I found that article quite interesting, especially the GPS aspect since I've noted a change in my own driving since we bought one. Having moved to a new part of the country, it's been very helpful to prevent me from getting lost somewhere. However, if I only do what it tells me to do, following verbal instructions, I seem to pay less attention to the landmarks and other information I would typically note as a way to "learn" my new route. With the GPS, it seems to take me 4 or 5 trips to really consolidate the route in my memory, as opposed to when I would use a map and pre-plan my trip, driving it only once or twice making the memory "solid".
I'd never noticed that facet but come to think of it yeah...
Right I'm binning the SatNav... I've got my phone as backup anyhow
Fascinating. Almost counter-intuitive. The easier it becomes, the less our brains integrate and learn.
As for Star Trek, I always considered that each person on the ship still had a specialty area, and only a few individuals were expected to have a wider breadth of knowledge.
Well that's the thing, each person seems well versed in science but has hobbies which would flaw all but geniuses and it's a whole crew of them. Okay there's a certain amount of "larger than life" at work there but I'd reckon most astronauts aren't as widely educated and that to a certain degree it would be required to make space travel of that scale viable.
It's a kids argument piece really to use such pop culture reference but it's not bad shorthand imo.
Plus, in considering the ramifications of the Universal Mind ... the more that is known expands the possibility to learn more of the unknown. Thus opening the Future mind to a greater and greater expansion of intellectual capacity as the foundation is deeper and broader.
Universal mind - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
That universal mind?
Not sure I understand right.
On an intuitive understanding alone, wouldn't higher knowledge rely on a foundation of knowledge and thus (using Mr Holmes theory of attic space) the more high level areas of knowledge you try to remember or master, the less space you have left for the foundation knowledge. I'm sure you're familiar with the problem of well educated low smarts people. They tend to fall over things reinforcing the Holmes theory that if you don't manage your attic space carefully you'll forget how to walk.
You're welcome. It's one of the few things which brought me back here, the opportunity to dissect some of the things I've been reading.
The article brings up an age-old question. People fear technology. Fearing technology is the only real way of becoming useless. It's better to accept it, and continue growing your own knowledge and understanding of the world and how things work. It keeps you adaptable.
Blindly walking forward is no better though. Progression must be maintained but must also be compared and contrasted to what went before to ensure it truly is advancement and not just a long curve into a nose dive.
Also advancement of technology is not necessarily advancement in human beings.
I find your post more interesting than the article, so I'll comment on that instead.
What ever fires your laser sir.
Overall I think our education could be more advanced somewhat like the people in Star Trek. I'm not sure the results of it are quite the same just like the cell phone is not exactly the same as the Star Trek communicators. However I think as an underlying principle our education could be much more advanced than it is now.
The majority of education in the modern world is public. While I appreciate how everyone has access to modern education, it also has the side effect of inhibiting innovation. Innovation comes out of a profit incentive, and there isn't much of a profit incentive in education.
In the absence of a profit incentive, the motivation becomes keeping up with some kind of standard. But people are gradually seeing eduation standards as more and more arbitrary. This is because the modern world is changing rapidly, but education is changing slowly. Our modern education is not equipped to keep up with the modern world. So I think there is a lot of room for improvement and innovation there, but I'm not sure if we will ever see it as long as the majority of education is public.
Whoa!!!!!
You did NOT just mention innovation and education near each other!!! You want the education system to THINK???? But that's why they got into education. They've already done the whole course so they don't have to think!
I think there were a few who suggested thought but they got life in detention for their efforts.
The education system has to have accreditation methods... for some reason. To have such accreditation you have to have a body who decides who and what is accredited. To do that you need people who are accredited already and this is only achieved by their forebearers being accredited. Now of course a career lasts what forty years? So the guy in charge is what something like 30 years behind on that final exam. Over his time small changes have been made but he can't sit by and let his subject be warped too much. He got into maths to teach maths not some new funky punk version for kids so he'll keep it more like the maths he recognises. It's human nature.
Until you kill off the antiquated and obsolete concept of certificates from accrediting bodies and the exams and gradings which gets dragged behind it, you'll never really progress with education.
Oh that and they'd have to recognise that not every last frickin nutter frothing person is a bloomin SJ and modify their teaching formats!!!!!!! :steam:
