Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
As a former humanities graduate I’d have hoped you’d have had a wittier response… (I agree with your sentiment though!)
I am not saying per se that humanities students are not contributors to the social weal. I am saying that the study of humanities has not made them net contributors to the social weal. Where they have contributed is when they went non humanities based like for example RCS and his insurance business. This is based on actuary which is more or less a stats based subject and hence stem.
There are few uni courses that directly lead to a career in that subject (although oddly my pharamacy students are on one such course). Uni study is about a lot more than the specifics of the three/four years. If every chemistry graduate tried to stay in chemistry there would be 10 for every job. But they also learn to evaluate data, solve problems and so on, skills that take them into a myriad of roles. Humanities will have similar hard and soft skills. At the fringes are some bat shit theories that get academics in the news. And that is often the aim - unis love getting in the news. But don’t forget the science weirdos are there too. From water molecules retaining the memory of molecules that were once dissolved in it, to the idea that having two sudden infant deaths in a family is unbelievably rare (when the chances of a second are more likely if there is a first), to the idea nuclear fusion will ever work as a power source.* Lots of the highest impact stuff in healthcare comes out of fairly soft subjects such as psychology. You can save billions on medication if you work out why patients don’t complete their medication or take them incorrectly.
*The sun doesn’t count.
Bat shit theories are I agree everywhere. Does not change the fact that stem has done a lot to improve the life of humans a lot. Humanities has done the squareroot of fuckall to improve it.
I don't advocate banning humanities studies I just think it should be seen as what it is which is a hobby sort of thing with little relevance to making life better for most people
I think you might want to consider the breadth of what the ‘humanities’ covers. I once attended a chemical weapons conference that was organised out of a social science department. There are serious things that effect peoples lives. Don’t get me wrong, I’m hard core STEM, trying to cure cancer, or at least understand it better, but human life is enhanced by endeavours in all ways.
Organised out of a social science department doesnt make it humanities based I suspect the conference was largely populated by stem people and most subjects were stem. If the WI organised it would not make chemical weapons a feminine issue.
Stem subjects have given the world nuclear power, renewable energy sources, nitrogen fertilisers so we can feed a world population, electric cars, anti biotics, medical advances that keep people alive such as pace makers and transplants.....etc etc
What has humanities given that balance the equation so they are equal?
Sweden will send about 50 IFV CV90 tracked vehicles and Archer artillery systems to Ukraine. The CV90 is used to transport up to 8 infantry troops and is equipped with a 40mm Bofors automatic gun. The package is worth SEK 4.3 billion ($419 million) https://twitter.com/RyszardJonski/status/1616025419693670405
The northern and eastern European countries get it. By their own words, Russia wants dominion over much of Europe. We can choose to stop it now, or in five or ten years, when it will be much, much more expensive.
This means we don't talk about giving Ukraine help. We don't equivocate. We don't do an "after-you" gambit. We give them what they need ASAP, so they can win this war.
The actions of the smaller nations - Sweden, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland etc - shame the larger ones such as Germany (and yes, @kamski, France and Italy).
I can understand Germany's reluctance, given their history. But they were in the wrong then. That doesn't mean they need to do wrong today.
What about the even larger one - the US?
You understand Germany's reluctance. Here's a thought experiment - what do you think are the reasons and arguments behind the US refusing (so far) to supply Ukraine with tanks?
Here's a fact that you may not have noticed, as it's quite a subtle one.
The USA is not in Europe. Germany is. The USA is not threatened territorially by Russia. They are not part of a massive economic bloc that is threatened by Russia's westwards expansion. Germany is.
You might want to check on a map.
Germany should do the right thing without such pathetic excuses. Other countries are not waiting for the US.
And why is Germany apparently stopping other countries from sending their Leopard tanks to Ukraine?
So you can't think of any reasons for the US to refuse tanks, except that it isn't in Europe? Come on, humour me and do the thought experiment.
