This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »
What was not taught in school that you realize, REALLY should have been? (Why?)
For me, things like Financial Literacy, Entrepreurism, Cooking and Sex Ed (and the Psychology of Relationships), were not taught. And I realize that I have had to spend quite a few years now bumbling through life with the rest of my friends, rather clueless. Yet, I'd always score high on calculus quizzes, in labelling body parts and I am an excellent speller. Oh! And I am really confident! : /
I feel I have useless superpowers in some areas and not enough power in others where I super need it. (Perhaps my ignorance is ripe for being picked on by predators in society...) Most of the things that I wish I learned, improved the quality of my life and mind once I did learn them.
What is your deal?
Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.
Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.














Krisztián Pintér 200+
what i pity is the amount of time spent on useless things. i still can construct a triangle from a side, an angle on it, and the opposing angle. i wonder if i should put that on my CV.
Joanne Donovan 30+
Krisztián Pintér 200+
Joanne Donovan 30+
Krisztián Pintér 200+
we spend way too much time on building a positive image of ourselves, as opposed to build a true knowledge of what we are really capable of.
Joanne Donovan 30+
If you do not possess this, your feeling is a constant feeling of want, a personal sense of needing to be better or worse still, an innate sense of failure. For those of us who have experienced this lack of self knowledge, which is nearly everyone, its nearly impossible to imagine what it is like to possess such inner security. Therefore we do not, most of the time, even bother to seek it.
It can be strengthened or recovered when we are children. But telling kids they can be then next president of the usa is not the same thing as building self knowledge. Its just another silly ego game based on original insecurity.
Joanne Donovan 30+
Krisztián Pintér 200+
Joanne Donovan 30+
James Zhang 30+
John Smith 30+
And by "proper" economics you mean Austrian "let them eat cake and drink whatever liquids we trickle down on them" laissez-faire economics, way to present your own personal preference for what is essentially not even a science (economics just isn't real science) as if it were an immutable fact, I'm sure education needs a lot more of that...
Krisztián Pintér 200+
Andres Aullet 10+
Falsehoods don't help, but metaphors, well, if you have ever taught a classes to young kids, you will remember that pieces of knowledge embedded in stories (whether true or fictional) are remembered best
Let me now pick on "proper" as you define it here, maybe you are right the austrian school of economics goes to great lenghts to be "proper" and attempt to close all open loops within its framework. Logically consistent, well, maybe yes.
But proper also means appropriate or adequate. And economics as taught in the austrian school of economics is not proper in that sense. I am yet to see a country that implements "pure" laissez faire capitalism. Only then we'll be able to see if which of the the claims of the austrian school are confirmed or not
cheers
John Frum 30+
If we were to looking at the logic of your argument, one could also say 'I am yet to see a country that implements "pure" corruption-free governance. Only then we'll be able to see if which of the the claims of the honest principles are confirmed or not'.
The whole idea of "no one has tried it yet, so it won't work" gets you very limited mileage. What Austrian economics has going for it are:
1. Sound reasoning behind principles
2. Accurate predictions of what will go wrong with each aspect of the erosion of liberty
I, myself, though largely Austrian in my outlook, am not convinced by ALL aspects of the Austrian canon. However, I am convinced by the bulk of it. The reason I mention that: I am not averse to discussion; I only stand to gain by discussing issues with knowledgeable people. However, I find that when people are dismissive of such a well-reasoned structure, they are mostly people who are unwilling to explore and to learn.
Krisztián Pintér 200+
would you say it is unscientific, up to interpretation, dubious, questionable or what?
John Frum 30+
No wonder you forgot to add "straw man" to the list of logical fallacies ;-).