The War On Math
-
The world’s changed a lot in the last 50 years. I’d humbly suggest what we teach and how we teach it should reflect this
wrote on 28 Jul 2023, 20:49 last edited by@Doctor-Phibes said in The War On Math:
The world’s changed a lot in the last 50 years. I’d humbly suggest what we teach and how we teach it should reflect this
Which means we need to go back, not forward. Kids don't need to go all in on another damn system that's going to be obsolete in 5 years, they need to learn how to think for themselves. If you believe public school is providing that you're out of your mind.
-
wrote on 28 Jul 2023, 20:57 last edited by
Public school can be effective, but some things have to change. Overt politics and causes need to leave the building. Back in the dim mists of time, I couldn't have told you whether my teachers were Republicans, Democrats or Crown Loyalists.
I've been preaching basics this entire thread and I believe in basics done well. No good team in any sport is worth a patoot unless they have good fundamentals.
Excellence should be rewarded. Effort should be encouraged. Competition should be encouraged. Mediocrity should not be praised and failure should not be accepted.
-
@Jolly said in The War On Math:
@Aqua-Letifer said in The War On Math:
@Jolly said in The War On Math:
You can't make chicken salad out of chickenshit.
Kids entering college in many STEM programs today, need at least an introductory course in calculus, in high school. That's a problem in minority schools, in small rural schools and with homeschooled kids.
We must address this at both high school and college level.
As for the crappy teaching of math at the lower levels, K-8, we really need to return to what works, ideology crap be damned. Memorization of time tables, basic math concepts, word problems, drlls, etc.
Or you could take the kids who clearly suck at math and see what their drawing skills are. You'll catch a few more that way.
Nobody should absolutely suck at math. Not up to and including high school level Algebra 1. Not if they are average intelligence.
Yet it's completely acceptable for them to be absolute crap at writing, drawing, gardening, home finance, and to never play an instrument in all of their childhood.
No parent in America would ever say, "okay well your Calc and AP English grades are good but what's with this B in art/creative writing/home ec/band?"
wrote on 28 Jul 2023, 20:58 last edited by@Aqua-Letifer said in The War On Math:
@Jolly said in The War On Math:
@Aqua-Letifer said in The War On Math:
@Jolly said in The War On Math:
You can't make chicken salad out of chickenshit.
Kids entering college in many STEM programs today, need at least an introductory course in calculus, in high school. That's a problem in minority schools, in small rural schools and with homeschooled kids.
We must address this at both high school and college level.
As for the crappy teaching of math at the lower levels, K-8, we really need to return to what works, ideology crap be damned. Memorization of time tables, basic math concepts, word problems, drlls, etc.
Or you could take the kids who clearly suck at math and see what their drawing skills are. You'll catch a few more that way.
Nobody should absolutely suck at math. Not up to and including high school level Algebra 1. Not if they are average intelligence.
Yet it's completely acceptable for them to be absolute crap at writing, drawing, gardening, home finance, and to never play an instrument in all of their childhood.
No parent in America would ever say, "okay well your Calc and AP English grades are good but what's with this B in art/creative writing/home ec/band?"
I get where you’re going with this, just 2 points.
-
Geometry is absolutely crucial for good visual art. Not that the art has to be perfectly geometric, in fact it shouldn’t be. But you should know the rules before you break them. Same with music and improvisation.
-
English and creative writing should also be an important skill for STEM students. When I was in HS, I was on the school’s JETS team (Junior Engineering and Technical Society). 8 students, 4 subject matters, 2 students per subject and each student had to cover 2 subjects. Chemistry, Biology, Physics, and English. Yes, English. The argument was that a good engineer needed to be able to accurately present their ideas, projects, etc… in a manner that was comprehensible to non-engineers.
Has that approach disappeared from schools these days?
-
-
@Aqua-Letifer said in The War On Math:
@Jolly said in The War On Math:
@Aqua-Letifer said in The War On Math:
@Jolly said in The War On Math:
You can't make chicken salad out of chickenshit.
