We are raising a generation of deluded narcissists

[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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

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]

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]

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]

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...........

 

[DallasCowpoke]

But maybe even more, I wonder how much of this is caused by all the PC "self-esteem" training that has gone on in schools and elsewhere for so long now. Don't give grades because kids who get a bad one will feel bad about themselves... That kind of thing.

My sentiments 100%! A few other things that have bothered me for a long time.

1) Having kids participate in a team sport, then not keeping score.
2) "Time outs".
3) Graduations from ANY grade lower than High School!

 

[Galian Beast]

VTA - Education was an example. Everything is eroding is eroding for a reason. To presume that reason without giving facts, and simply giving an opinion is confirmation bias.

ABQCOWBOY - My point is that the field experience gained from having a child apparently is worthless to you if your opinion is that the majority of people are not raising their children right. You could raise a child every day, but be completely unqualified to do so versus having no children of your own, but being better suited towards parenthood.

And I was referring to the facts presented on the topic at hand.

It means after this, therefore because of this.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

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.

Unlikely. A HS track season is really only going to last 4 months or so. I mean, seriously, how many world class sprinters/students do you think relocate in a single track season? However, if that very unlikely event were to materialize, it is logical to assume that if I'm a 10 flat 100 meter guy, the track coach is going to find me a place on the track team. Somebody else may get bumped, maybe a person who isn't working nearly as hard as I am to make the team but I won't be bumped. In the almost impossible event that by some Universal misfortune, there are 4 sub 10 flat 100 meter guys who just happen to transfer into town during track season, and the rest of the entire team advances to the point that a 10 flat led foot like myself is just not good enough and everybody else on the team is better then me and there is no longer a spot for me on the team, then there's always Baseball.

I know that I can run, I know that I can field and I know that I can hit. At some point, it occurs to me that I might have been wasting my time with Track and Field when I could have been an All Star all this time.

If for some unfathomable reason, the Baseball team starts showing up all these remarkable athletes from out of district and they are three deep at every position with transfers that are better then I am, then I guess I will just have to go out and find myself a job that I can work and make money at. I mean, in my family, if you weren't playing a sport or in some other kind of activity, then you had to work in the family business. That was concrete when I was growing up and we really never got paid for that. That was how our Mom's all instilled the right kind of ethic into us at the time. So, you went out and got your own job if you weren't in sponsored activities. Now, since it doesn't really matter how fast you run if your working, I'd imagine that I wouldn't have to worry too much about sub 10 flat transfer students.

What else you got?

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

ABQCOWBOY - My point is that the field experience gained from having a child apparently is worthless to you if your opinion is that the majority of people are not raising their children right. You could raise a child every day, but be completely unqualified to do so versus having no children of your own, but being better suited towards parenthood.

I do not recall stating an opinion which echos these statements. If you have it, please, help me to understand.

However, since you bring it up, yes I suppose that COULD be the case. You could have parents that are not good parents and you could have people that do not have children, no experience and they could be better suited to being parents but that was never the question was it?

The question was: Would you say that people, on the whole, who have never had children, because of the lack of that exprience, are better suited to speak on this question of Generational behavior because they have never had the experience of raising children?

That was the question.

And I was referring to the facts presented on the topic at hand.

I did present facts on the topic I was discussing. As far as the rest, well, I think you don't need me to comment on that. I think you have your hands full trying to defend your position against all these other posters as it is.

It means after this, therefore because of this.

Of course it does, but even in Latin, it still is not a fact. It's still your opinion and nothing more.

 

[vta]

VTA - Education was an example. Everything is eroding is eroding for a reason. To presume that reason without giving facts, and simply giving an opinion is confirmation bias.

You seem to have a pretty slack definition of just what facts are, or you're confusing facts with opinions.

It's not my opinion that SAT scores have declined to their lowest levels, or that America has slipped down to 17 on the global scale of educational rankings. The same goes for economic situation, health, etc. These are facts, not ideas propagated by me.

If you contend that I'm wrong, that education is in fact rising, that our economy is in fact healthy, by all means provide your own facts.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

For the record Galian, my opinion on this subject is probably too politically charged to discuss on the board.

However, if you would like to discuss my thoughts on this, you can certainly feel free to PM me and I would be happy to discuss the subject with you.

 

[Galian Beast]

ABQ - I would say that raising children doesn't give you better insight on the differences between generations.

What facts did you present. I'd love to see them.

It's not an opinion its a matter of logic.

VTA - Why are you so easily confused, I'm not arguing the facts in regards to lower SAT scores, rather the cause of lower scores. And the cause of the other things you mentioned.

 

[vta]

ABQ - I would say that raising children doesn't give you better insight on the differences between generations.

What facts did you present. I'd love to see them.

It's not an opinion its a matter of logic.

VTA - Why are you so easily confused, I'm not arguing the facts in regards to lower SAT scores, rather the cause of lower scores. And the cause of the other things you mentioned.

You're not arguing anything, except others' opinions. You haven't mentioned a cause for lower scores at all, and neither have I. There hasn't been a counter argument for anything, except your commentary on the psychological breakdown of how others came by their conclusions and claims that people are confused. :laugh2:

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

ABQ - I would say that raising children doesn't give you better insight on the differences between generations.

What facts did you present. I'd love to see them.

It's not an opinion its a matter of logic.

VTA - Why are you so easily confused, I'm not arguing the facts in regards to lower SAT scores, rather the cause of lower scores. And the cause of the other things you mentioned.

Again, not what I asked. I very specifically asked you if you believed, based on your previous statements, if you felt as if people who had not raised children had better insight into Generational differences.

We already know you don't believe that raising children is important.

Are you going to continue to avoid the question?

 

[WV Cowboy]

You forgot ethics in general and morality.

Yes I did, you are right, .. forgive me.

Especially morality, .. such a shame.