You say you understand German reluctance but you are asking me for the reason. I'd be genuinely interested to hear what you think the reasons for German reluctance are.
"You might want to check on a map" really?
The only way that Germany is different from the other countries already helping out more is that its forefathers were Nazis who raped Ukraine
Why should that stop them sending tanks?
The Nazi relationship with Ukraine was far less clear cut than that.
Not in a way that makes it more complicated to send tanks
What is currently making it complicated for Germany to send tanks is the apparent reluctance of the US to send tanks.
Why does that make it more complicated? If it's the right thing to do, they should do it. If it's not the right thing to do, they should say clearly they will not send them - and why.
It would certainly simplify the decision if the US announced it was going to send tanks.
(Snip)
You might think so. It might also offer Scholz an opportunity to say: "Hey, Ukraine's getting 200 Abrams. They don't need our Leopards."
He should just FDI.
Can you really not appreciate why Scholz might be reluctant to send tanks if the US is refusing to do so? Anything that looks like the Germans taking a military lead would be a propaganda victory for Putin, for one thing. Memories of the Great Patriotic War and all that.
That just sounds like excuse-making.
Putin will try to make a propaganda victory out of anything. Sending them. Not sending them. ("Look, the Germans think their tanks are pants and will blow up at the first sight of a T-62!")
It's quite simple: do you want Russia to be defeated in Ukraine? If so, they need the tools. Not giving them the tools may still lead to a win, but it will cost many more Ukrainian lives.
If you don't want Russia to be defeated in Ukraine, why not?
It sounds like you are making excuses for the Americans. Don't you think the Russians are more likely to be defeated if the US also sends tanks?
LOL, I'm not making excuses (although there are practical problems with the fuel-guzzling, maintenance-heavy turbine-driven Abrams that are not faced with the Leopard 2). The US should send some. But that doesn't excuse Germany not sending Leopards.
The UK has shown more leadership in this horrid mess than Germany has, at every stage. And that's such an unusual thing to say nowadays, you have to wonder why.
There's zero reason for Germany not to send tanks. There's less than zero (negative?) reason for them to block other countries sending their Leopards.
Linking it to US deliveries of Abrams is pathetic, especially after we've committed to delivering C2s.
Your arguments are becoming increasingly irrational. It is not remotely unusual for the UK to show more leadership in military matters than Germany, for very obvious historical reasons. And it's absurd to claim that there's zero reason for Germany not to send tanks. Of course there are reasons for Germany not to send tanks, just as there are reasons for Germany to send tanks.
Hopefully the West will work together to find the best way to deal with the Russian invasion of Ukraine and bring an end to the suffering. And hopefully the people working on this are basing their plans on reason rather than the kind of impetuous "just FDI" mentality that you are displaying here.
"Your arguments are becoming increasingly irrational. "
LOL. No. My position is simple: I want Russia out of Ukraine. The longer the war goes on, the more Ukrainians die. They need as many tools as they can get to achieve victory as soon as possible. That's best for all of us.
You may disagree. But I think what I've said today is pretty much in line with that.
Yes, there needs to be a plan. Yes, there are things that could make the situation worse (except Ukraine has shown an admirable ability to run and maintain a diverse range of kit). But that's not what we're seeing from Scholz. Or from your excuses.
I think Germany should send tanks, though I'm less absolutely certain than you seem to be. And there's plenty of criticism in Germany of the delays, and not only the opposition CDU but also the FDP and Greens are in favour. I'm not a fan of Scholz, who I think hasn't shown much leadership, although he may be fairly in line with the median German voter on these issues.
But I don't understand why you are willing to make excuses for the US, while at the same time making such self-righteous condemnation of Germany. It seems inconsistent and illogical when I don't hear you use this kind of language about anyone else. And yes maybe every day costs lives, but Ukraine has been asking for tanks from allies for months, and forgive me if I missed it, but I didn't hear this kind of language from you for all these months. And I find some of your arguments pretty contrived.