Kids entering college in many STEM programs today, need at least an introductory course in calculus, in high school. That's a problem in minority schools, in small rural schools and with homeschooled kids.
We must address this at both high school and college level.
As for the crappy teaching of math at the lower levels, K-8, we really need to return to what works, ideology crap be damned. Memorization of time tables, basic math concepts, word problems, drlls, etc.
Or you could take the kids who clearly suck at math and see what their drawing skills are. You'll catch a few more that way.
Nobody should absolutely suck at math. Not up to and including high school level Algebra 1. Not if they are average intelligence.
Yet it's completely acceptable for them to be absolute crap at writing, drawing, gardening, home finance, and to never play an instrument in all of their childhood.
No parent in America would ever say, "okay well your Calc and AP English grades are good but what's with this B in art/creative writing/home ec/band?"
I get where you’re going with this, just 2 points.
-
Geometry is absolutely crucial for good visual art. Not that the art has to be perfectly geometric, in fact it shouldn’t be. But you should know the rules before you break them. Same with music and improvisation.
-
English and creative writing should also be an important skill for STEM students. When I was in HS, I was on the school’s JETS team (Junior Engineering and Technical Society). 8 students, 4 subject matters, 2 students per subject and each student had to cover 2 subjects. Chemistry, Biology, Physics, and English. Yes, English. The argument was that a good engineer needed to be able to accurately present their ideas, projects, etc… in a manner that was comprehensible to non-engineers.
Has that approach disappeared from schools these days?
wrote on 28 Jul 2023, 21:04 last edited by@LuFins-Dad said in The War On Math:
@Aqua-Letifer said in The War On Math:
@Jolly said in The War On Math:
@Aqua-Letifer said in The War On Math:
@Jolly said in The War On Math:
You can't make chicken salad out of chickenshit.
Kids entering college in many STEM programs today, need at least an introductory course in calculus, in high school. That's a problem in minority schools, in small rural schools and with homeschooled kids.
We must address this at both high school and college level.
As for the crappy teaching of math at the lower levels, K-8, we really need to return to what works, ideology crap be damned. Memorization of time tables, basic math concepts, word problems, drlls, etc.
Or you could take the kids who clearly suck at math and see what their drawing skills are. You'll catch a few more that way.
Nobody should absolutely suck at math. Not up to and including high school level Algebra 1. Not if they are average intelligence.
Yet it's completely acceptable for them to be absolute crap at writing, drawing, gardening, home finance, and to never play an instrument in all of their childhood.
No parent in America would ever say, "okay well your Calc and AP English grades are good but what's with this B in art/creative writing/home ec/band?"
I get where you’re going with this, just 2 points.
- Geometry is absolutely crucial for good visual art. Not that the art has to be perfectly geometric, in fact it shouldn’t be. But you should know the rules before you break them. Same with music and improvisation.
Geometry is essential but that's covered in math classes. Perspective, proportion, shape and form are other very important building blocks.
Which aren't taught because of 2 factors: "draw what you feel" has become the standard in public school art, and it's gotten that way because no parent gives a fuck. STEM or GTFO is how parents approach school curriculum.
- English and creative writing should also be an important skill for STEM students.
Yeah well trust me it's not. The average worker out there can't imagine their way out of a paper bag.
The argument was that a good engineer needed to be able to accurately present their ideas, projects, etc… in a manner that was comprehensible to non-engineers.
Nobody, but nobody is learning that. Wanna know how I know? That's what I'm often hired to do and sadly, people think it's pointy black hat magic to be able to do so.
-
-
@Aqua-Letifer said in The War On Math:
@Jolly said in The War On Math:
@Aqua-Letifer said in The War On Math:
@Jolly said in The War On Math:
You can't make chicken salad out of chickenshit.
Kids entering college in many STEM programs today, need at least an introductory course in calculus, in high school. That's a problem in minority schools, in small rural schools and with homeschooled kids.
We must address this at both high school and college level.
