If your considering copy and pasting your latest drive by spam here because you cant find any other place.
DONT!
Oprano has a ZERO tolerance policy for spam. Yours WILL be deleted. If you are looking for more exposure for your product please contact advertising@oprano.com for more information.
Legacy Archived Main BoardBusiness chat and general industry chat. All participation is welcome. Dont post your fucking spam here.
One disadvantage this board software has is not having "Ingore user" feature.
It wasn't really necessary though, until this Labret "fella" arrived.
Labret: Why won't you go back to GFY where you are "appriciated"?
Originally posted by XXXManager@Sep 17 2003, 06:51 AM One disadvantage this board software has is not having "Ingore user" feature.
It wasn't really necessary though, until this Labret "fella" arrived.
Labret: Why won't you go back to GFY where you are "appriciated"?
Hey XXX...
Yeah, I was well aware of Labret's posting style and what appear to be his "favorite" issues....
But, I also usually adopt a wait and see attitude when a person goes from one board to another..... If they keep up the profile then I either go to war or ignore.....
About the only real complaint I have on Labret right now would be about hoew he has to drop to name calling in what otherwise are intelligent posts...
Originally posted by [Labret]@Sep 17 2003, 07:35 AM Keep up the profile? You one of them people with board personas? You an actor?
Nopers... with me, what you see is what you get... usually
By that statement I meant that I don't carry what a person does on one board to other boards....
I do not base my opinions of folks on what I have seen on GFY.... I base my opinion on what I see here....
So, no attack is in order by any means.....
I do wonder though, how anyone who is obviously as intelligent as you are can spout hatred towards a group of people...... Towards governments, fine.... Towards establishments, fine....
I tend to take each person as a seperate entity... I don't blame all white folk for how native americans have been treated... I don't blame all the Jewish people, or even all the Israelis for that matter, for how the palestinians have been treated.. I don't blame all the palestinians or moslems for their reaction to Israel....
People tend to be the same the world over from what I can tell.. There are assholes everywhere, but there are good folk too... None of us is in total control of our own situation... None of us controls the government we live under or the actions of that Government whether they were elected or forced upon us...
I do wonder though, how anyone who is obviously as intelligent as you are can spout hatred towards a group of people...... Towards governments, fine.... Towards establishments, fine....
I dont see how intelligence and hatred have any correlate. I dont see how anyone could get an education and not be angry. As if the more uneducated you are, the more acceptable it is to be hateful? And the smarter you are the more unacceptable hatred is? If anything, the more I learn, the angrier I get. By the time I am a Phd, I will be living in the mountains mailing pipe bombs to MTV executives. How anyone could sit and around and watch the tacit acceptance and lemming like maintenance of the status quo without damn near frothing at the mouth, I cannot fathom. And again, I dont hate everyone, I hate very select groups of people. I loathe the herd mentality and anyone (like Buff) that wants to stand up and moo louder than the rest in his herd in some misguided attempt at individualism, will be shown the respect the deserve. Which in my eyes is none. My enemy is not based on race or religion, my enemy is ignorance.
As for my apparent hatred and use of profanity. When arguing with someone like Buff, you need to argue at their level. You need to weave your criticism with colloquialism that they will understand. I am not saying I am above it all, I am as white trash as they come, I am quite comfortable talking like a biker. In fact I prefer it. But I digress. You would not be able to argue with Buffy any other way. Any attempt I made to inject simple logic into an argument was met with more prose steeped in metaphor and simile and utterly lacking in any substantive content. It is all merely to cover his shortcomings. It may dazzle some and give the impression that he knows anything at all, but to me its utterly transparent. Its nothing new. I have argued with Colin several times on GFY and you will never read me calling him an ignorant bitch or insinuating he blows goats. Just as you will never read him calling me names. To argue with someone like Buffy, the sheeple, or anyone on GFY for that matter, you are gonna have to drop down to their level. Could you imagine Buffy arguing with a Phd? What a clusterfuck that would be. It would be like watching the Special Olympics, absolutely hilarious, but at the same time tragic and heartbreaking.
I dont think Buffy is utterly worthless, in fact I find some of his work absolutely hilarious. Judging from his sample clips on Chatroom Romeo, he certainly is not lacking in charisma and self confidence. But while these may be his strong points, they are also his worst enemy.
Could you imagine Buffy arguing with a Phd? What a clusterfuck that would be. It would be like watching the Special Olympics, absolutely hilarious, but at the same time tragic and heartbreaking.