I'm not making 'excuses' for the US (aside from a few points below that suggest the Leopard 2 is a marginally better tank for this particular case than Abrams). To make it clear: the US should send Abrams (as I think I've said below). More Bradleys as well (though as with all of these things, training takes a considerable time. I fully expect more to be sent after the first few and the operating and maintenance teams are set up in Ukraine - which is another reason to send the tanks of whatever type ASAP).
What is contrived is the 'link' you and others suggest that Germany can only send tanks if the US does. It is, in my view, bullshit. It's ridiculous, especially after the UK is sending some MBTs and Russia has not nuked us. And not allowing other countries to send their Leopards is crazy from a medium-term business point of view. Hopefully that at least may change.
I think you're taking my criticism of Germany over their handling of this Ukraine crisis too far. I'm not 'condemning' them. I think they've made some good decisions, some mediocre decisions, and some bad decisions. But their messaging appears to be all over the place. And messaging matters, especially when the Kremlin is listening.
All this started with a BBC article that had an odd graph that, as DA said, pro-Russians were using to their advantage. The way to 'beat' UK in terms of military kit sent is to send the kit.
Doesn’t the Abrams take about five hours of maintenance for every hour of operation ? Other way round for the Bradleys.
The Leopard makes way more sense logistically.
I think the Abrams gets 3 gallons per mile. That's thirsty.
And a massive issue is that it uses that much fuel even when idling. (Both the above from @MarkHertling, I think)
Not an insurmountable issue (after all, the US copes with it), but it is a big issue if fuel supply to the front becomes disrupted.
That’s bonkers. You wouldn’t need fuel supply to be much disrupted to get into problems. They should bring out a mild hybrid version with regenerative braking.
Apparently it's been seen as a potential issue with the Abrams since it was first introduced. The potential new version, the Abrams X, goes back to a diesel powerpack rather than a turbine. It's also hybrid.
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
As a former humanities graduate I’d have hoped you’d have had a wittier response… (I agree with your sentiment though!)
I am not saying per se that humanities students are not contributors to the social weal. I am saying that the study of humanities has not made them net contributors to the social weal. Where they have contributed is when they went non humanities based like for example RCS and his insurance business. This is based on actuary which is more or less a stats based subject and hence stem.
There are few uni courses that directly lead to a career in that subject (although oddly my pharamacy students are on one such course). Uni study is about a lot more than the specifics of the three/four years. If every chemistry graduate tried to stay in chemistry there would be 10 for every job. But they also learn to evaluate data, solve problems and so on, skills that take them into a myriad of roles. Humanities will have similar hard and soft skills. At the fringes are some bat shit theories that get academics in the news. And that is often the aim - unis love getting in the news. But don’t forget the science weirdos are there too. From water molecules retaining the memory of molecules that were once dissolved in it, to the idea that having two sudden infant deaths in a family is unbelievably rare (when the chances of a second are more likely if there is a first), to the idea nuclear fusion will ever work as a power source.* Lots of the highest impact stuff in healthcare comes out of fairly soft subjects such as psychology. You can save billions on medication if you work out why patients don’t complete their medication or take them incorrectly.
*The sun doesn’t count.
Bat shit theories are I agree everywhere. Does not change the fact that stem has done a lot to improve the life of humans a lot. Humanities has done the squareroot of fuckall to improve it.
I don't advocate banning humanities studies I just think it should be seen as what it is which is a hobby sort of thing with little relevance to making life better for most people
I think you might want to consider the breadth of what the ‘humanities’ covers. I once attended a chemical weapons conference that was organised out of a social science department. There are serious things that effect peoples lives. Don’t get me wrong, I’m hard core STEM, trying to cure cancer, or at least understand it better, but human life is enhanced by endeavours in all ways.