As for the crappy teaching of math at the lower levels, K-8, we really need to return to what works, ideology crap be damned. Memorization of time tables, basic math concepts, word problems, drlls, etc.
Or you could take the kids who clearly suck at math and see what their drawing skills are. You'll catch a few more that way.
Nobody should absolutely suck at math. Not up to and including high school level Algebra 1. Not if they are average intelligence.
Yet it's completely acceptable for them to be absolute crap at writing, drawing, gardening, home finance, and to never play an instrument in all of their childhood.
No parent in America would ever say, "okay well your Calc and AP English grades are good but what's with this B in art/creative writing/home ec/band?"
I get where you’re going with this, just 2 points.
-
Geometry is absolutely crucial for good visual art. Not that the art has to be perfectly geometric, in fact it shouldn’t be. But you should know the rules before you break them. Same with music and improvisation.
-
English and creative writing should also be an important skill for STEM students. When I was in HS, I was on the school’s JETS team (Junior Engineering and Technical Society). 8 students, 4 subject matters, 2 students per subject and each student had to cover 2 subjects. Chemistry, Biology, Physics, and English. Yes, English. The argument was that a good engineer needed to be able to accurately present their ideas, projects, etc… in a manner that was comprehensible to non-engineers.
Has that approach disappeared from schools these days?
wrote on 28 Jul 2023, 21:29 last edited by@LuFins-Dad said in The War On Math:
good engineer needed to be able to accurately present their ideas
Everybody should be able to present their ideas on Facebook and Twitter.
With a minimum of words, real words, and reasonable spelling.
-
-
@LuFins-Dad said in The War On Math:
@Aqua-Letifer said in The War On Math:
@Jolly said in The War On Math:
@Aqua-Letifer said in The War On Math:
@Jolly said in The War On Math:
You can't make chicken salad out of chickenshit.
Kids entering college in many STEM programs today, need at least an introductory course in calculus, in high school. That's a problem in minority schools, in small rural schools and with homeschooled kids.
We must address this at both high school and college level.
As for the crappy teaching of math at the lower levels, K-8, we really need to return to what works, ideology crap be damned. Memorization of time tables, basic math concepts, word problems, drlls, etc.
Or you could take the kids who clearly suck at math and see what their drawing skills are. You'll catch a few more that way.
Nobody should absolutely suck at math. Not up to and including high school level Algebra 1. Not if they are average intelligence.
Yet it's completely acceptable for them to be absolute crap at writing, drawing, gardening, home finance, and to never play an instrument in all of their childhood.
No parent in America would ever say, "okay well your Calc and AP English grades are good but what's with this B in art/creative writing/home ec/band?"
I get where you’re going with this, just 2 points.
- Geometry is absolutely crucial for good visual art. Not that the art has to be perfectly geometric, in fact it shouldn’t be. But you should know the rules before you break them. Same with music and improvisation.
Geometry is essential but that's covered in math classes. Perspective, proportion, shape and form are other very important building blocks.
Which aren't taught because of 2 factors: "draw what you feel" has become the standard in public school art, and it's gotten that way because no parent gives a fuck. STEM or GTFO is how parents approach school curriculum.
- English and creative writing should also be an important skill for STEM students.
Yeah well trust me it's not. The average worker out there can't imagine their way out of a paper bag.
The argument was that a good engineer needed to be able to accurately present their ideas, projects, etc… in a manner that was comprehensible to non-engineers.
Nobody, but nobody is learning that. Wanna know how I know? That's what I'm often hired to do and sadly, people think it's pointy black hat magic to be able to do so.
wrote on 28 Jul 2023, 21:46 last edited by@Aqua-Letifer said in The War On Math:
@LuFins-Dad said in The War On Math:
@Aqua-Letifer said in The War On Math:
@Jolly said in The War On Math:
@Aqua-Letifer said in The War On Math:
@Jolly said in The War On Math:
You can't make chicken salad out of chickenshit.
Kids entering college in many STEM programs today, need at least an introductory course in calculus, in high school. That's a problem in minority schools, in small rural schools and with homeschooled kids.
