We are raising a generation of deluded narcissists

[vta]

Originally Posted by Galian Beast

If you notice I haven't made any conclusion as to what the problem is. That is the difference between me and the very people who are judging others here.

It is somewhat subjective to say our education is failing, because as I said, first you need to create a parameter to judge the level of education. You suggest that the higher ranked schools are just higher ranked compared to the low overall standard, yet you provide no evidence of this.

Are we in a better financial state than other generations, than most, certainly, than the previous generation? No. Now that we've established that, rather than assume your conclusion is accurate, you'd do well to prove it.

Does any of that have to do with the rise of globalization, the effects of a global economy on the us economy? The rising cost of higher education? There are numerous factors that have been completely ignored for this preconception of a weaker generation that has been coddled.
[View Full Quote]..

No I don't have to create a parameter, because it's not subjective. Me creating a parameter would be biased.The objective scale of measurement is by historic performance and global standings. There are numerous reports that you can find citing how SAT scores are the lowest they've been in decades. and the U.S. sits about 17 amongst 36 of industrialized nations.

You say I should prove our economy is falling then offer a reason as to why it is, by citing globalization? Hehehe.

You can loook at the by product of high unemployment; our import/export over under, corruption. I'd find it hard to believe the economic downturn of the last 5-7 years has been lost on you.

All this aside, above I'd said people want to grab a segment and argue it, ignoring the entire picture. I'm not going to parse the issue into little segments, because on their own they're not so damaging. You can't argue in segments and make a complete picture.

You haven't offered a conclusion but you have on numerous occasions claimed certain facts are being ignored. I asked point blank twice what's missing. Maybe you should unveil the mystery and simply answer. You can't refute an assertion by pretending I'm missing something. What's missing?

It's not judgemental to point out when something is faltering, it's good sense.

[ABQCOWBOY]

Originally Posted by Galian Beast

That's the thing you aren't getting... I never took a position. I was simply here to say that you're all being extremely presumptuous and haven't backed up any of your hypothesis with any facts. It's rather silly actually.

I told you before, I get it. However, your opening post does not lend itself to your stated position and, IMO, it only served to alienate many of the posters who don't agree with you. The ability to have good productive discussion went out the window when you said opions were baseless. In fact, many of the posters who posted in that thread have children. They have up front experience in the subject matter. I do not know if you have children Galian or how old they might be if you do. However, I do know that your example was pretty insulting. In fact, here is what you said:

Imagine the following scenario:

The water level in room B is lower than the water is Room A.

Without facts and data you've decided that there is less water in room B, and that the inhabitants of Room B have been removing the water, since it's lower.

In reality Room B is a larger room than Room A, and while the level appears lower the quantity of water might actually be greater.

You suggest here that none of the posters are posting from a stand point of factual experience or any real supporting Data. That's insulting and it's not factual. What they have may not agree with you but that doesn't mean it's not factual.

You go on to suggest, metaphorically, that the posters were baseless in their arguments and that they were merely basing their statement on faulty perceptions rather then reality.

I mean, can you not see that this is insulting?

You accuse posters of not bring facts yet when you refer to Dunning-Kruger and it is pointed out that Dunning-Kruger theory can be applied to all age groups, you do what? You don't acknowledge that fact. Instead accuse the posters who don't agree with you of presenting no fact.

That's not how you have a good intellectual discussion. You are not the only one, please don't misunderstand.

The fact of the matter is that when I read what you posted, the first thing that came to mind was not that you were trying to have a meaningful discussion. It was, "How stupid does this person think we are?"

That's the truth.

[jnday]

Originally Posted by ABQCOWBOY

I told you before, I get it. However, your opening post does not lend itself to your stated position and, IMO, it only served to alienate many of the posters who don't agree with you. The ability to have good productive discussion went out the window when you said opions were baseless. In fact, many of the posters who posted in that thread have children. They have up front experience in the subject matter. I do not know if you have children Galian or how old they might be if you do. However, I do know that your example was pretty insulting. In fact, here is what you said:

Imagine the following scenario:

The water level in room B is lower than the water is Room A.

Without facts and data you've decided that there is less water in room B, and that the inhabitants of Room B have been removing the water, since it's lower.

[View Full Quote]In reality Room B is a larger room than Room A, and while the level appears lower the quantity of water might actually be greater.