Organised out of a social science department doesnt make it humanities based I suspect the conference was largely populated by stem people and most subjects were stem. If the WI organised it would not make chemical weapons a feminine issue.
Stem subjects have given the world nuclear power, renewable energy sources, nitrogen fertilisers so we can feed a world population, electric cars, anti biotics, medical advances that keep people alive such as pace makers and transplants.....etc etc
What has humanities given that balance the equation so they are equal?
Democracy?
Plato did not study humanities
Nor did he think much of democracy, putting it very mildly
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
As a former humanities graduate I’d have hoped you’d have had a wittier response… (I agree with your sentiment though!)
I am not saying per se that humanities students are not contributors to the social weal. I am saying that the study of humanities has not made them net contributors to the social weal. Where they have contributed is when they went non humanities based like for example RCS and his insurance business. This is based on actuary which is more or less a stats based subject and hence stem.
There are few uni courses that directly lead to a career in that subject (although oddly my pharamacy students are on one such course). Uni study is about a lot more than the specifics of the three/four years. If every chemistry graduate tried to stay in chemistry there would be 10 for every job. But they also learn to evaluate data, solve problems and so on, skills that take them into a myriad of roles. Humanities will have similar hard and soft skills. At the fringes are some bat shit theories that get academics in the news. And that is often the aim - unis love getting in the news. But don’t forget the science weirdos are there too. From water molecules retaining the memory of molecules that were once dissolved in it, to the idea that having two sudden infant deaths in a family is unbelievably rare (when the chances of a second are more likely if there is a first), to the idea nuclear fusion will ever work as a power source.* Lots of the highest impact stuff in healthcare comes out of fairly soft subjects such as psychology. You can save billions on medication if you work out why patients don’t complete their medication or take them incorrectly.
*The sun doesn’t count.
Bat shit theories are I agree everywhere. Does not change the fact that stem has done a lot to improve the life of humans a lot. Humanities has done the squareroot of fuckall to improve it.
I don't advocate banning humanities studies I just think it should be seen as what it is which is a hobby sort of thing with little relevance to making life better for most people
I think you might want to consider the breadth of what the ‘humanities’ covers. I once attended a chemical weapons conference that was organised out of a social science department. There are serious things that effect peoples lives. Don’t get me wrong, I’m hard core STEM, trying to cure cancer, or at least understand it better, but human life is enhanced by endeavours in all ways.
Organised out of a social science department doesnt make it humanities based I suspect the conference was largely populated by stem people and most subjects were stem. If the WI organised it would not make chemical weapons a feminine issue.
Stem subjects have given the world nuclear power, renewable energy sources, nitrogen fertilisers so we can feed a world population, electric cars, anti biotics, medical advances that keep people alive such as pace makers and transplants.....etc etc
What has humanities given that balance the equation so they are equal?
Democracy?
Plato did not study humanities
Nor did he think much of democracy, putting it very mildly
He was the positor of democracy, just not the democracy we have. I doubt he ever envisioned the vote of someone who sits on their ass all day and watches jeremy kyle having an equal say to someone who actually contributes to society.
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
As a former humanities graduate I’d have hoped you’d have had a wittier response… (I agree with your sentiment though!)
I am not saying per se that humanities students are not contributors to the social weal. I am saying that the study of humanities has not made them net contributors to the social weal. Where they have contributed is when they went non humanities based like for example RCS and his insurance business. This is based on actuary which is more or less a stats based subject and hence stem.
There are few uni courses that directly lead to a career in that subject (although oddly my pharamacy students are on one such course). Uni study is about a lot more than the specifics of the three/four years. If every chemistry graduate tried to stay in chemistry there would be 10 for every job. But they also learn to evaluate data, solve problems and so on, skills that take them into a myriad of roles. Humanities will have similar hard and soft skills. At the fringes are some bat shit theories that get academics in the news. And that is often the aim - unis love getting in the news. But don’t forget the science weirdos are there too. From water molecules retaining the memory of molecules that were once dissolved in it, to the idea that having two sudden infant deaths in a family is unbelievably rare (when the chances of a second are more likely if there is a first), to the idea nuclear fusion will ever work as a power source.* Lots of the highest impact stuff in healthcare comes out of fairly soft subjects such as psychology. You can save billions on medication if you work out why patients don’t complete their medication or take them incorrectly.