Well most university academics are leftists and many of them have degrees in abject tripe like Sociology, so yes, I completely agree: very few PHDed intellectuals could stand up to the barrage of logic and wisdom which I would levy at them.
But to date the only PHDs I've crushed since graduating from college are:
1. Noam Chomsky: In a lengthy email exchange we had about his leftist views and how he could possibly reconcile his hatred for free markets with his several expensive vehicles including a sports car and a boat. I owned him (and did all the research on his personal assets myself).
2. Paul Krugman: Another email debate -- he conceded that expansion of the money stock is inflationary, backpeddling from all of his published positions.
3. My father: He thinks that people like you might still exist if we didn't subsidize the breeding of the masses via the welfare state. I proved that idiots like you would never be born were it not for the federal government's ability to distort incentive structures on such a massive scale, because your retard parents wouldn't be able to afford to feed themselves, much less live long enough to fuck and reproduce.
Why is that? Why are universities not bastions of conservatism?
I'll gladly spell it out for you.
Lets define conservative.
"Favoring traditional views and values; tending to oppose change. "
Ahhh yes, basically... lets maintain the status quo. Change is bad. For a conservative there is no reason to get an education. After all, all the answers and lessons in life are to be found in the past. Change bad, stasis good. Dont question, just accept.
And again with your buzzword of the week, "leftist". Everyone not to the right is on the left... right Buffy? You are either conservative, or a liberal? Right? Please explain it to me.
Quote:
and many of them have degrees in abject tripe like Sociology
I am guessing that is aimed at me. I would be amazed if you knew what sociology was. Regardless, I have two undergrad degrees. One in physical anthropology and one in *gasp* sociology. Compare and contrast. That should be a hoot.
Quote:
The study of human social behavior, especially the study of the origins, organization, institutions, and development of human society.
Analysis of a social institution or societal segment as a self-contained entity or in relation to society as a whole.
Completely unworthy of study right Buffy? You gotta wonder about a guy who attempts to denigrate another individual for getting an education. It is obvious that Buff is no fan of education. Books bad. Tv good.
Quote:
1. Noam Chomsky:
This. This is the icing on the cake.
Buff, mental giant, destroyed the man that is considered to be the worlds leading giant in the field of linguistics, MIT professor, and one of the leading political dissidents of the 20th century. Author of I dont know how many critically acclaimed books. A man that spends his life eating other Phds for lunch, got his ass whomped in an email debate with Buff.
You are fucking delusional. Just because you emailed Chomsky's office and called him a leftist douchebag, does not constitute an "owning".
Quote:
3. My father: He thinks that people like you might still exist if we didn't subsidize the breeding of the masses via the welfare state. I proved that idiots like you would never be born were it not for the federal government's ability to distort incentive structures on such a massive scale, because your retard parents wouldn't be able to afford to feed themselves, much less live long enough to fuck and reproduce.
Perfect example of what I was explaining to Sarettah. Utterly void of substance, groundless, and baseless. I dont even know where to start on this one. Let me see if I got this straight. You believe that the welfare system breeds liberalism? Could you flesh this one out a little more for me? I bet the logic behind it is stunning.
Originally posted by [Labret]@Sep 17 2003, 02:50 PM I dont see how intelligence and hatred have any correlate. I dont see how anyone could get an education and not be angry. As if the more uneducated you are, the more acceptable it is to be hateful? And the smarter you are the more unacceptable hatred is? If anything, the more I learn, the angrier I get.
There is a direct correlation in my mind. But first as in any conversation, terms must be defined. Anger is not hate. Anger may manifest itself in hateful ways, but it is not hate.
I just realized that I could write a 1000 page thesis on this and still say nothing important. I hate when I can't verbalize what is running through my head.
I will be back later, gonna write some thoughts down first because this is an important subject as far as I am concerned.
I am guessing that is aimed at me. I would be amazed if you knew what sociology was. Regardless, I have two undergrad degrees. One in physical anthropology and one in *gasp* sociology.
Ding ding ding. Most people would consider that a lucky guess on my part.
It's not -- I can smell you fucking leftards a mile a way. You reek. You smell like a sewage treatment plant infested with dead skunks.
I announce my retirement from this thread -- nothing trumps your admission that you have your degree in sociology (except that you went to public grammar and high school).
