faith may perhaps be misplaced, because there is no such thing as science — It is people who do science, people who work on it.

    Ultimately, those who believe in science, place their faith in the people who practice science. And people who practice science may be no better equipped to deal with the real world than any other kind of person. One thing that worried me was a suggestion that Isaac Asimov once made that scientists should be left to govern the world, because they understand the world.

    Is government then to be equated with education also?

    Would scientists make better politicians than politicians do?


    As a Professor puts his trust in science, so the students place their trust in the Professor.

    The learning system of the today works because the students open their minds up to a figure they know, love and respect. This is an acknowledged fact; if we love, or respect a person, then we pay greater attention to them. This concept lies behind the whole system of celebrity advertising.

    Brooke Shields is hired to tell us that she uses a certain brand of underarm deodorant to let people get close to her. Okay, fine, that's her privilege. But she is telling us this not to educate us into her habits, but because the advertising company wants us to think, "Gee, if Brooke buys it, it's gotta be good, 'cause she's so wonderful." It falls down, of course if you don't think Brooke is wonderful. Then you buy a brand she doesn't advertise!!

    The same applies to any product a celebrity offers to recommend to us. Advertisers know that the average person pays more attention to a celebrity offering a product than to a non-entity offering it. Trust is essential to a system or community working properly, of course. If you are going to catch a train, you trust that if it is supposed to go to a certain destination, then it will go there. You trust that the fare posted is the right fare, and you won't be extorted for further costs whilst underway. You trust the driver to be responsible and able, and to get you there. You trust the general populace not to bomb the train or anything. Whatever you do in the day, you have to use your trust.

    Trust is implicit to civilization. But trust can always be perverted. The confidence trickster relies on precisely that. Sometimes he will exhort you to trust him. Sometimes, more cunningly, to trust yourself, as in the shell game.

    The System and the Professors are figures of trust. Notice the use of titles here. Titles generally signify positions of authority, general competence and ability. We sort of subconsciously assume that a title means a person is trustworthy.

    Though they are now using ancient history, if the course is a success, they will soon be using their own history...

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    5,324

    Re: education and trust

    I'm not sure what to make of you Fiz...

    Anyway, terrific post, and I misunderstood what you referring to as education when you posted above, my apologies. You are absolutely right, and I feel I was lucky enough to go to a school where we weren't taught facts, we were taught to think.

    However, I think you are targetting the wrong people with your remarks about science. The reason I started studying science was to get away from the type of education you are talking about. In science you are taught processes for finding the truth, not just facts. You are expected to question the person teaching you, you are expected to know why we believe what we believe, not just understand the facts. For example, in my exams I can get the wrong answer to a question, but as long as the process I went through to solve the problem was good, I will still get good marks.

    You sound like you were not taught this way, but I can only speak from my experience, and while it may be the way you say in some disciplines, it certainly isn't in science. When you first start out, yes, you will be expected to learn facts, but only because you need to have a solid understanding of how the facts work before you can begin to explain them.

  7. #7
    Fizban "The Fabulous" Guest

    Re: education and trust

    Einstein's Luck: The Truth Behind Some of the Greatest Scientific Discoveries
    by John Waller.
    Year: 2002.
    Even the history of science has been mythologized. (I've no idea why the book is titled Einstein's Luck. Einstein isn't one of the science heros explored. Author Eddington is explored. He allegedly proved correct Einstein's General Theory of Relativity by careful examination of a solar eclipse in 1919. However the data was actually inconclusive. It was a strong belief that Einstein was correct which led to the unsubstantiated conclusion.)
    http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/AS...viddeleysho-20


    Why American History is Boring

    Students who go to college and take history in college learn to their shock and surprise that much of what they were taught in public grade school is at best misleading or at worst sometimes just plain wrong. But a lot of people never go to college, and those who do are so put off by history as taught in grade school that they do everything to avoid taking it. It's primarily because public schools hate controversy, so they sanitize history, turning it into just a bunch of boring things that happened, apparently for no reason, because the controversial explanation of why has been excised.

    Some of the most interesting things in American History that we could actually learn a lot from are omitted because they are unpleasant. The easiest way to deal with an unpleasant incident is to simply omit it from the record. Students are never told bad things happened. This leads to an opinion that we should "Return to the Good Old Days" because there wasn't anything wrong in the past.

    Students graduate thinking America has never done anything wrong. It leads to an attitude that our country is the greatest country in the world and all other countries envy us, want to be like us, and use us as the blueprint for democracy. Then something like 9-11 happens and Americans are surprised and confused to learn that many countries actually hate us.

