It was set out in your initial description of this scenario, and you subsequently agreed when it was repeated, that the number of particles in the room remains constant. So you're now proposing a new scenario in which people in the room remove particles?RJG wrote:No, each breath removes from the total number of fixed particles from the room. Therefore, on each subsequent breath, you will breathe in a lower number of particles.
The Dangerous Irrationality of Masking our Vaccinated People
-
- Posts: 10339
- Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm
Re: The Dangerous Irrationality of Masking our Vaccinated People
- RJG
- Posts: 2767
- Joined: March 28th, 2012, 8:52 pm
Re: The Dangerous Irrationality of Masking our Vaccinated People
The number of particles in a room is fixed, not maintained as constant. If there is no one (an infected person) adding particles to the room, then the "particles-per-person" is a function of the number of people in the room. The more people, the lower the "particles-per-person", and therefore, the safer each individual person becomes.Steve3007 wrote:It was set out in your initial description of this scenario, and you subsequently agreed when it was repeated, that the number of particles in the room remains constant.
-
- Posts: 10339
- Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm
Re: The Dangerous Irrationality of Masking our Vaccinated People
This is going to descend into another argument about words so let's just leave it.
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7935
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: The Dangerous Irrationality of Masking our Vaccinated People
Harvard graduates egocentric? Perish the thought. Though this is less regional and more a commentary on the lack of quality of science courses for non-majors compared to that of non-science courses for scientists.Sculptor1 wrote: ↑March 25th, 2021, 7:48 amWhat I see here is three students.LuckyR wrote: ↑March 25th, 2021, 1:53 amI am not going to argue with you. On a related note, to illustrate the pathetic state of science education, many are familiar with the lack of simple scientific knowledge even among Harvard graduates:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JXb7Oq13pjQ
I wonder if it is possible to find 3 Cambridge or Oxford Students that would share the same fallacy?
I wonder how many posters on this Forum would be honest enough to admit to the same fallacy?
The viewpoint is hideously egocentric. Do they not know about Australia's "opposite" seasons?
- Sculptor1
- Posts: 7091
- Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am
Re: The Dangerous Irrationality of Masking our Vaccinated People
I would say that the majority of people leaving school either share this misconception, or cannot properly explain why the seasons happen.LuckyR wrote: ↑March 25th, 2021, 3:52 pmHarvard graduates egocentric? Perish the thought. Though this is less regional and more a commentary on the lack of quality of science courses for non-majors compared to that of non-science courses for scientists.Sculptor1 wrote: ↑March 25th, 2021, 7:48 amWhat I see here is three students.LuckyR wrote: ↑March 25th, 2021, 1:53 amI am not going to argue with you. On a related note, to illustrate the pathetic state of science education, many are familiar with the lack of simple scientific knowledge even among Harvard graduates:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JXb7Oq13pjQ
I wonder if it is possible to find 3 Cambridge or Oxford Students that would share the same fallacy?
I wonder how many posters on this Forum would be honest enough to admit to the same fallacy?
The viewpoint is hideously egocentric. Do they not know about Australia's "opposite" seasons?
I have even witnessed a Primary school teacher confused about the topic and repeating the fallacy in a British school.
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7935
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: The Dangerous Irrationality of Masking our Vaccinated People
Thus why it is more likely for a primary scientist to have a decent secondary understanding of philosophy than for a primary philosopher to have a decent understanding of science.Sculptor1 wrote: ↑March 25th, 2021, 6:16 pmI would say that the majority of people leaving school either share this misconception, or cannot properly explain why the seasons happen.LuckyR wrote: ↑March 25th, 2021, 3:52 pmHarvard graduates egocentric? Perish the thought. Though this is less regional and more a commentary on the lack of quality of science courses for non-majors compared to that of non-science courses for scientists.Sculptor1 wrote: ↑March 25th, 2021, 7:48 amWhat I see here is three students.LuckyR wrote: ↑March 25th, 2021, 1:53 am
I am not going to argue with you. On a related note, to illustrate the pathetic state of science education, many are familiar with the lack of simple scientific knowledge even among Harvard graduates:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JXb7Oq13pjQ
I wonder if it is possible to find 3 Cambridge or Oxford Students that would share the same fallacy?
I wonder how many posters on this Forum would be honest enough to admit to the same fallacy?
The viewpoint is hideously egocentric. Do they not know about Australia's "opposite" seasons?
I have even witnessed a Primary school teacher confused about the topic and repeating the fallacy in a British school.