*The sun doesn’t count.
Bat shit theories are I agree everywhere. Does not change the fact that stem has done a lot to improve the life of humans a lot. Humanities has done the squareroot of fuckall to improve it.
I don't advocate banning humanities studies I just think it should be seen as what it is which is a hobby sort of thing with little relevance to making life better for most people
I think you might want to consider the breadth of what the ‘humanities’ covers. I once attended a chemical weapons conference that was organised out of a social science department. There are serious things that effect peoples lives. Don’t get me wrong, I’m hard core STEM, trying to cure cancer, or at least understand it better, but human life is enhanced by endeavours in all ways.
Organised out of a social science department doesnt make it humanities based I suspect the conference was largely populated by stem people and most subjects were stem. If the WI organised it would not make chemical weapons a feminine issue.
Stem subjects have given the world nuclear power, renewable energy sources, nitrogen fertilisers so we can feed a world population, electric cars, anti biotics, medical advances that keep people alive such as pace makers and transplants.....etc etc
What has humanities given that balance the equation so they are equal?
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
As a former humanities graduate I’d have hoped you’d have had a wittier response… (I agree with your sentiment though!)
I am not saying per se that humanities students are not contributors to the social weal. I am saying that the study of humanities has not made them net contributors to the social weal. Where they have contributed is when they went non humanities based like for example RCS and his insurance business. This is based on actuary which is more or less a stats based subject and hence stem.
There are few uni courses that directly lead to a career in that subject (although oddly my pharamacy students are on one such course). Uni study is about a lot more than the specifics of the three/four years. If every chemistry graduate tried to stay in chemistry there would be 10 for every job. But they also learn to evaluate data, solve problems and so on, skills that take them into a myriad of roles. Humanities will have similar hard and soft skills. At the fringes are some bat shit theories that get academics in the news. And that is often the aim - unis love getting in the news. But don’t forget the science weirdos are there too. From water molecules retaining the memory of molecules that were once dissolved in it, to the idea that having two sudden infant deaths in a family is unbelievably rare (when the chances of a second are more likely if there is a first), to the idea nuclear fusion will ever work as a power source.* Lots of the highest impact stuff in healthcare comes out of fairly soft subjects such as psychology. You can save billions on medication if you work out why patients don’t complete their medication or take them incorrectly.
*The sun doesn’t count.
Bat shit theories are I agree everywhere. Does not change the fact that stem has done a lot to improve the life of humans a lot. Humanities has done the squareroot of fuckall to improve it.
I don't advocate banning humanities studies I just think it should be seen as what it is which is a hobby sort of thing with little relevance to making life better for most people
I think you might want to consider the breadth of what the ‘humanities’ covers. I once attended a chemical weapons conference that was organised out of a social science department. There are serious things that effect peoples lives. Don’t get me wrong, I’m hard core STEM, trying to cure cancer, or at least understand it better, but human life is enhanced by endeavours in all ways.
Organised out of a social science department doesnt make it humanities based I suspect the conference was largely populated by stem people and most subjects were stem. If the WI organised it would not make chemical weapons a feminine issue.
Stem subjects have given the world nuclear power, renewable energy sources, nitrogen fertilisers so we can feed a world population, electric cars, anti biotics, medical advances that keep people alive such as pace makers and transplants.....etc etc
What has humanities given that balance the equation so they are equal?
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
Well, Pagan 2 quite clearly refers to 'Humaities' students, not Humanities students (which I'm one of), so no need to take umbrage on their behalf.