    History as taught in our public schools leads to a belief that we should support whatever our President does, and do whatever our President says, including going to war in places like Vietnam and Iraq, because history as taught in our schools makes our Presidents heros we should worship. This then leads to a theory that it's all a Big Conspiracy to make us complacent sheep, when actually it's just a natural result of our culture's aversion to controversy and unpleasantness.

    Ironically, war and violence are natural results of our own aversion to controversy and unpleasantness.

    — David W. Deley
    The chronicles of American history are strewn with myths, legends, fables, folklore, misinformation, and misconceptions. Some of the myth-making is inadvertent, but much of it is deliberate. Patriotism and filiopietism have set many a tall tale in motion, but so have political partisanship and ideological zeal. The bent for simplism, as well as just plain sloppy reporting, has also added to the mischief. Decontextualism — the moralizing passion for judging past generations by present-day standards — has been at work, too. ("Understanding the past," as Paul Fussell reminds us, "requires pretending that you don't know the present.") And paranoia has sometimes entered the picture, for some mentalities automatically transmute the contingent and unforeseen into conspiratorial design. Some of the myths are innocuous enough; others, though, stand in the way of our getting a good insight into what went on in the past and on how we got to where we are now.
    In history there are no absolutes. When it comes to controversial issues, the historian deals with probabilities, not finalities.

    (Quoted from the book
    Not So! Popular Myths About America from Columbus to Clinton.
    by Paul F. Boller, Jr.
    Last edited by Fizban "The Fabulous"; 05-28-2007 at 08:01 PM.

  8. #8
    Fizban "The Fabulous" Guest

    Re: education and trust

    HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS HATE HISTORY.
    Our situation is this: American history is full of fantastic and important stories. These stories have the power to spellbind audiences, even audiences of difficult seventh-graders. These same stories show what America has been about and are directly relevant to our present society. American audiences, even young ones, need and want to know about their national past. Yet they sleep through the classes that present it.

    What has gone wrong?

    We begin to get a handle on this question by noting that the teaching of history, more than any other discipline, is dominated by textbooks.8 And students are right: the books are boring.9 The stories that history textbooks tell are predictable; every problem has already been solved or is about to be solved. Textbooks exclude conflict or real suspense. They leave out anything that might reflect badly upon our national character. When they try for drama, they achieve only melodrama, because readers know that everything will turn out fine in the end. "Despite setbacks, the United States overcame these challenges," in the words of one textbook. Most authors of history textbooks don't even try for melodrama. Instead, they write in a tone that if heard aloud might be described as "mumbling lecturer." No wonder students lose interest.

    Textbooks almost never use the present to illuminate the past. They might ask students to consider gender roles in contemporary society as a means of prompting students to think about what women did and did not achieve in the suffrage movement or in the more recent women's movement. They might ask students to prepare household budgets for the families of a janitor and a stockbroker as a means of prompting thinking about labor unions and social classes in the past and present. They might, but they don't. The present is not a source of information for writers of history textbooks.

    Conversely, textbooks seldom use the past to illuminate the present. They portray the past as a simple-minded morality play. "Be a good citizen" is the message that textbooks extract from the past. "You have a proud heritage. Be all that you can be. After all, look at what the United States has accomplished." While there is nothing wrong with optimism, it can become something of a burden for students of color, children of working-class parents, girls who notice the dearth of female historical figures, or members of any group that has not achieved socioeconomic success. The optimistic approach prevents any understanding of failure other than blaming the victim. No wonder children of color are alienated. Even for male children from affluent white Families, bland optimism gets pretty boring after eight hundred pages.

    Textbooks in American history stand in sharp contrast to other teaching materials. Why are history textbooks so bad? Nationalism is one of the culprits. Textbooks are often muddled by the conflicting desires to promote inquiry and to indoctrinate blind patriotism. "Take a look in your history book, and you'll see why we should be proud," goes an anthem often sung by high school glee clubs. But we need not even look inside.10 The titles themselves tell the story: The Great Republic, The American Way, Land of Promise, Rise of the American Nation.11,15 Such titles differ from the titles of all other textbooks students read in high school or college. Chemistry books, for example, are called Chemistry or Principles of Chemistry, not Rise of the Molecule. And you can tell history textbooks just from their covers, graced as they are with American flags, bald eagles, the Statue of Liberty.