- Sculptor1
- Posts: 7091
- Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am
Re: The Dangerous Irrationality of Masking our Vaccinated People
It's my view that having a decent grounding in epistemology, logic and empiricism is the best way to guarentee a general appreciation of science. Without that, teaching science is little more than rote learning which is easily forgotten.LuckyR wrote: ↑March 25th, 2021, 6:24 pmThus why it is more likely for a primary scientist to have a decent secondary understanding of philosophy than for a primary philosopher to have a decent understanding of science.Sculptor1 wrote: ↑March 25th, 2021, 6:16 pmI would say that the majority of people leaving school either share this misconception, or cannot properly explain why the seasons happen.LuckyR wrote: ↑March 25th, 2021, 3:52 pmHarvard graduates egocentric? Perish the thought. Though this is less regional and more a commentary on the lack of quality of science courses for non-majors compared to that of non-science courses for scientists.Sculptor1 wrote: ↑March 25th, 2021, 7:48 am
What I see here is three students.
I wonder if it is possible to find 3 Cambridge or Oxford Students that would share the same fallacy?
I wonder how many posters on this Forum would be honest enough to admit to the same fallacy?
The viewpoint is hideously egocentric. Do they not know about Australia's "opposite" seasons?
I have even witnessed a Primary school teacher confused about the topic and repeating the fallacy in a British school.
Arbitrary divisions between science and the philosophy upon which it necessarily and critically relies is an unfortunate consequnce of our educational system.
When I was involved in primary teaching between 22-12 ish years ago there was great efforts to tech some basic reasoning and philosophy. Not sure what the state of play is now given the shocking cuts in basic provision of education since 2008.
On this issue for anyone wanting to look into the history of cosmology the best book I have found is Arthur Koerstler's The Sleepwalkers, which is an excellent survey from Copurnicus, throught Kepler, Newton, Brahe, and others to show the development of the modern heliocentric hypothesis.
Have you read it?
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7935
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: The Dangerous Irrationality of Masking our Vaccinated People
I am not commenting on the uses nor the importance of various subjects, just that science literacy is less common than competence in other disciplines.Sculptor1 wrote: ↑March 25th, 2021, 6:35 pmIt's my view that having a decent grounding in epistemology, logic and empiricism is the best way to guarentee a general appreciation of science. Without that, teaching science is little more than rote learning which is easily forgotten.LuckyR wrote: ↑March 25th, 2021, 6:24 pmThus why it is more likely for a primary scientist to have a decent secondary understanding of philosophy than for a primary philosopher to have a decent understanding of science.Sculptor1 wrote: ↑March 25th, 2021, 6:16 pmI would say that the majority of people leaving school either share this misconception, or cannot properly explain why the seasons happen.
I have even witnessed a Primary school teacher confused about the topic and repeating the fallacy in a British school.
Arbitrary divisions between science and the philosophy upon which it necessarily and critically relies is an unfortunate consequnce of our educational system.
When I was involved in primary teaching between 22-12 ish years ago there was great efforts to tech some basic reasoning and philosophy. Not sure what the state of play is now given the shocking cuts in basic provision of education since 2008.
On this issue for anyone wanting to look into the history of cosmology the best book I have found is Arthur Koerstler's The Sleepwalkers, which is an excellent survey from Copurnicus, throught Kepler, Newton, Brahe, and others to show the development of the modern heliocentric hypothesis.
Have you read it?
-
- Posts: 10339
- Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm
Re: The Dangerous Irrationality of Masking our Vaccinated People
This is true, and it was always one of the things about science (particularly physics) that appealed to my own laziness - the fact that it's not (or at least shouldn't be) about rote learning long lists of facts but about learning relatively small sets of logical patterns and principles that can be re-applied multiple times. So it's about learning the techniques, and ways of thinking, required to solve problems rather than just learning what the answers to the problems are.Sculptor1 wrote:It's my view that having a decent grounding in epistemology, logic and empiricism is the best way to guarentee a general appreciation of science. Without that, teaching science is little more than rote learning which is easily forgotten.
The trouble is, in my experience both as a former school teacher and as a parent and step-parent, some students are, at least initially, confused and feel defeated by this idea. They want to be told what answers they need to memorize. They resist the idea that instead of learning facts they need to practice methods. I'm currently dealing with this with my step-daughter struggling with her GCSE maths. She's still at the stage where she looks at a maths question in an exam paper and just doesn't know how to work out what it's asking her to do.
It seems to me that it's generally regarded as more socially acceptable to be both scientifically and mathematically illiterate than it is to be ignorant in other subject. I think there are various reasons for this, but one (at least where I live) is that the people whose voices are heard (journalists and politicians) are often proudly scientifically and mathematically lliterate.LuckyR wrote:I am not commenting on the uses nor the importance of various subjects, just that science literacy is less common than competence in other disciplines.
There's a UK TV quiz show called University Challenge hosted by a journalist called Jeremy Paxman. He's never been shy to show his opinions and over the years of watching I've noted that there tends to be a difference in the way that he reacts when contestants get a question about, say, history wrong versus getting a question about mathematics or physics right. In the former case he mocks them for their ignorance and in the second case he mocks them for their geekiness.
