Education is Ignorance, by Noam Chomsky (Excerpted from Class Warfare) DAVID BARSAMIAN: One of the heroes of the current right-wing revival... is Adam Smith. You've done some pretty impressive research on Smith that has excavated... a lot of information that's not coming out. You've often quoted him describing the "vile maxim of the masters of mankind: all for ourselves and nothing for other people." NOAM CHOMSKY: I didn't do any research at all on Smith. I just read him. He did give an argument for markets, but the argument was that under conditions of perfect liberty, markets will lead to perfect equality. He also made remarks which ought to be truisms about the way states work. This truism was, a century later, called class analysis, but you don't have to go to Marx to find it. The version of him that's given today is just ridiculous. But even more interesting in some ways was the index. I want to be clear about this. This is true of classical liberalism in general. It's the same when you read Jefferson. CHOMSKY: ... ...
List of common misconceptions From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia This incomplete list is not intended to be exhaustive. This list corrects erroneous beliefs that are currently widely held about notable topics. Arts and culture Food and cooking Roll-style Western sushi. Searing meat does not "seal in" moisture, and in fact may actually cause meat to lose moisture. Legislation and crime Literature The Harry Potter books, though they have broken children's book publishing records, have not led to an increase in reading among children or adults, nor slowed the ongoing overall decline in book purchases by Americans, and children who did read the Harry Potter books were not more likely to go on to read more outside of the fantasy and mystery genres.[21][22][23][24] Music Religion Hebrew Bible The forbidden fruit mentioned in the Book of Genesis is commonly assumed to be an apple,[27] and is widely depicted as such in Western art. Buddhism The historical Buddha was not obese. Christianity Islam Sports Words and phrases History Biology
Falsifiability Falsifiability is the ability of a theory—a working framework for explaining and predicting natural phenomena—to be disproved by an experiment or observation.[1] The ability to evaluate theories against observations is essential to the scientific method, and as such, the falsifiability of theories is key to this and is the prime test for whether a proposition or theory can be described as scientific. Put simply, if a theory cannot be falsified, there is no point in even examining the evidence. [edit] Scientific knowledge All scientific knowledge and theories are based on two things: observation and consistent logic. A theory is a logical explanation for observations. It has been argued, most notably by Karl Popper, that the scientific method demands that a theory must at least in principle be falsifiable in order for it to be valid as science. [edit] Examples of falsifiability Until the twentieth century Newton's laws of motion were a) scientific and b) believed to be true. [edit] See also
OBAMA vs ROMNEY: Here's Who's Right About The Economy You're Distracted. This Professor Can Help. - Technology By Marc Parry Seattle Matthew Ryan Williams for The Chronicle Before each class session, David Levy leads his students in a few minutes of meditation. To complete her homework assignment, Meran Hill needed total concentration. Then she plunged into the task: Spend 15 minutes doing e-mail. Soon enough, though, a familiar craving bubbled up. As Ms. But the assignment had her trapped. The e-mail drill was one of numerous mind-training exercises in a unique class designed to raise students' awareness about how they use their digital tools. Their professor, David M. At its extreme, that debate plays out in the writing of authors whom the critic Adam Gopnik has dubbed the Never-Betters and the Better-Nevers. On college campuses, meanwhile, educators struggle to manage what the Stanford University multitasking researcher Clifford Nass describes as a radical shift in the nature of attention. Amid this scampering attention, some fear for the future of long-form reading. When I ask Mr. But Mr. Mr.
Philosophic burden of proof The philosophical burden of proof or onus (probandi) is the obligation on a party in an epistemic dispute to provide sufficient warrant for their position. Holder of the burden[edit] When debating any issue, there is an implicit burden of proof on the person asserting a claim. While certain kinds of arguments, such as logical syllogisms, require mathematical or strictly logical proofs, the standard for evidence to meet the burden of proof is usually determined by context and community standards.[4][5] In public discourse[edit] Burden of proof is also an important concept in the public arena of ideas. Proving a negative[edit] When the assertion to prove is a negative claim, the burden takes the form of a negative proof, proof of impossibility, or mere evidence of absence. Example[edit] The number of gumballs is even.The number of gumballs is odd. These two claims can be considered independently. See also[edit] References[edit] Jump up ^ "Argumentum ad Ignorantiam".
Why Americans doubt man-made climate change - Inside Story: US 2012 It was 42 years ago that the first Earth Day was organised in the US, drawing millions of Americans to rallies across the country calling for a sustainable environment. Some consider that day to be the birth of the modern environmentalist movement in the US. Today the day is marked by millions around the world but its impact in the US seems to have fizzled, with only dozens turning out at the National Mall in Washington DC on Sunday. While the first Earth Day helped lead to the establishment of the US Environmental Protection agency, this year it was largely ignored by politicians and the public. The issue of climate change has barely come up on the US presidential campaign trail. And for the Republicans it is something they would rather distance themselves from. So why do most Americans still doubt that climate change is man-made?
where good ideas come from? Unfalsifiable hypothesis From Citizendium, the Citizens' Compendium A hypothesis is unfalsifiable when by its very nature it cannot be disproven by any amount of evidence. This idea is important when making any kind of claim and when verifying claims. A scientific claim that cannot be tested must be refined and clarified until it can be. "Seek and you shall find." This statement cannot be proven wrong because the seeker will either find what they are looking for or they will keep looking. "This vault can be broken into." In order to prove this statement wrong, one would have to try to break into it for an infinite amount of time, which is impossible.