    Between the glossy covers, American history textbooks are full of information—overly full. These books are huge. The specimens in my collection of a dozen of the most popular textbooks average four and a half pounds in weight and 888 pages in length. No publisher wants to lose an adoption because a book has left out a detail of concern to a particular geographical area or a particular group. Textbook authors seem compelled to include a paragraph about every U.S. president, even Chester A. Arthur and Millard Fillmore. Then there are the review pages at the end of each chapter. Land of Promise, to take one example, enumerates 444 chapter-closing "Main Ideas." In addition, the book lists literally thousands of "Skill Activities," "Key Terms," "Matching" items, "Fill in the Blanks," "Thinking Critically" questions, and "Review Identifications," as well as still more "Main Ideas" at the ends of the various sections within each chapter. At year's end, no student can remember 444 main ideas, not to mention 624 key terms and countless other "factoids." So students and teachers fall back on one main idea: to memorize the terms for the test following each chapter, then forget them to clear the synapses for the next chapter. No wonder so many high school graduates cannot remember in which century the Civil War was fought!12

    None of the facts is remembered, because they are presented simply as one damn thing after another. While textbook authors tend to include most of the trees and all too many twigs, they neglect to give readers even a glimpse of what they might rind memorable: the forests. Textbooks stifle meaning by suppressing causation. Students exit history textbooks without having developed the ability to think coherently about social life.

    Even though the books bulge with detail, even though the courses are so busy they rarely reach 1960, our teachers and our textbooks still leave out most of what we need to know about the American past. Some of the factoids they present are flatly wrong or unverifiable. In sum, startling errors of omission and distortion mar American histories.

    Errors in history textbooks often go uncorrected, partly because the history profession does not bother to review textbooks: Occasionally outsiders do: Frances FitzGerald's 1979 study, America Revised, was a bestseller, but it made no impact on the industry. In pointing out how textbooks ignored or distorted the Spanish impact on Latin America and the colonial United States, FitzGerald predicted, "Text publishers may now be on the verge of rewriting history." But she was wrong—the books have not changed.13

    History can be imagined as a pyramid. At its base are the millions of primary sources—the plantation records, city directories, speeches, songs, photographs, newspaper articles, diaries, and letters that document times past. Based on these primary materials, historians write secondary works—books and articles on subjects ranging from deafness on Martha's Vineyard to Grant's tactics at Vicksburg. Historians produce hundreds of these works every year, many of them splendid. In theory, a few historians, working individually or in teams, then synthesize the secondary literature into tertiary works—textbooks covering all phases of U.S. history.

    In practice, however, it doesn't happen that way. Instead, history textbooks are clones of each other. The first thing editors do when recruiting new authors is to send them a half-dozen examples of the competition. Often a textbook is written not by the authors whose names grace its cover, but by minions deep in the bowels of the publisher's offices. When historians do write textbooks, they risk snickers from their colleagues—tinged with envy, but snickers nonetheless: "Why are you devoting time to pedagogy rather than original research?"

    The result is not happy for textbook scholarship. Many history textbooks list up-to-the-minute secondary sources in their bibliographies, yet the narratives remain totally traditional—unaffected by recent research.14

    What would we think of a course in poetry in which students never read a poem? The editors' voice in an English literature textbook might be as dull as the voice in a history textbook, but at least in the English textbook the voice stills when the book presents original works of literature. The omniscient narrator's voice of history textbooks insulates students from the raw materials of history. Rarely do authors quote speeches, songs, diaries, or letters. Students need not be protected from this material. They can just as well read one paragraph from William Jennings Bryan's "Cross of Gold" speech as read American Adventures's two paragraphs about it.

    Textbooks also keep students in the dark about the nature of history. History is furious debate informed by evidence and reason. Textbooks encourage students to believe that history is facts to be learned. "We have not avoided controversial issues," announces one set of textbook authors; "instead, we have tried to offer reasoned judgments" on them — thus removing the controversy! Because textbooks employ such a godlike tone, it never occurs to most students to question them. "In retrospect I ask myself, why didn't I think to ask, for example, who were the original inhabitants of the Americas, what was their life like, and how did it change when Columbus arrived," wrote a student of mine in 1991. "However, back then everything was presented as if it were the full picture," she continued, "so I never thought to doubt that it was."

    As a result of all this, most high school seniors are hamstrung in their efforts to analyze controversial issues in our society. (I know because I encounter these students the next year as college freshmen.) We've got to do better. Five-sixths of all Americans never take a course in American history beyond high school. What our citizens "learn" in high school forms much of what they know about our past.




    (Quoted from the book
    Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong
    by James W. Loewen



    What would happen if a computer could just beam all the facts into your brain— would that make you educated?

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    315

    Re: education and trust

    Quote Originally Posted by Fizban "The Fabulous"
    What would happen if a computer could just beam all the facts into your brain— would that make you educated?
    If I now "knew it" ..... If I could access that information whenever I chose to ... yes ... that could serve as "education." What is the difference if I read it in a book or it is downloaded into my mind? I'll take it any way I can get it.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    315

    Re: education and trust

    The diploma would have looked nice on the wall though. :)

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    5,324

    Re: education and trust

    Quote Originally Posted by Fizban "The Fabulous"
    What would happen if a computer could just beam all the facts into your brain— would that make you educated?
    No. Knowing the facts is some disciplines is important, but that isn't what makes you an historian. You need to be able to analyse the data, compare conflicting evidence, weigh up opposing arguments, draw parallels and trends etc... (I'm just kind of guessing that this is what an historian does, I've never done history).