We must address this at both high school and college level.
As for the crappy teaching of math at the lower levels, K-8, we really need to return to what works, ideology crap be damned. Memorization of time tables, basic math concepts, word problems, drlls, etc.
Or you could take the kids who clearly suck at math and see what their drawing skills are. You'll catch a few more that way.
Nobody should absolutely suck at math. Not up to and including high school level Algebra 1. Not if they are average intelligence.
Yet it's completely acceptable for them to be absolute crap at writing, drawing, gardening, home finance, and to never play an instrument in all of their childhood.
No parent in America would ever say, "okay well your Calc and AP English grades are good but what's with this B in art/creative writing/home ec/band?"
I get where you’re going with this, just 2 points.
- Geometry is absolutely crucial for good visual art. Not that the art has to be perfectly geometric, in fact it shouldn’t be. But you should know the rules before you break them. Same with music and improvisation.
Geometry is essential but that's covered in math classes. Perspective, proportion, shape and form are other very important building blocks.
Which aren't taught because of 2 factors: "draw what you feel" has become the standard in public school art, and it's gotten that way because no parent gives a fuck. STEM or GTFO is how parents approach school curriculum.
- English and creative writing should also be an important skill for STEM students.
Yeah well trust me it's not. The average worker out there can't imagine their way out of a paper bag.
The argument was that a good engineer needed to be able to accurately present their ideas, projects, etc… in a manner that was comprehensible to non-engineers.
Nobody, but nobody is learning that. Wanna know how I know? That's what I'm often hired to do and sadly, people think it's pointy black hat magic to be able to do so.
Then wear it with pride, lad! Wear it with pride.
-
@Doctor-Phibes said in The War On Math:
@Jolly said in The War On Math:
Nobody should absolutely suck at math. Not up to and including high school level Algebra 1. Not if they are average intelligence.
Half the population is below average intelligence.
No, half the population is below mean intelligence.
wrote on 28 Jul 2023, 22:37 last edited by@LuFins-Dad said in The War On Math:
@Doctor-Phibes said in The War On Math:
Half the population is below average intelligence.
No, half the population is below mean intelligence.
"Median", people, "median."
-
@LuFins-Dad said in The War On Math:
@Aqua-Letifer said in The War On Math:
@Jolly said in The War On Math:
@Aqua-Letifer said in The War On Math:
@Jolly said in The War On Math:
You can't make chicken salad out of chickenshit.
Kids entering college in many STEM programs today, need at least an introductory course in calculus, in high school. That's a problem in minority schools, in small rural schools and with homeschooled kids.
We must address this at both high school and college level.
As for the crappy teaching of math at the lower levels, K-8, we really need to return to what works, ideology crap be damned. Memorization of time tables, basic math concepts, word problems, drlls, etc.
Or you could take the kids who clearly suck at math and see what their drawing skills are. You'll catch a few more that way.
Nobody should absolutely suck at math. Not up to and including high school level Algebra 1. Not if they are average intelligence.
Yet it's completely acceptable for them to be absolute crap at writing, drawing, gardening, home finance, and to never play an instrument in all of their childhood.
No parent in America would ever say, "okay well your Calc and AP English grades are good but what's with this B in art/creative writing/home ec/band?"
I get where you’re going with this, just 2 points.
- Geometry is absolutely crucial for good visual art. Not that the art has to be perfectly geometric, in fact it shouldn’t be. But you should know the rules before you break them. Same with music and improvisation.
Geometry is essential but that's covered in math classes. Perspective, proportion, shape and form are other very important building blocks.
Which aren't taught because of 2 factors: "draw what you feel" has become the standard in public school art, and it's gotten that way because no parent gives a fuck. STEM or GTFO is how parents approach school curriculum.
- English and creative writing should also be an important skill for STEM students.
Yeah well trust me it's not. The average worker out there can't imagine their way out of a paper bag.