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
Well, Pagan 2 quite clearly refers to 'Humaities' students, not Humanities students (which I'm one of), so no need to take umbrage on their behalf.
I think you will find I had the n in there....maybe it doesnt show up on russian monitors
Lee Anderson MP @LeeAndersonMP_ Katy works for me. She is single & earns less than 30k, rents a room for £775pcm in Central London, has student debt, £120 a month on travelling to work saves money every month, goes on foreign holidays & does not need to use a foodbank.
I sometimes wonder what old school Tory nasties like Chope make of social climber 30p Lee?
I eat my share of value brand products, but I draw the line at fake Weetabix. Not even close to the real thing.
We switched to own-brand all-bran a while back (it's among my kids' favourites because it looks like sticks - have managed to convince the younger eater that it isprocessed sticks, I think, athough she also refers to it, quite descriptively, as "all brown"). They do taste different; took a while to realise (comparing two packets' ingredients/nutrition) that the main difference is that the 'real' one is stuffed with a lot more salt. Having got used to the own-brand one, I think I now prefer it.
Weetabix - can any variation be worse than the real thing? Although I must admit I'm the only non-eater in my family.
The issue with Weetabix is with the milk. Too much or too little renders it soggy/dry respectively and the landing zone between the two is very narrow (compared to say Cornflakes). I gave up long ago. Life's too short.
Dunno, I'm pretty sure the issue with Weetabix is the Weetabix. It's horrible with or without milk in whatever quantity. Milk is fine without Weetabix
Heretic, Weetabix is second only to Porridge, Oat Chruchies and Corn flakes
That's fourth then.
Wot, no Crunchy Nut Cornflakes?
Fifth....
No breakfast is even getting started until it has bacon and/or/both eggs. Honourable mention to kippers though. (That's a PB first!)
Alternatively an Arbroath smoked haddock with a poached egg (or finnan haddock will also do).
That gets in with having eggs. Breakfast rule #1 - pass!
My favourite breakfast. Smoked Haddock with a fat golden-yolk poached egg on top. Crunchy toast and butter. Strong tea. Mmmmmmm
It’s one of the best things about staying in quality British hotels. I’ve never found it anywhere outside the UK
The best possible breakfasts in my view are;
Bacon sandwich (I'm nearly persuaded that an egg topping should be involved, but then a little cheese, and you run away)
Kedgeree - I've no idea why people can't cook it well, admittedly I can't.
Bacon sandwich with white sliced bread and (in my opinion) ketchup, not brown sauce. Brown sauce for sausages.
As for egg, runny scrambled and with the absolute must have ingredient of half a level teaspoon of MSG. Transforms egg into something eggier.
Best breakfast is a breakfast burrito.
No MSG unfortunately.
My son has discovered that the local supermarket sells MSG in little jars that you can simply sprinkle on food.
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
Well, Pagan 2 quite clearly refers to 'Humaities' students, not Humanities students (which I'm one of), so no need to take umbrage on their behalf.
I think you will find I had the n in there....maybe it doesnt show up on russian monitors
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
What big advance has humanity studies ever given us? Please tell. Now do some humanities students do well and enhance the place yes....generally not through the humanities studies they did. You are a case in point....you studied humanites...your contributions to society however are not humanity based
Science, Technology, Engineering and Medicine all help us live, but it is the Arts and Humanities that give us a reason to live.
Well they might you some of us frankly think most modern art is a pile of dross. You think hurst and Emin give you a reason to live thats fine what they give me is a reason to believe the universe would be better off with out humans
Most modern art is figurative realism. I think you mean abstract art, rather than modern art.
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
What big advance has humanity studies ever given us? Please tell. Now do some humanities students do well and enhance the place yes....generally not through the humanities studies they did. You are a case in point....you studied humanites...your contributions to society however are not humanity based
Science, Technology, Engineering and Medicine all help us live, but it is the Arts and Humanities that give us a reason to live.