    I'm not expected to remember facts when I go into an exam, I am given a formula sheet that has all the information I need to answer the questions. The law students get to take in all their legal books and they are free to search for any facts they want. Same sort of thing is true for the other disciplines.

    The reality is that nowadays you have almost every fact ever recorded right at your fingertips. If I want to know something about American History I don't go to someone that has studied history at uni, I type my question into Google. Like that book you wrote said though, unfortunately in highschool people are often just taught facts, and they never learn what a subject is really about.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    315

    Re: education and trust

    Re: George Carlin's thought for the day

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    May 29

    The wisest man I ever knew taught me something I never forgot. And although I never forgot it, I never quite memorized it either. So what I'm left with is the memory of having learned something very wise that I can't quite remember.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    404

    Re: education and trust

    Quote Originally Posted by Fizban "The Fabulous"
    ............. education and trust. ....... Is government then to be equated with education also? ..........Would scientists make better politicians than politicians do?
    A circular reference, since the scientist would no longer be a scientist, but rather a politician. His/her perspective would change because logic does not apply in politics. Scientists cannot think outside the box of logic reasoning.
    Quote Originally Posted by Fizban "The Fabulous"
    .............the average person pays more attention to a celebrity offering a product than to a non-entity offering it.
    Perhaps a celebrity would make a better politician since the ego of the celeb is more to be loved & adored by their public, than to become a multi-millionaire. Therefor they would be more likely do the will of the majority.
    Quote Originally Posted by Fizban "The Fabulous"
    ............. Trust is essential to a system or community working properly, of course. Trust is implicit to civilization. But trust can always be perverted. The confidence trickster relies on precisely that....
    Bringing us to what I believe to be the more powerful drive.....wisdom guided by profound discernment. Without this, man ultimately fails. Those men whom you mentioned, Edison, Einstien, Jesus, Moses, etc.. who acheived greatness without education, all clearly displayed great wisdom and profound discernment of others.

    Without it, no man will be any greater than the piece of paper his birth is recorded on.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    404

    Re: education and trust

    Quote Originally Posted by Fizban "The Fabulous"
    ......... But are learning facts and education synonymous? ........
    Excellent post Fiz! My summation is; Facts are individual perceptions and education is no more than brainwashing. Often and particularly if we believe in absolutes, we are limiting ourselves with our education. However on the flip-side, if a person does not acquire education, he is a mere fool.
    Seek all knowledge while exercising wisdom and discernment.
    That is the key to greatness!

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    327

    Re: education and trust

    So the old fuzzy is back the confidence man mouthing rhetoric, defying the laws of grammar, like a verbal houdini. Make an outlandish statement then back it up with some spurious nonsense. Education Schmeducation, Facts Schmacts. Ahh But I have the secret knowledge from ancient Egypt the true knowledge etc etc....

    "Pollution, the energy crisis, overpopulation, undernourishment — science will solve them all, given time. But this faith may perhaps be misplaced, because there is no such thing as science"

    HUH?
    So what your solution?... God will fix it maybe....Or Just have a World War that'll solve all these problems in one foul swoop. Less people Less problems Easy Peasy.

    " And paranoia has sometimes entered the picture, for some mentalities automatically transmute the contingent and unforeseen into conspiratorial design. Some of the myths are innocuous enough; others, though, stand in the way of our getting a good insight into what went on in the past and on how we got to where we are now.
    In history there are no absolutes. When it comes to controversial issues, the historian deals with probabilities, not finalities."

    Boy didnt expect you to resort to such post modernist nonsense to make a case, but then you are a slippery little bugger.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    227

    Re: education and trust

    If you don't want to get into it but you need to complete your writing home task then I recommend you essayspirit. This platform is very reliable, fast, and affordable. They'll complete any essay with any deadlines and with the best quality.

Similar Threads

  1. Sex Education
    By enlightenment in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 06-20-2019, 07:21 PM
  2. Future Education
    By Paladine in forum Conspiracy Theories
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-18-2019, 06:55 AM
  3. A Current US Education?
    By EvilZoe in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 10-25-2018, 06:58 AM
  4. Income Education
    By Danceman1945 in forum Government Scams
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 12-19-2014, 12:09 AM
  5. MLM education
    By Once Upon a Time in forum MLM Scams
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 09-12-2012, 03:04 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may edit your posts
  •