Yo, Buffy ... just what in the hell does the fact that [labert] went to public schools have to do with anything?
Imagine that ... someone who claims to have "owned" Noam Chomsky has to resort to insults that mean something only to himself and like minded elitists, and is too much of a pussy to continue an exchange with a mere physical anthropology/sociology double major.
For shame, for shame ... You are a walking poster child for the arguement that any extra opportunities offered by private schools can be wasted if there's not much to work with - if in fact you did attend private schools.
__________________ SEX STORY TEXT Exotic Material for Adult Websites Available for part time (project or ongoing) work ...
one might point out that zionism began as a secular movement...in response to certain european countries "ideas" concerning people of the Jewish faith...
Secular?
"the national movement for the return of the Jewish people to their homeland and the resumption of Jewish sovereignty"
Zionism advocates theocracy plain and simple. Theocracy is the opposite of secular.
Quote:
One might also point that even within the Jewish community - zionism is not fully accepted - a secular state of Yisroel is not justified in Torah.
A secular state justified in the Torah? Why would it be? You do know what secular means right?
Quote:
One might also point out, of the three "monotheistic (Christianity & Islam's monotheism is debatable)" traditions based on Abraham...it is only Islam that was founded and overly propogated by what would essentially be called a warlord.
Propagation of a religion via force. The brand of Christianity you see today was a result of the early church's complete and total annihilation of competing sects, such as the Gnostic, the Monophysites et all. After the Council of Nicaea, anyone group that did not adhere to the Nicean Creed was outlawed and dealt with by force. Christianity had its warlord, he was called "The Pope". You did things his way, or no way. Remember a guy called Martin Luther's reaction? Xtianity was spread by force, period. Judaism was not concerned with spreading the faith at all. Judaism belonged to the Jewish people and them alone. You did not convert the defeated, you destroyed them entirely. The Torah is replete with stories of God demanding genocide of entire peoples. No interest whatsoever in converting them. In the early days you did not convert to Judaism, you were born into Judaism. Although they did seem to have an affinity for little virgin girls.
Point being, all monotheism has its roots in force of one kind or another. Hence why I have an intense dislike of it. "mono", one. There can be only one, everyone else must die.
My favorite quote:
Quote:
Numbers 31:1-18: "...And they warred against the Midianites, as the Lord commanded moses, and they slew all the [adult] males. And the children of Israel took all the women of Midian captives, and their little ones...And they brought the captives, and the prey, and the spoil, unto Moses...And Moses was angry with the officers of the host And Moses said unto them, Have ye saved all the women alive? Behold, these caused the children of Israel, through the counsel of Ba'laam, to commit trespass against the Lord in the matter of Peor, and there was a plague among the congregation of the Lord. Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the female children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves."
Keep the little girls for yourself after you wipe out the entire population. Nice. Elohim is a god of looooove.
Quote:
It's their land...but it was someone else's land before that & someone else's before that - ad infinitum. He who has the biggest guns wins...
I'll go for that I guess, although social darwinism is a tough point to argue. I can use your argument to justify slavery as well. You are walking a slippery slope with social darwinism.
Quote:
is it really the land...or more it's better to kills Israeli's/westerners then to kill each other...lock a shia & a sunni in a room for a few days with no westerners & make your bets on who comes out alive.
I think it is a combination of a whole lot of factors. I think it is largely theological. The Quran makes it quite clear what should happen to those that attack Islam.
Lock some Catholics in a room with a bunch of good ol southern boy evangelical Christians and lets see who comes out alive. I am not even quite sure what the point of your last comparison was.
Imagine that ... someone who claims to have "owned" Noam Chomsky has to resort to insults that mean something only to himself and like minded elitists, and is too much of a pussy to continue an exchange with a mere physical anthropology/sociology double major
You flatter Buffy with the elitist statement.
Sad isnt it? I guess I should be flattered that I presented a tougher challenge than Chomsky.
Originally posted by sarettah@Sep 17 2003, 05:51 PM I will be back later, gonna write some thoughts down first because this is an important subject as far as I am concerned.
Sorry I din't get back to this thread last night....
Not gonna finish it today either...lol....
If you want to do an owned pic...go right ahead... although the one you posted on Buff is the first I have ever seen over here at Oprano.....Usually just see those at GFY.....
Originally posted by [Labret]@Sep 18 2003, 02:43 AM
Quote:
one might point out that zionism began as a secular movement...in response to certain european countries "ideas" concerning people of the Jewish faith...