Well they might you some of us frankly think most modern art is a pile of dross. You think hurst and Emin give you a reason to live thats fine what they give me is a reason to believe the universe would be better off with out humans
Most modern art is figurative realism. I think you mean abstract art, rather than modern art.
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
As a former humanities graduate I’d have hoped you’d have had a wittier response… (I agree with your sentiment though!)
I am not saying per se that humanities students are not contributors to the social weal. I am saying that the study of humanities has not made them net contributors to the social weal. Where they have contributed is when they went non humanities based like for example RCS and his insurance business. This is based on actuary which is more or less a stats based subject and hence stem.
There are few uni courses that directly lead to a career in that subject (although oddly my pharamacy students are on one such course). Uni study is about a lot more than the specifics of the three/four years. If every chemistry graduate tried to stay in chemistry there would be 10 for every job. But they also learn to evaluate data, solve problems and so on, skills that take them into a myriad of roles. Humanities will have similar hard and soft skills. At the fringes are some bat shit theories that get academics in the news. And that is often the aim - unis love getting in the news. But don’t forget the science weirdos are there too. From water molecules retaining the memory of molecules that were once dissolved in it, to the idea that having two sudden infant deaths in a family is unbelievably rare (when the chances of a second are more likely if there is a first), to the idea nuclear fusion will ever work as a power source.* Lots of the highest impact stuff in healthcare comes out of fairly soft subjects such as psychology. You can save billions on medication if you work out why patients don’t complete their medication or take them incorrectly.
*The sun doesn’t count.
Bat shit theories are I agree everywhere. Does not change the fact that stem has done a lot to improve the life of humans a lot. Humanities has done the squareroot of fuckall to improve it.
I don't advocate banning humanities studies I just think it should be seen as what it is which is a hobby sort of thing with little relevance to making life better for most people
I think you might want to consider the breadth of what the ‘humanities’ covers. I once attended a chemical weapons conference that was organised out of a social science department. There are serious things that effect peoples lives. Don’t get me wrong, I’m hard core STEM, trying to cure cancer, or at least understand it better, but human life is enhanced by endeavours in all ways.
Organised out of a social science department doesnt make it humanities based I suspect the conference was largely populated by stem people and most subjects were stem. If the WI organised it would not make chemical weapons a feminine issue.
Stem subjects have given the world nuclear power, renewable energy sources, nitrogen fertilisers so we can feed a world population, electric cars, anti biotics, medical advances that keep people alive such as pace makers and transplants.....etc etc
What has humanities given that balance the equation so they are equal?
Democracy?
Plato did not study humanities
He did study under Socrates and others, though on a tutorial basis. There were no recognised universities at that time.
Lee Anderson MP @LeeAndersonMP_ Katy works for me. She is single & earns less than 30k, rents a room for £775pcm in Central London, has student debt, £120 a month on travelling to work saves money every month, goes on foreign holidays & does not need to use a foodbank.
I sometimes wonder what old school Tory nasties like Chope make of social climber 30p Lee?
I eat my share of value brand products, but I draw the line at fake Weetabix. Not even close to the real thing.
We switched to own-brand all-bran a while back (it's among my kids' favourites because it looks like sticks - have managed to convince the younger eater that it isprocessed sticks, I think, athough she also refers to it, quite descriptively, as "all brown"). They do taste different; took a while to realise (comparing two packets' ingredients/nutrition) that the main difference is that the 'real' one is stuffed with a lot more salt. Having got used to the own-brand one, I think I now prefer it.
Weetabix - can any variation be worse than the real thing? Although I must admit I'm the only non-eater in my family.
The issue with Weetabix is with the milk. Too much or too little renders it soggy/dry respectively and the landing zone between the two is very narrow (compared to say Cornflakes). I gave up long ago. Life's too short.