The argument was that a good engineer needed to be able to accurately present their ideas, projects, etc… in a manner that was comprehensible to non-engineers.
Nobody, but nobody is learning that. Wanna know how I know? That's what I'm often hired to do and sadly, people think it's pointy black hat magic to be able to do so.
wrote on 28 Jul 2023, 22:56 last edited by@Aqua-Letifer said in The War On Math:
@LuFins-Dad said in The War On Math:
...
The argument was that a good engineer needed to be able to accurately present their ideas, projects, etc… in a manner that was comprehensible to non-engineers.Nobody, but nobody is learning that. Wanna know how I know? That's what I'm often hired to do and sadly, people think it's pointy black hat magic to be able to do so.
Be valuable enough in the technical aspects of engineering and the employer will hire you patent lawyers and technical writers to help take care of the nontechnical aspects of engineering for you. It's simple cost optimization. Why pay an exceptional technical talent $$$$$$ an hour to write simple English while you can pay a slightly above average writer $$ an hour to write simple English? You let that $$$$$$/hr. talent focus on doing the sort of things that only that $$$$$$/hr. talent can do, offload the less economically valuable tasks to cheaper labor. Same reason to hire secretaries and personal assistants to support senior executives, same reason to hire physician's assistants to support doctors.
It's the $$$/hr. technical talents (and these happen to be the majority) who need to also be good at communications.
-
Public school can be effective, but some things have to change. Overt politics and causes need to leave the building. Back in the dim mists of time, I couldn't have told you whether my teachers were Republicans, Democrats or Crown Loyalists.
I've been preaching basics this entire thread and I believe in basics done well. No good team in any sport is worth a patoot unless they have good fundamentals.
Excellence should be rewarded. Effort should be encouraged. Competition should be encouraged. Mediocrity should not be praised and failure should not be accepted.
wrote on 28 Jul 2023, 22:57 last edited by@Jolly said in The War On Math:
Excellence should be rewarded. Effort should be encouraged. Competition should be encouraged. Mediocrity should not be praised and failure should not be accepted.
+1
-
@LuFins-Dad said in The War On Math:
@Doctor-Phibes said in The War On Math:
Half the population is below average intelligence.
No, half the population is below mean intelligence.
"Median", people, "median."
wrote on 28 Jul 2023, 22:59 last edited by@Axtremus said in The War On Math:
@LuFins-Dad said in The War On Math:
@Doctor-Phibes said in The War On Math:
Half the population is below average intelligence.
No, half the population is below mean intelligence.
"Median", people, "median."
Median is the mean in a normal distribution.
-
@Axtremus said in The War On Math:
@LuFins-Dad said in The War On Math:
@Doctor-Phibes said in The War On Math:
Half the population is below average intelligence.
No, half the population is below mean intelligence.
"Median", people, "median."
Median is the mean in a normal distribution.
wrote on 28 Jul 2023, 23:02 last edited by@Horace said in The War On Math:
@Axtremus said in The War On Math:
@LuFins-Dad said in The War On Math:
@Doctor-Phibes said in The War On Math:
Half the population is below average intelligence.
No, half the population is below mean intelligence.
"Median", people, "median."
Median is the mean in a normal distribution.
The mean is not necessarily the median in other distributions that are not a normal distribution. "Median" works for all distributions, "mean" works only for some distributions.
-
wrote on 28 Jul 2023, 23:05 last edited by
Fucking hell.
I'm beginning to see why so many managers are British.
-
@Horace said in The War On Math:
@Axtremus said in The War On Math:
@LuFins-Dad said in The War On Math:
@Doctor-Phibes said in The War On Math:
Half the population is below average intelligence.
No, half the population is below mean intelligence.
"Median", people, "median."
Median is the mean in a normal distribution.
The mean is not necessarily the median in other distributions that are not a normal distribution. "Median" works for all distributions, "mean" works only for some distributions.
wrote on 28 Jul 2023, 23:08 last edited by@Axtremus said in The War On Math:
@Horace said in The War On Math:
@Axtremus said in The War On Math:
@LuFins-Dad said in The War On Math:
@Doctor-Phibes said in The War On Math:
Half the population is below average intelligence.
No, half the population is below mean intelligence.
"Median", people, "median."
Median is the mean in a normal distribution.
The mean is not necessarily the median in other distributions that are not a normal distribution. "Median" works for all distributions, "mean" works only for some distributions.
We're talking about a normal distribution, unless you would like to claim the intelligence distribution is non-normal. For instance, maybe it's bimodal, with liberals at the low end, and conservatives at the high end.
-
@Axtremus said in The War On Math:
@Horace said in The War On Math:
@Axtremus said in The War On Math:
@LuFins-Dad said in The War On Math:
@Doctor-Phibes said in The War On Math:
Half the population is below average intelligence.
No, half the population is below mean intelligence.
"Median", people, "median."
Median is the mean in a normal distribution.
The mean is not necessarily the median in other distributions that are not a normal distribution. "Median" works for all distributions, "mean" works only for some distributions.
We're talking about a normal distribution, unless you would like to claim the intelligence distribution is non-normal. For instance, maybe it's bimodal, with liberals at the low end, and conservatives at the high end.
wrote on 28 Jul 2023, 23:14 last edited by@Horace said in The War On Math:
@Axtremus said in The War On Math:
@Horace said in The War On Math:
@Axtremus said in The War On Math:
@LuFins-Dad said in The War On Math:
@Doctor-Phibes said in The War On Math:
Half the population is below average intelligence.
No, half the population is below mean intelligence.
"Median", people, "median."
Median is the mean in a normal distribution.
The mean is not necessarily the median in other distributions that are not a normal distribution. "Median" works for all distributions, "mean" works only for some distributions.
We're talking about a normal distribution, unless you would like to claim the intelligence distribution is non-normal. For instance, maybe it's bimodal, with liberals at the low end, and conservatives at the high end.
Whether intelligence is distributed normally depends on the population. "Median" does not depend on the distribution but "mean" does.
-
wrote on 28 Jul 2023, 23:20 last edited by
This should really go in the ‘mildly interesting’ thread.
I said ‘average’ because I’m not a gimboid.
-
This should really go in the ‘mildly interesting’ thread.
I said ‘average’ because I’m not a gimboid.
wrote on 28 Jul 2023, 23:30 last edited by@Doctor-Phibes said in The War On Math:
This should really go in the ‘mildly interesting’ thread.
I said ‘average’ because I’m not a gimboid.
This thread is the perfect place for math education. Education is not "mildly interesting" - it is essential. The equity and inclusion of all people depends on it.
-
@Aqua-Letifer said in The War On Math:
@LuFins-Dad said in The War On Math:
...
The argument was that a good engineer needed to be able to accurately present their ideas, projects, etc… in a manner that was comprehensible to non-engineers.Nobody, but nobody is learning that. Wanna know how I know? That's what I'm often hired to do and sadly, people think it's pointy black hat magic to be able to do so.
Be valuable enough in the technical aspects of engineering and the employer will hire you patent lawyers and technical writers to help take care of the nontechnical aspects of engineering for you. It's simple cost optimization. Why pay an exceptional technical talent $$$$$$ an hour to write simple English while you can pay a slightly above average writer $$ an hour to write simple English? You let that $$$$$$/hr. talent focus on doing the sort of things that only that $$$$$$/hr. talent can do, offload the less economically valuable tasks to cheaper labor. Same reason to hire secretaries and personal assistants to support senior executives, same reason to hire physician's assistants to support doctors.
It's the $$$/hr. technical talents (and these happen to be the majority) who need to also be good at communications.
wrote on 28 Jul 2023, 23:59 last edited by LuFins Dad@Axtremus said in The War On Math:
~~Be valuable enough in the technical aspects of engineering and the employer will hire you patent lawyers and technical writers to help take care of the nontechnical aspects of engineering for you. It's simple cost optimization. Why pay an exceptional technical talent $$$$$$ an hour to write simple English while you can pay a slightly above average writer $$ an hour to write simple English? You let that $$$$$$/hr. talent focus on doing the sort of things that only that $$$$$$/hr. talent can do, offload the load pu The only thing I can think of is that the first time you see less economically valuable tasks to cheaper labor. Same reason to hire secretaries and personal assistants to support senior executives, same reason to hire physician's assistants to support doctors.