Secular?
"the national movement for the return of the Jewish people to their homeland and the resumption of Jewish sovereignty"
Zionism advocates theocracy plain and simple. Theocracy is the opposite of secular.
Quote:
One might also point that even within the Jewish community - zionism is not fully accepted - a secular state of Yisroel is not justified in Torah.
A secular state justified in the Torah? Why would it be? You do know what secular means right?
Quote:
One might also point out, of the three "monotheistic (Christianity & Islam's monotheism is debatable)" traditions based on Abraham...it is only Islam that was founded and overly propogated by what would essentially be called a warlord.
Propagation of a religion via force. The brand of Christianity you see today was a result of the early church's complete and total annihilation of competing sects, such as the Gnostic, the Monophysites et all. After the Council of Nicaea, anyone group that did not adhere to the Nicean Creed was outlawed and dealt with by force. Christianity had its warlord, he was called "The Pope". You did things his way, or no way. Remember a guy called Martin Luther's reaction? Xtianity was spread by force, period. Judaism was not concerned with spreading the faith at all. Judaism belonged to the Jewish people and them alone. You did not convert the defeated, you destroyed them entirely. The Torah is replete with stories of God demanding genocide of entire peoples. No interest whatsoever in converting them. In the early days you did not convert to Judaism, you were born into Judaism. Although they did seem to have an affinity for little virgin girls.
Point being, all monotheism has its roots in force of one kind or another. Hence why I have an intense dislike of it. "mono", one. There can be only one, everyone else must die.
My favorite quote:
Quote:
Numbers 31:1-18: "...And they warred against the Midianites, as the Lord commanded moses, and they slew all the [adult] males. And the children of Israel took all the women of Midian captives, and their little ones...And they brought the captives, and the prey, and the spoil, unto Moses...And Moses was angry with the officers of the host And Moses said unto them, Have ye saved all the women alive? Behold, these caused the children of Israel, through the counsel of Ba'laam, to commit trespass against the Lord in the matter of Peor, and there was a plague among the congregation of the Lord. Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the female children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves."
Keep the little girls for yourself after you wipe out the entire population. Nice. Elohim is a god of looooove.
Quote:
It's their land...but it was someone else's land before that & someone else's before that - ad infinitum. He who has the biggest guns wins...
I'll go for that I guess, although social darwinism is a tough point to argue. I can use your argument to justify slavery as well. You are walking a slippery slope with social darwinism.
Quote:
is it really the land...or more it's better to kills Israeli's/westerners then to kill each other...lock a shia & a sunni in a room for a few days with no westerners & make your bets on who comes out alive.
I think it is a combination of a whole lot of factors. I think it is largely theological. The Quran makes it quite clear what should happen to those that attack Islam.
Lock some Catholics in a room with a bunch of good ol southern boy evangelical Christians and lets see who comes out alive. I am not even quite sure what the point of your last comparison was.
I'm no good at piecing qoutes - so bear with me.
Zionism began as movement to afford peoples included, either willingly or unwillingly, within the Jewish community a nation seperate from Europe. Zionism can't argue for a theocratic state for the reason's I mentioned previously. Unfortunately, any country with a majority of the population belonging to one particular faith will be overly concerned with that theology. The present conflict isn't between Jews/Muslims - it's a contrast in world views...wouldn't matter if it was north dakota...Islamic ideals will never mix with western philosophy. To even engage in debate their has to be a common paradigm...The soviets/US hated each other - we never nuked each other because of a common paradigm...self-preservation.
I'm afraid I do know what secular means...unfortunately, any time the word "Jewish" enters into a debate the definitions become rather blurry in order to justify positions...to say one is Jewish is based on canonnical criteria...yet people call themselves Jewish Atheists - it's a contradiction to define one's self by a criteria you dismiss...it gets muddy...
Nicea took the cult of Yoshua to a formalized statement of him as the Mosiach...essentially the beginnings of Pauline Christianity - and presented a codified theological base as the new Israel which excluded the remnants of the mystical/prophetic schools still operating - for obvious reasons. As far as any pope being a warlord...that's debatable on whether it was the religious leaders being puppets of the state or vice versa. BTW - to some extent gnosticism and the other esoteric cults still have remnants (namely coptics).