-
- Posts: 10339
- Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm
Re: The Dangerous Irrationality of Masking our Vaccinated People
I was briefly a secondary school teacher about 25 years ago. I don't remember a school-wide effort to teach reasoning and philosophy then, but that was just my anecdotal experience in one school. My own kids are currently both in the same grammar school (we still have them in Kent) and they study philosophy, but I'm not sure yet how much good it's doing them in terms of learning reasoning that is applicable to solving problems in other subjects. But one of the major problem in mainstream education, it seems to me, is the compartmentalization and lack of interconnection between subjects.Sculptor1 wrote:When I was involved in primary teaching between 22-12 ish years ago there was great efforts to teach some basic reasoning and philosophy. Not sure what the state of play is now given the shocking cuts in basic provision of education since 2008.
- Sculptor1
- Posts: 7091
- Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am
Re: The Dangerous Irrationality of Masking our Vaccinated People
You mean there is more chalk than cheese, or do you mean that thick string is always longer than thin string?LuckyR wrote: ↑March 26th, 2021, 2:37 amI am not commenting on the uses nor the importance of various subjects, just that science literacy is less common than competence in other disciplines.Sculptor1 wrote: ↑March 25th, 2021, 6:35 pmIt's my view that having a decent grounding in epistemology, logic and empiricism is the best way to guarentee a general appreciation of science. Without that, teaching science is little more than rote learning which is easily forgotten.LuckyR wrote: ↑March 25th, 2021, 6:24 pmThus why it is more likely for a primary scientist to have a decent secondary understanding of philosophy than for a primary philosopher to have a decent understanding of science.Sculptor1 wrote: ↑March 25th, 2021, 6:16 pm
I would say that the majority of people leaving school either share this misconception, or cannot properly explain why the seasons happen.
I have even witnessed a Primary school teacher confused about the topic and repeating the fallacy in a British school.
Arbitrary divisions between science and the philosophy upon which it necessarily and critically relies is an unfortunate consequnce of our educational system.
When I was involved in primary teaching between 22-12 ish years ago there was great efforts to tech some basic reasoning and philosophy. Not sure what the state of play is now given the shocking cuts in basic provision of education since 2008.
On this issue for anyone wanting to look into the history of cosmology the best book I have found is Arthur Koerstler's The Sleepwalkers, which is an excellent survey from Copurnicus, throught Kepler, Newton, Brahe, and others to show the development of the modern heliocentric hypothesis.
Have you read it?
- Sculptor1
- Posts: 7091
- Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am
Re: The Dangerous Irrationality of Masking our Vaccinated People
I imagine the she has been taught steps rather then underlying essential concepts. I hated Maths and failed getting a CSE (yes I was in a Secondary Modern) grade 3, until I took a GCE in one year at 6thform, a fat old lady with bad breath taught maths from the ground up telling us HOW formula had been derived; showing us the meaning of it all. She was wonderful.Steve3007 wrote: ↑March 26th, 2021, 6:03 amThis is true, and it was always one of the things about science (particularly physics) that appealed to my own laziness - the fact that it's not (or at least shouldn't be) about rote learning long lists of facts but about learning relatively small sets of logical patterns and principles that can be re-applied multiple times. So it's about learning the techniques, and ways of thinking, required to solve problems rather than just learning what the answers to the problems are.Sculptor1 wrote:It's my view that having a decent grounding in epistemology, logic and empiricism is the best way to guarentee a general appreciation of science. Without that, teaching science is little more than rote learning which is easily forgotten.
The trouble is, in my experience both as a former school teacher and as a parent and step-parent, some students are, at least initially, confused and feel defeated by this idea. They want to be told what answers they need to memorize. They resist the idea that instead of learning facts they need to practice methods. I'm currently dealing with this with my step-daughter struggling with her GCSE maths. She's still at the stage where she looks at a maths question in an exam paper and just doesn't know how to work out what it's asking her to do.
Your step-daughter's experience is an unfortunate artifact of standard education which has consistently failed to teach people HOW to learn and HOW to think, in favour of WHAT to learn and WHAT to think.
Learning philosophy can be done from the earliest age, but is never about telling them what they have to think. The old Victorian method still survives. Sadly B.ed, and PGCEs teaching is little more than a box ticking exercise which fails to address fundemental issues of method, When I did mine They were only interested in my producing evidence; about two reams of A4 printer paper full of dross. I saw 2 really good teachers quit, whilst the aspergery and anal types were able to continue despite poor classroom control and lack of inspirational method.