You suggest here that none of the posters are posting from a stand point of factual experience or any real supporting Data. That's insulting and it's not factual. What they have may not agree with you but that doesn't mean it's not factual.

You go on to suggest, metaphorically, that the posters were baseless in their arguments and that they were merely basing their statement on faulty perceptions rather then reality.

I mean, can you not see that this is insulting?

You accuse posters of not bring facts yet when you refer to Dunning-Kruger and it is pointed out that Dunning-Kruger theory can be applied to all age groups, you do what? You don't acknowledge that fact. Instead accuse the posters who don't agree with you of presenting no fact.

That's not how you have a good intellectual discussion. You are not the only one, please don't misunderstand.

The fact of the matter is that when I read what you posted, the first thing that came to mind was not that you were trying to have a meaningful discussion. It was, "How stupid does this person think we are?"

That's the truth.

Very well done sir.

[Galian Beast]

Originally Posted by vta

No I don't have to create a parameter, because it's not subjective. Me creating a parameter would be biased.The objective scale of measurement is by historic performance and global standings. There are numerous reports that you can find citing how SAT scores are the lowest they've been in decades. and the U.S. sits about 17 amongst 36 of industrialized nations.

You say I should prove our economy is falling then offer a reason as to why it is, by citing globalization? Hehehe.

You can loook at the by product of high unemployment; our import/export over under, corruption. I'd find it hard to believe the economic downturn of the last 5-7 years has been lost on you.

All this aside, above I'd said people want to grab a segment and argue it, ignoring the entire picture. I'm not going to parse the issue into little segments, because on their own they're not so damaging. You can't argue in segments and make a complete picture.

[View Full Quote]You haven't offered a conclusion but you have on numerous occasions claimed certain facts are being ignored. I asked point blank twice what's missing. Maybe you should unveil the mystery and simply answer. You can't refute an assertion by pretending I'm missing something. What's missing?

It's not judgemental to point out when something is faltering, it's good sense.

You're not really paying attention. Take global standings for instance. Let me give you another scenario:

Imagine you can run the 100 meter dash in 10 seconds. And you're the fastest person in your school. Thus you are ranked #1. If 3 kids switch to your school, and they can run the 100 meter dash in 9 seconds, and all of a sudden you're ranked #4 have you done something to become slower?

Not to mention that the SATS aren't taking globally, so it's clearly not a global indicator.

As for SAT scores being down, rather than assuming your conclusion is correct without providing evidence to back it up, you could investigate the cause of lower scores that has data backing it up.

I haven't come to a conclusion myself, because doing so would be presumptuous.

[Galian Beast]

Originally Posted by ABQCOWBOY

I told you before, I get it. However, your opening post does not lend itself to your stated position and, IMO, it only served to alienate many of the posters who don't agree with you. The ability to have good productive discussion went out the window when you said opions were baseless. In fact, many of the posters who posted in that thread have children. They have up front experience in the subject matter. I do not know if you have children Galian or how old they might be if you do. However, I do know that your example was pretty insulting. In fact, here is what you said:

Imagine the following scenario:

The water level in room B is lower than the water is Room A.

Without facts and data you've decided that there is less water in room B, and that the inhabitants of Room B have been removing the water, since it's lower.

[View Full Quote]In reality Room B is a larger room than Room A, and while the level appears lower the quantity of water might actually be greater.

You suggest here that none of the posters are posting from a stand point of factual experience or any real supporting Data. That's insulting and it's not factual. What they have may not agree with you but that doesn't mean it's not factual.

You go on to suggest, metaphorically, that the posters were baseless in their arguments and that they were merely basing their statement on faulty perceptions rather then reality.

I mean, can you not see that this is insulting?

You accuse posters of not bring facts yet when you refer to Dunning-Kruger and it is pointed out that Dunning-Kruger theory can be applied to all age groups, you do what? You don't acknowledge that fact. Instead accuse the posters who don't agree with you of presenting no fact.

That's not how you have a good intellectual discussion. You are not the only one, please don't misunderstand.

The fact of the matter is that when I read what you posted, the first thing that came to mind was not that you were trying to have a meaningful discussion. It was, "How stupid does this person think we are?"

That's the truth.

Tell me the difference between an anecdote and data. Does having children make you the authority on the position of our current society compared to generations before it?