Qouting the Tanach gets very tricky...there are two points overlooked generally. The Jewish concept of "G-d" is all encompassing - that means the Divine is love/hatred/peace/war/pain/pleasure - there is no other. To say only good things come from above is an absurditity to the observant Jewish mind. This isn't pantheism - it's an absolute monotheism wherein the divine is not bound by one aspect...that would be limiting the concept and necessarily make the divine no longer divine. Jews will say "G-d does what G-d does because that's what G-d does". Also with the Tanach it should be noted the literal relevance of anything aside from the 613 Mitzvo is questionable - Jewish theology is not literal in it's interpretation of anything other than Mitzvo. Midrashim (stories)...even within Torah are considered to be examples of what happens when you do/don't do Mitzvo. No one in their right mind believes the world was created in 7 days...
The sunni shia comment was simply to point out within the Islamic world - the notion of quietly debating differences over a pipe isn't the norm (which isn't limited to Islamic thought - but muslims have a tendancy to hold grudges for a long time - ever called a Kharajijte - best to stay away from whoever called you that & their family for generations). The two main branches of Islam have been killing each other for centuries - obviously it's better to kill someone else...
Moreover - I'm not really arguing a position of darwinism & I'm certainly not taking the position that might = right...more a statement of reality. History has demonstrated the ones with the biggest guns usually win in military conflict. Certainly not taking it to the extreme of only the strong/superior survive.
Originally posted by PornoDoggy@Sep 17 2003, 07:42 PM Yo, Buffy ... just what in the hell does the fact that [labert] went to public schools have to do with anything?
I would be honest to god surprised if Buffy did not graduate from public school himself. He exhibits all the classical traits of a typical public school graduate.
I should follow that up with an explanation. The public school system is only designed to create mindless little automatons. It is nothing more than societies way of enculturating you into consumer society and preparing you to be another cog in the industrial machine. Public school does not, and I am not saying private school does, teach critical thinking skills nor does it introduce any alternative viewpoints. But again, that is not what it is there for. Its only job is to produce workers and consumers.
Back when the industrial revolution began sweeping across Europe and the United States, the factories needed a large workforce. Since 98% of the population was agrarian they found it increasingly difficult to keep these people working long steady hours. Your typical agrarian individual had no concept of working by the clock, or working to accumulate material wealth. They only knew how to work long enough in order to get what they needed to survive. Nothing more was needed. If you could get away with working 4 hours a day on a very small farm, why the hell would you work 14 hours a day? There was no large scale consumer society, if you needed anything else you simply bartered for it. I am getting off track. So this new class of factory workers found the idea of working in a factory 14 hours a day to be absurd. They only wanted to work long enough to get what they wanted and be done with it. Henry Ford had this same problem, Ill come back to this in a minute.
Slowly but surely this gave rise to a small consumer class that needed to purchase its goods from producers in order to survive.
This is where the idea of public school comes in. Child labor was a huge problem during this time. Not only were children forced to work in dangerous conditions, expanding populations in these new industrial centers created competition for work. Then comes the enemy of Buff, the lefties come in and fix this problem by creating child labor laws. More adults are available for work now, and children are not working 12 hour days in dismal conditions.
But what the fuck do we do with all these kids? Enter the school system.
Brilliant idea actually. We will take all these children, regiment them according to the clock, enculturate them how we see fit, and when we are done... bingo, instant working class. Barely educated (esp by todays standards), used to working by the clock, and minds pumped full of whatever the ruling class saw fit.
Its no different than getting an education here. You are shown what is right, what is wrong. Who is right, who is wrong. What happens if you break the rules of the ruling class. Why it is good to follow the herd.
Back to Henry Ford. So what does Henry do to keep these lazy hick bastards working? Instead of paying them a minimum wage, he pays them an astounding wage for the time. What does all this extra money do? What do you do with extra money? You spend it. Henry Ford created a class of consumer employees. The more you make, the more you buy. And one need only look to examples of people in this industry to see what money and material wealth create. Its just creates more need, more want. Commodity fetishism it is called, and most of you are stricken with it. You got the Brad Shaws, the Lensmen, the MikeAI, people just obsessed with gathering up material possessions. Why? Because it is their identity. They cannot exist without it. It fills a void. It makes them who they are. They sleep better at night knowing they have more than the next guy.
Shit, time for class. Until next time faggarios. I didnt bother to spell check, have a ball Buffy.
