www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall How Limbaugh convinced me not to vote for Bush

Dear Charles,

Yes, about spending too much time on this forum.

It takes a lot of self-discipline to control one's posting here, determination, steel mind control in fact . . .

You have to really work hard to acquire those qualities.

Or so people tell me . . .

Alex

Dear Jennifer, Esq.

It is obvious that you would make a formidable debating opponent, much as St Catherine of Alexandria was . . .

Ten of us guys are no match for you!

And it is only in the Eastern Catholic Churches that you will find men who are humble enough to admit this . . .

Alex

ByzTn - where to begin, ...

He is quite right. There are many schools that focus on teaching exclusively. At most Universities there is the expectation that in addition to teaching one will undertake scholarly activity to advance the scope of human knowledge. This is an important activity. While mnay people have more talent for one than the other, the two activites are not mutually exclusive; really in most cases they are highly synergystic. Continuing scholarly activity fortifies excellence; no amount of charisma, or classroom presenence can ever substitute for have something true and meaningful to say. Nobel Laureate Roald Hoffman - a great researcher and teacher - wrote an op-ed piece on this subject for the NYT a decade or so ago that is worth searching for.


And your point? Surely we don't want to revert to that!

Well, as stated above, education as transmission of knowledge is only part of the deal. Creation of new knowledge is the activity of great universities. Creative spirit is the very heart of this vocation. Are universities also littered with careerists who are just there to pay a mortgage. Sure. Why would missing the mark be surprising in a human enterprise? But a moment's reflection on US universities in this century ought to have one more impressed with tremendous achievements in knowledge, rather than pre-occupied with those who fall short.

That's kind of the point.
As long as we agree on "often".
Sometimes this self-absorbed industry rises to respond directly to outside challenges. It, provided the edge in encryptation, radar, and weaponry that won WWII. Without the prior years of self-absorption that developed insular excellence, the new knowledge that provided these new technologies would have been lacking and the outcome might have been different.

Dear Alex:

Come on!

Have you seen MEMO or PAUL or ME trying to win an argument from Jennifer?

Latins are, likewise, humble you know!

Amado

Folks, I do want to apologize for the intellectual snobbery. It was tacky and I apologize. I shouldn't have "gone there."

Well, that was tried in Poland in the late 80's-early 90's- massive failure and great economic hardship for the people (plenty of food in the shops but most people could not afford it) I wish Eastern Europe a smooth integration into the EU

Of course, one needs to know subject matter in order to teach it. But a fair amount of research these days doesn't do anything except spend money. There was a nationally-known researcher here some years ago, who was notorious for spending millions and producing results on the order of, "generally, dogs have four legs." Sometimes, the scholarly activity doesn't fortify anything, except the researcher's financial well-being. There is good research, and pointless research, and often no one is really taking a good look at it to see which category it falls into.

Some fields do have a good track record for producing new knowledge. Other fields seem to produce a lot of propaganda that masquerades as knowledge. This has grown much worse since the late 60s. I think some fields have better research controls and review bodies with more clearly defined research guidelines than do other fields. "Pure" sciences often do seem to have more clear-cut objectives - but not always.

War does seem to spur technological advances and great leaps in knowledge - probably the only good thing that comes out of it. Too bad we can't have those good things without the wars. I think the universities of WWII were a good bit different than universities today. After the late 60s and early 70s, the universities underwent some major changes - not always for the better.

The need to apply for funding by peer-review is a great discipline. That tends to filter out the ridiculous. At the same time it also tends to filter out work to test hypotheses that emeerge from novel viewpoints. This discipline cuts both ways. The fact that an enormous of work is involved in doing anything of quality is the best disincentive to ridiculous work, and workmanship is probably is a sure indicator serious scholarship.

War spurs great technological advances that are built on the knowledge that emerged from insular self-absorbed basic science.

Right. The revolution in solid-state physics, and chemical and materials synthesis required to support e.g., a PC industry, had barely begun; biotechnology wasn't yet conceived. And heros like Conant opened the doors to kids of working stiffs. The changes are just remarkable.

Dear Brian,

That was tried, but with the old communist guard still in place.

That is why I suggested an actual U.S. invasion with tanks, troops and helicopters to "try it again."

Alex

God forbid but with the current administration in place, i would not be surprised if they even would invade Poland!! But hopefully that will all be over after today :p

PEACE,

Brian

Yes, don't forget Poland!

Brian, nothing is going to be over after today. Regardless of who wins the election, it's going to take some time to get out of the mess in Iraq. However, if you agree to invade Poland and Canada, I will go along with you.

Dear Charles,

Canada has been part of the U.S. economic empire for some time now . . .

But if you want to take your tanks to Eastern Europe, then you're really on a roll . . .

Alex

Alex, the poor people of Poland have suffered so much at the hands of the Russians, they would have been happy at one time if we had annexed them.