It's the $$$/hr. technical talents (and these happen to be the majority) who need to also be good at communications~~
In today’s world the $$$$$ minds that can’t express themselves wind up making $$ working for $$ minds that know how to communicate and make $$$$$$$$.
Einstein wrote and presented his own work. Hawking couldn’t even truly speak or write and he still believed it important to present and communicate his own work. Oppenheimer learned an entire frigging language in 6 weeks because he thought it was important to lead a technical presentation in the Netherlands. But I’m sure they were wrong and you are as right as you usually are…
-
@Doctor-Phibes said in The War On Math:
This should really go in the ‘mildly interesting’ thread.
I said ‘average’ because I’m not a gimboid.
This thread is the perfect place for math education. Education is not "mildly interesting" - it is essential. The equity and inclusion of all people depends on it.
wrote on 29 Jul 2023, 00:07 last edited by@Horace said in The War On Math:
@Doctor-Phibes said in The War On Math:
This should really go in the ‘mildly interesting’ thread.
I said ‘average’ because I’m not a gimboid.
This thread is the perfect place for math education. Education is not "mildly interesting" - it is essential. The equity and inclusion of all people depends on it.
When I said it should go in the mildly interesting thread I was lying
-
wrote on 29 Jul 2023, 00:20 last edited by
Education is extremely important.
-
@Axtremus said in The War On Math:
~~Be valuable enough in the technical aspects of engineering and the employer will hire you patent lawyers and technical writers to help take care of the nontechnical aspects of engineering for you. It's simple cost optimization. Why pay an exceptional technical talent $$$$$$ an hour to write simple English while you can pay a slightly above average writer $$ an hour to write simple English? You let that $$$$$$/hr. talent focus on doing the sort of things that only that $$$$$$/hr. talent can do, offload the load pu The only thing I can think of is that the first time you see less economically valuable tasks to cheaper labor. Same reason to hire secretaries and personal assistants to support senior executives, same reason to hire physician's assistants to support doctors.
It's the $$$/hr. technical talents (and these happen to be the majority) who need to also be good at communications~~
In today’s world the $$$$$ minds that can’t express themselves wind up making $$ working for $$ minds that know how to communicate and make $$$$$$$$.
Einstein wrote and presented his own work. Hawking couldn’t even truly speak or write and he still believed it important to present and communicate his own work. Oppenheimer learned an entire frigging language in 6 weeks because he thought it was important to lead a technical presentation in the Netherlands. But I’m sure they were wrong and you are as right as you usually are…
wrote on 29 Jul 2023, 02:52 last edited by@LuFins-Dad said in The War On Math:
@Axtremus said in The War On Math:
~~Be valuable enough in the technical aspects of engineering and the employer will hire you patent lawyers and technical writers to help take care of the nontechnical aspects of engineering for you. It's simple cost optimization. Why pay an exceptional technical talent $$$$$$ an hour to write simple English while you can pay a slightly above average writer $$ an hour to write simple English? You let that $$$$$$/hr. talent focus on doing the sort of things that only that $$$$$$/hr. talent can do, offload the load pu The only thing I can think of is that the first time you see less economically valuable tasks to cheaper labor. Same reason to hire secretaries and personal assistants to support senior executives, same reason to hire physician's assistants to support doctors.
It's the $$$/hr. technical talents (and these happen to be the majority) who need to also be good at communications~~
In today’s world the $$$$$ minds that can’t express themselves wind up making $$ working for $$ minds that know how to communicate and make $$$$$$$$.
Absolutely.
There is no one here who should be surprised that you know this and Ax doesn't.