That was almost predictable ... [labert]'s opinions on public schools don't seem too much different that [buff]s. Just a bit more evidence that they are cut from the same cloth ... main difference I see is who they identify as the antagonists and protagonists.
__________________ SEX STORY TEXT Exotic Material for Adult Websites Available for part time (project or ongoing) work ...
Originally posted by PornoDoggy@Sep 18 2003, 07:46 AM That was almost predictable ... [labert]'s opinions on public schools don't seem too much different that [buff]s. Just a bit more evidence that they are cut from the same cloth ... main difference I see is who they identify as the antagonists and protagonists.
Give me a fucking break, I think you need to seriously re-read what I wrote.
Buffy only feels public education is bad because it doesnt cost as much as his. His view is nothing more than the end result of the same consumer mindset that I have been discussing for the last 3 days. If it costs more, it is better.
His ideas, or lack thereof, come nowhere even remotely close to why I feel public education is a joke.
His idea is based on some consumer class system, mine is actually the end result of countless people conducting research.
Cut of the same cloth. Seriously. Pull your head out.
Originally posted by [Labret]@Sep 18 2003, 11:35 AM mine is actually the end result of countless people conducting research.
Selected bits and pieces of various studies and history actually.
There are many reasons why there are public schools in the U.S. while the reasons you gave are indeed valid, they do not cover all of them and possibly not the vast majority of them.
Many colonies established public schools to teach kids the bible and the proper puritanical mindset.
Native Americans were forced into Mission schools and then later Federal boarding schools as a way to "breed the savage" out of them.
Vocational schools were established to place control over workers in the hands of the factory owners instead of the Union apprentice programs.
and many were established for the reasons you have stated.
However, as with anything, they have evolved. Many offer a very poor education and barely equip a person with the knowledge to survive in the real world. Some have excellent programs with the goal of preparing students to continue onward in their educational pursuits and often feed students into the various ivy league colleges.
The same can be said of private schools.
I know that I went to a public school in New York and received a fairly good education. I graduated in 1973. Our graduating class was close to 50% college oriented with SAT scores that were quite high (we had 2 students, twin brother and students with 1600s) I was somewhere around the middle of the class gradewise with SATs above 1300.
Since the public school systems are controlled at the state/local level predominantly, there is no one reason that they exist and there is no one standard level of education emerging from them.
I don't think my head is anywhere but on straight.
Regardless of the rationale that either of you use to justify your obvious contempt for public education, I do think they are remarkably similar.
The most obvious common characteristic is the elitist attitude that BOTH of you share. It doesn't matter if that elitism is based on a feeling of class superiority or a pseudonihilistic attitude of greater "enlightenment" - it's the same thing wrapped up in a different package.
__________________ SEX STORY TEXT Exotic Material for Adult Websites Available for part time (project or ongoing) work ...
Seems to me education is what you make it for the most part.
If you are inclined to question things, to contemplate, to perform any form of critical thinking and to research, you are likely to form a more educated and balanced philosophy.
It may still differ from others, but you will be less indoctrinated.
Of course, as an example, if you go to Catholic school you are going to be nudged towards Jesus as the answer and if you go to Gov't school you are going to be nudged towards government as the answer.
IMHO, the type of school has some degree of influence, but not as much as the mindset of the individual.
Sheeple will be sheeple no matter what school you send them to.
Originally posted by sarettah@Sep 18 2003, 03:21 PM I am actually inclined to believe that individual teachers have much more influence than the particular school does...
There are some very mediocre teachers in both private and public schools and there are some excellent teachers in private and public schools...
All it takes is one great teacher at the right point in time to turn a person on to loving learning...
and all it takes is one really rotten teacher at the right point in time to destroy one's love of learning....
sare, I concur
edit, just so ya all know......puplic school grade school, puplic HS, puplic college............RTR
Last edited by dantheman at Sep 18 2003, 03:27 PM
__________________
"Never argue with an idiot....he will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience."
Originally posted by sarettah@Sep 18 2003, 03:21 PM I am actually inclined to believe that individual teachers have much more influence than the particular school does...
There are some very mediocre teachers in both private and public schools and there are some excellent teachers in private and public schools...
All it takes is one great teacher at the right point in time to turn a person on to loving learning...
and all it takes is one really rotten teacher at the right point in time to destroy one's love of learning....
Sare, I agree with that as well.
I was speaking in general, but if you drill down there are sure to be instances like you pointed out.
09-17-2003
Linear Mode
