nathan98000

Posts

Sorted by New

Wiki Contributions

Comments

[Creative Writing Contest] All the People You Could Come to Love

This was wonderful! I felt my eyes water a bit as Ethan was walking away. Thank you for writing this.

[Creative Writing Contest] Average Joe

Thank you for writing this! I hadn't read anything before about Salk, and this was a very well written brief bio. I especially liked that you kept his name hidden until the middle of the story. Up until then, I thought this was entirely fictional. The idea that a REAL person could save thousands of lives is  inspiring and the feeling comes through in your writing

Philosophy Web - Project Proposal

This may be of interest. Several of the links on this website have the user test the consistency of their philosophical beliefs.

https://www.philosophersmag.com/games

(Video) You (Probably) Shouldn't Go To College

You three days ago:

Do you NEED an art degree to become a successful artist?

You yesterday:

Did you have to [go to Julliard] in order to become a successful musician?

I think it's fair for me to characterize your argument as:

You don't have to go to college to be  successful.

I agree that this discussion is unlikely to lead to anything productive. I encourage you to concede that going to college is actually a benefit for most people.

(Video) You (Probably) Shouldn't Go To College

Sure you could learn how to use your left hand, but it's an impedes progress and doesn't really help you much in achieving your goals. Like art school.

You're missing the analogy.

Your argument is that you don't have to go to college to be successful. Therefore, you probably shouldn't go to college.

My argument is that you don't have to use your right hand to be successful. Therefore, you probably shouldn't use your right hand.

Both of these are bad arguments.

A better argument would be: The benefit gained from getting an art degree is not worth the cost of college.

But 1) this would require actually looking at the numbers, and 2) the numbers would probably suggest that college is a good investment (even for art majors).

(Video) You (Probably) Shouldn't Go To College

"Social sciences" and a lot of psychology are soft sciences, and possibly even pseudosciences.

You explicitly say at the start of your video that you recommend people go into psychology... You also use images of art supplies in your video whenever you say the word "art". You also talk about getting paints from Michael's as a substitute for an arts education. It seems goal-post shifting to now claim you were actually referring to liberal arts in general. It also doesn't at all address the fact that most college students don't go to private universities.

Did you have to in order to become a successful musician?

I don't have to use my right hand to be successful.  But it would be silly to make a video called "You (Probably) Shouldn't Use Your Right Hand".

(Video) You (Probably) Shouldn't Go To College

Of course it's clickbait, and I don't see anything wrong with using clickbait titles as long as they aren't misleading.

It is misleading. The title is "You (Probably) Shouldn't Go To College." But you complain specifically about arts, language, and literature majors at private universities. This is not most people who go to college.

Are you disagreeing with that analysis? 

Asserting that humanities professors are pretentious jackoffs with dumbass interpretations is more easily interpreted as angry venting than as reasonable argument.

I don't care if you graduated top of your class with a music degree from Julliard, since it tells me nothing about what type of music you're capable of composing.

Think of it like this: People care if you graduated top of your class with a music degree from Julliard. Is it stupid? Maybe, but that's how it is. I didn't make the rules.

(Video) You (Probably) Shouldn't Go To College

I downvoted this and wanted to explain why.

First, the video seems contrarian for the sake of being contrarian. For example, the title of the video is "You (Probably) Shouldn't Go To College" even though you seem to limit your criticisms to art, language, and literature majors at private universities. In other words, you clickbaited the title so people would go in looking for an angry disagreement. 

This is even more obvious towards the end of your video where you say that in your experience people who teach humanities subjects are "pretentious jackoffs" who have "dumbass" interpretations. It's hard to interpret this as a good-faith argument about why people in general shouldn't go to college.

Second, you present zero evidence for any claims you make. Your video is a list of assertions. You talk about doing a cost-benefit analysis, but then you handwave numbers out of nowhere.  Your video doesn't leave me feeling confident that you've looked at the data on the job prospects of those with vs without college degrees.

I understand that the style of your video isn't a lecture that's comprehensively reviewing the research. But I think that's exactly the problem. Not that every video has to be a lecture. But I would like to see fewer uncharitable, uninformed Angry Rant videos on the EA Forum.

Idea: the "woketionary"

Having shared definitions also prevents deliberate/strategic misinterpretation.

The existence of a dictionary which claims to be apolitical doesn't mean that people will have shared definitions. Webster's dictionary already exists. This doesn't stop people from having semantic disagreements.

Sure, nothing is ever apolitical.  But you can try to make it less so.

How does one make a "less political" dictionary that explicitly and exclusively deals with political concepts?

What do you mean "the standard reasons"? 

There's a risk of EA being subsumed under one or another political party, which would make it less credible to those of different political affiliations.  There's also the risk of turning into the kind of dumpster fire of bad faith arguments that many political forums encounter. There's also the fact that political issues are relatively less neglected.

Load More