I'm the one who stated Dunning Kruger isn't necessarily generational. Go back and read my original post. It seems you've confused yourself.

When you make a statement, you back it up with facts. If you don't, it's baseless. It becomes opinion. What good is an opinion that isn't cultivated by facts. And if it is cultivated by facts, please by all means present them.

What has happened is you've created a logical fallacy.

A happened and B happened so A must have caused B. That isn't logically sound.

[Galian Beast]

Further, I didn't say you should prove our economy is falling, I said you should prove that there is an association between how this generation was raised and the failing economy.

[JBond]

Originally Posted by Galian Beast

You're not really paying attention. Take global standings for instance. Let me give you another scenario:

Imagine you can run the 100 meter dash in 10 seconds. And you're the fastest person in your school. Thus you are ranked #1. If 3 kids switch to your school, and they can run the 100 meter dash in 9 seconds, and all of a sudden you're ranked #4 have you done something to become slower?

Not to mention that the SATS aren't taking globally, so it's clearly not a global indicator.

As for SAT scores being down, rather than assuming your conclusion is correct without providing evidence to back it up, you could investigate the cause of lower scores that has data backing it up.

I haven't come to a conclusion myself, because doing so would be presumptuous.

You win. I ordered your prize. I think it should fit well. Wear it proudly so everyone knows.

[ABQCOWBOY]

Originally Posted by Galian Beast

Tell me the difference between an anecdote and data. Does having children make you the authority on the position of our current society compared to generations before it?

An authority? No, not an authority. A person with a certain amount of practical knowledge, lets call it field experience for this excercise, oh yes. Most certainly. Does not having any children or not living that experience on daily basis make such a person more qualified then those who have raised children?

I'm the one who stated Dunning Kruger isn't necessarily generational. Go back and read my original post. It seems you've confused yourself.

If that is indeed the case, then you have my apology. I wonder, where is yours for treating everybody like buffoons?

When you make a statement, you back it up with facts. If you don't, it's baseless. It becomes opinion. What good is an opinion that isn't cultivated by facts. And if it is cultivated by facts, please by all means present them.

I have already presented facts to you. Clearly, all that gets you is more of this kind of pointless rhetoric. If this is how you want to handle this, that's fine, that's your decision. However, it is not OK for you to claim that the facts are not being presented to you. They are, your just not acknowledging them.

What has happened is you've created a logical fallacy.

This sounds like an opinion devoid of facts.

A happened and B happened so A must have caused B. That isn't logically sound.

I think you are over thinking this. You made a statement and because of how you presented it, you were attacked. That's really what it comes down to IMO.

[ABQCOWBOY]

Originally Posted by Galian Beast

You're not really paying attention. Take global standings for instance. Let me give you another scenario:

Imagine you can run the 100 meter dash in 10 seconds. And you're the fastest person in your school. Thus you are ranked #1. If 3 kids switch to your school, and they can run the 100 meter dash in 9 seconds, and all of a sudden you're ranked #4 have you done something to become slower?

Not to mention that the SATS aren't taking globally, so it's clearly not a global indicator.

As for SAT scores being down, rather than assuming your conclusion is correct without providing evidence to back it up, you could investigate the cause of lower scores that has data backing it up.

I haven't come to a conclusion myself, because doing so would be presumptuous.

Well, I assume this is still in context to the younger generation of today and their work ethics etc?

In the example you give above for Track and Field, I'm going to be happy as pie and not worry about the three faster kids who just moved into the district. In fact, I'm going to make sure they have everything they need and then some. I'm going to work even harder then I did before and I'm going to push these guys as far as I can. Why? Because I've just lucked into a state championship in the 4x4 and it's possible that if I work just a little harder, I might be able to break into the top three and maybe even win the 100 with a bit more hard work.

Seems simple once you really look at it objectively, does it not?

[vta]

Originally Posted by Galian Beast

You're not really paying attention. Take global standings for instance. Let me give you another scenario:

Imagine you can run the 100 meter dash in 10 seconds. And you're the fastest person in your school. Thus you are ranked #1. If 3 kids switch to your school, and they can run the 100 meter dash in 9 seconds, and all of a sudden you're ranked #4 have you done something to become slower?

Not to mention that the SATS aren't taking globally, so it's clearly not a global indicator.

As for SAT scores being down, rather than assuming your conclusion is correct without providing evidence to back it up, you could investigate the cause of lower scores that has data backing it up.

