Re: Remine reproductive excess requirement
- From: "g" <gillawton@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2005 20:17:08 -0400 (EDT)
Perplexed offered this crap as though he were spokesman for all the
"insiders" in his pseudo-community of
quasi-control freaks. I doubt he speaks for the really brilliant ones:
> You are invited to join this process. Or, you can stand on the sidelines
> and snipe. Or, you can become the founder of a competing process, and
> invite people to join you. It is your choice. Just don't pretend that
> the people participating in the existing process are busy defending
> their egos and academic prerogatives. Think, maybe, that they may see
> themselves as defending MUTUALLY AGREED CRYSTAL CLEAR inherited
> terminology.
Have NEVER doubted nor failed to appreciate peer review, nor given you any
cause to suggest same.
Have NEVER attacked biology, biologists, evolution... only lack of clarity
by ANYBODY, including SELF, and without respect for any person, field of
study, or control freak who is exercised by that.
Am delighted to have learned to spell species correctly.
Am delighted to have learned that "optimal" is to quality, as "maximal" is
to quantity.
You seem to wish to keep a score card on what I did not know yesterday, and
not to resent the fact that I embrace and internalize correction. Embracing
and internalizing correction does NOT equate to sucking up to a control
freak who waves a score card on errors made in past and subsequently
corrected.
Some self-appointed spokespersons for the "elite" in any field of study can
see a gnat in a student's eye but not a beetle in their own. Some teachers
are collectors of a student's errors and resent his progress.
Also, some teachers engage in fallacious usages, even as they condemn
students for being confused or hampered by them. You cannot handle an
example in the field you pretend to serve and protect by trying to squelch
requests for clarity, so let me point to such a request of those in another
field, physics (in which I am learning, also).
EXAMPLE -- the concept of displacement, in physics, refers to a
straight-line distance (unless otherwise stated, as in non-Euclidian
geometry). It is the shortest distance between two points that an object has
moved from a starting position to an ending position. Often textbook
definitions do not make this clear and, what is worse, give examples that
are fallacious, hence misleading to the student, with regard to it. It is
one thing to use a tolerance scale suggesting a fallacy in relation to a
definition, where one has disclosed he is doing so, or is among others who
are abundantly aware one is doing so. If, in a learning example for
students, or in a test question, the distance driven by a motor vehicle
between two cities is expressed as representing displacement, that suggests
displacement is not the shortest distance between two points but the
distance traveled by a motor vehicle as it meanders to right and left and up
and down, along its route. Actual displacement between any given starting
point and ending point on earth would make no turns or curves, and no ups or
downs, nor would it follow the curvature of the earth. The "most correct"
answer to a test question may be viewed as applying the same scale of
tolerance as is implied by the way the example or question or problem, is
stated. However, clarity in teaching/learning examples would best be served
by disclosures of conceptual discrepancies. Often teachers themselves are no
even aware that they, or their texts, or their tests imply undisclosed
conceptual fallacies.
If Perplexed would offer correction without trying to be a control freak and
an old-score-card keeper, that would be welcome.
.
- References:
- Remine reproductive excess requirement
- From: Joe Felsenstein
- Re: Remine reproductive excess requirement
- From: Perplexed in Peoria
- Re: Remine reproductive excess requirement
- From: g
- Re: Remine reproductive excess requirement
- From: Perplexed in Peoria
- Re: Remine reproductive excess requirement
- From: g
- Re: Remine reproductive excess requirement
- From: Perplexed in Peoria
- Re: Remine reproductive excess requirement
- From: g
- Re: Remine reproductive excess requirement
- From: Perplexed in Peoria
- Remine reproductive excess requirement
- Prev by Date: Re: Lizard engines and rat engines
- Next by Date: Re: Lizard engines and rat engines
- Previous by thread: Re: Remine reproductive excess requirement
- Next by thread: Re: Remine reproductive excess requirement
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|