- Sculptor1
- Posts: 7091
- Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am
Re: The Dangerous Irrationality of Masking our Vaccinated People
Paxo is a lovable ****.Steve3007 wrote: ↑March 26th, 2021, 6:03 amThis is true, and it was always one of the things about science (particularly physics) that appealed to my own laziness - the fact that it's not (or at least shouldn't be) about rote learning long lists of facts but about learning relatively small sets of logical patterns and principles that can be re-applied multiple times. So it's about learning the techniques, and ways of thinking, required to solve problems rather than just learning what the answers to the problems are.Sculptor1 wrote:It's my view that having a decent grounding in epistemology, logic and empiricism is the best way to guarentee a general appreciation of science. Without that, teaching science is little more than rote learning which is easily forgotten.
The trouble is, in my experience both as a former school teacher and as a parent and step-parent, some students are, at least initially, confused and feel defeated by this idea. They want to be told what answers they need to memorize. They resist the idea that instead of learning facts they need to practice methods. I'm currently dealing with this with my step-daughter struggling with her GCSE maths. She's still at the stage where she looks at a maths question in an exam paper and just doesn't know how to work out what it's asking her to do.
It seems to me that it's generally regarded as more socially acceptable to be both scientifically and mathematically illiterate than it is to be ignorant in other subject. I think there are various reasons for this, but one (at least where I live) is that the people whose voices are heard (journalists and politicians) are often proudly scientifically and mathematically lliterate.LuckyR wrote:I am not commenting on the uses nor the importance of various subjects, just that science literacy is less common than competence in other disciplines.
There's a UK TV quiz show called University Challenge hosted by a journalist called Jeremy Paxman. He's never been shy to show his opinions and over the years of watching I've noted that there tends to be a difference in the way that he reacts when contestants get a question about, say, history wrong versus getting a question about mathematics or physics right. In the former case he mocks them for their ignorance and in the second case he mocks them for their geekiness.
It is wierd, though he has been hosting the program for a long time, when the announcer says; "Asking the Questions....! Bamber Gasoine still enters my head.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wi5SJKI6RpU
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7935
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: The Dangerous Irrationality of Masking our Vaccinated People
The causes are quite numerous, you have mentioned several. Others include the reality that understanding concepts is inherently more difficult than regurgitating factoids, that formal Education has traditionally been politically led by the Humanities and that successful scientists can find well compensated employment in industry whereas the pinnacle of employment outside of the sciences is often in higher education itself. Lastly and likely most importantly, grade school educators are less likely to be personally science literate and thus shy away from teaching subject matter in which they themselves are not conversant.Steve3007 wrote: ↑March 26th, 2021, 6:03 amIt seems to me that it's generally regarded as more socially acceptable to be both scientifically and mathematically illiterate than it is to be ignorant in other subject. I think there are various reasons for this, but one (at least where I live) is that the people whose voices are heard (journalists and politicians) are often proudly scientifically and mathematically lliterate.LuckyR wrote:I am not commenting on the uses nor the importance of various subjects, just that science literacy is less common than competence in other disciplines.
There's a UK TV quiz show called University Challenge hosted by a journalist called Jeremy Paxman. He's never been shy to show his opinions and over the years of watching I've noted that there tends to be a difference in the way that he reacts when contestants get a question about, say, history wrong versus getting a question about mathematics or physics right. In the former case he mocks them for their ignorance and in the second case he mocks them for their geekiness.
- Sculptor1
- Posts: 7091
- Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am
Re: The Dangerous Irrationality of Masking our Vaccinated People
I would hesitate from overlarge conclusions based on the prejudices of one man.LuckyR wrote: ↑March 26th, 2021, 12:41 pmThe causes are quite numerous, you have mentioned several. Others include the reality that understanding concepts is inherently more difficult than regurgitating factoids, that formal Education has traditionally been politically led by the Humanities and that successful scientists can find well compensated employment in industry whereas the pinnacle of employment outside of the sciences is often in higher education itself. Lastly and likely most importantly, grade school educators are less likely to be personally science literate and thus shy away from teaching subject matter in which they themselves are not conversant.Steve3007 wrote: ↑March 26th, 2021, 6:03 amIt seems to me that it's generally regarded as more socially acceptable to be both scientifically and mathematically illiterate than it is to be ignorant in other subject. I think there are various reasons for this, but one (at least where I live) is that the people whose voices are heard (journalists and politicians) are often proudly scientifically and mathematically lliterate.LuckyR wrote:I am not commenting on the uses nor the importance of various subjects, just that science literacy is less common than competence in other disciplines.
There's a UK TV quiz show called University Challenge hosted by a journalist called Jeremy Paxman. He's never been shy to show his opinions and over the years of watching I've noted that there tends to be a difference in the way that he reacts when contestants get a question about, say, history wrong versus getting a question about mathematics or physics right. In the former case he mocks them for their ignorance and in the second case he mocks them for their geekiness.
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023