I haven't come to a conclusion myself, because doing so would be presumptuous.

I know SAT's aren't taken globally, I coupled that with global standings for both sides of the measuring process. National historic precedence and global standings are two forms of measurement.

Oh you have come to a conclusion, you're just playing an ambiguous stance to keep from having to assert yourself with any of the facts you think everyone else is obligated to provide (even though our economic and educational standings are factual). So instead you offer ill-fitting metaphors and ignore direct questions.

State your position plainly or just admit you hate the conclusions others are coming to. It's understandable to reject these views; no one can look at it entirely in a pragmatic way and claim to be unaffected.

[Galian Beast]

Raising a child does not make you an authority on child raising, if it did, your premise would be invalid from the get go.

If everyone who raised children were experts, how could we have such a problem with how children are raised? Illogical.

Apology accepted.

What facts have you presented?

It's not an opinion. What you've done is a logical fallacy.

Post hoc ergo propter hoc, look it up.

[Galian Beast]

Originally Posted by ABQCOWBOY

Well, I assume this is still in context to the younger generation of today and their work ethics etc?

In the example you give above for Track and Field, I'm going to be happy as pie and not worry about the three faster kids who just moved into the district. In fact, I'm going to make sure they have everything they need and then some. I'm going to work even harder then I did before and I'm going to push these guys as far as I can. Why? Because I've just lucked into a state championship in the 4x4 and it's possible that if I work just a little harder, I might be able to break into the top three and maybe even win the 100 with a bit more hard work.

Seems simple once you really look at it objectively, does it not?

And now another student comes, and bumps you off the relay team. And now you aren't on the track team at all... despite all your hard work the others work just as hard. I suppose now you're a failure... despite your original standing as superior and all of your hard work... Yikes.

Originally Posted by vta

I know SAT's aren't taken globally, I coupled that with global standings for both sides of the measuring process. National historic precedence and global standings are two forms of measurement.

Oh you have come to a conclusion, you're just playing an ambiguous stance to keep from having to assert yourself with any of the facts you think everyone else is obligated to provide (even though our economic and educational standings are factual). So instead you offer ill-fitting metaphors and ignore direct questions.

State your position plainly or just admit you hate the conclusions others are coming to. It's understandable to reject these views; no one can look at it entirely in a pragmatic way and claim to be unaffected.

My position has nothing to do with your presumption. You can't suggest that because we are falling behind in education it is because of a specific factor without proving that it's because of that factor. Correlation doesn't prove causation, it never has.

[vta]

Originally Posted by Galian Beast

My position has nothing to do with your presumption. You can't suggest that because we are falling behind in education it is because of a specific factor without proving that it's because of that factor. Correlation doesn't prove causation, it never has.

I never said anything about education falling behind due to a specific factor. I pointed to education among other reasons why cultures decline. We're talking generational erosion in this thread, not educational erosion.

[Aikmaniac]

Originally Posted by FiveRings

Also a lot of this should be on parents. There are parents out there that have no business being in the position. But our society says marrying and having kids is the way of life, without questioning if you really want or can have a child. And in turn, we're left with kids that aren't properly disciplined and get their views and opinions from shoddy sources

Marriage is going by the wayside, my friend.

[ABQCOWBOY]

Originally Posted by Galian Beast

Raising a child does not make you an authority on child raising, if it did, your premise would be invalid from the get go.

If everyone who raised children were experts, how could we have such a problem with how children are raised? Illogical.

This might all be very useful if somebody had claimed that raising children made a person an expert in the subject matter. However, since nobody did, I am forced to ask, what's your point?

On a side note, you never really answered the question asked of you. I'll ask it again.

Does not having any children or not living that experience on daily basis make such a person more qualified then those who have raised children?

Apology accepted.

But not reciprocated. I wonder, if I asked any of the posters in this thread if they were surprised by that, would they answer in the affirmative?

What facts have you presented?

Well, I gave you your own words. I explained how they were not conducive to a productive discussion but rather, a bit insulting. I don't know what more proof I could have presented.

It's not an opinion. What you've done is a logical fallacy.

Yeah, still kinda sounding like an opinion devoid of facts.

Post hoc ergo propter hoc, look it up.

I'm sorry, I've given up latin as I am no longer expected to test on it. You will just have to translate into english.

Thank you...........