Dunno, I'm pretty sure the issue with Weetabix is the Weetabix. It's horrible with or without milk in whatever quantity. Milk is fine without Weetabix
Heretic, Weetabix is second only to Porridge, Oat Chruchies and Corn flakes
That's fourth then.
Wot, no Crunchy Nut Cornflakes?
Fifth....
No breakfast is even getting started until it has bacon and/or/both eggs. Honourable mention to kippers though. (That's a PB first!)
Alternatively an Arbroath smoked haddock with a poached egg (or finnan haddock will also do).
That gets in with having eggs. Breakfast rule #1 - pass!
My favourite breakfast. Smoked Haddock with a fat golden-yolk poached egg on top. Crunchy toast and butter. Strong tea. Mmmmmmm
It’s one of the best things about staying in quality British hotels. I’ve never found it anywhere outside the UK
The best possible breakfasts in my view are;
Bacon sandwich (I'm nearly persuaded that an egg topping should be involved, but then a little cheese, and you run away)
Kedgeree - I've no idea why people can't cook it well, admittedly I can't.
Bacon sandwich with white sliced bread and (in my opinion) ketchup, not brown sauce. Brown sauce for sausages.
As for egg, runny scrambled and with the absolute must have ingredient of half a level teaspoon of MSG. Transforms egg into something eggier.
Best breakfast is a breakfast burrito.
No MSG unfortunately.
My son has discovered that the local supermarket sells MSG in little jars that you can simply sprinkle on food.
MSG is a weird one. If the wife eats it, she gets a migraine next day, yet there is no clinical reason for that, apart from my suspicion that it dehydrates her a lot. I experienced this a bit after an all you can eat Chinese buffet. Next day I felt dreadful, huge hangover, but I’d only had a couple of pints. A colleague suggested I drink two pints of water. I did and within 20 mins or so I was fine.
There was at one time a van parked at the border view point on one of the windier routes from England to Scotland where you could pause on the way North and sample this delight...
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
As a former humanities graduate I’d have hoped you’d have had a wittier response… (I agree with your sentiment though!)
I am not saying per se that humanities students are not contributors to the social weal. I am saying that the study of humanities has not made them net contributors to the social weal. Where they have contributed is when they went non humanities based like for example RCS and his insurance business. This is based on actuary which is more or less a stats based subject and hence stem.
There are few uni courses that directly lead to a career in that subject (although oddly my pharamacy students are on one such course). Uni study is about a lot more than the specifics of the three/four years. If every chemistry graduate tried to stay in chemistry there would be 10 for every job. But they also learn to evaluate data, solve problems and so on, skills that take them into a myriad of roles. Humanities will have similar hard and soft skills. At the fringes are some bat shit theories that get academics in the news. And that is often the aim - unis love getting in the news. But don’t forget the science weirdos are there too. From water molecules retaining the memory of molecules that were once dissolved in it, to the idea that having two sudden infant deaths in a family is unbelievably rare (when the chances of a second are more likely if there is a first), to the idea nuclear fusion will ever work as a power source.* Lots of the highest impact stuff in healthcare comes out of fairly soft subjects such as psychology. You can save billions on medication if you work out why patients don’t complete their medication or take them incorrectly.
*The sun doesn’t count.
Bat shit theories are I agree everywhere. Does not change the fact that stem has done a lot to improve the life of humans a lot. Humanities has done the squareroot of fuckall to improve it.
I don't advocate banning humanities studies I just think it should be seen as what it is which is a hobby sort of thing with little relevance to making life better for most people
I think you might want to consider the breadth of what the ‘humanities’ covers. I once attended a chemical weapons conference that was organised out of a social science department. There are serious things that effect peoples lives. Don’t get me wrong, I’m hard core STEM, trying to cure cancer, or at least understand it better, but human life is enhanced by endeavours in all ways.
Organised out of a social science department doesnt make it humanities based I suspect the conference was largely populated by stem people and most subjects were stem. If the WI organised it would not make chemical weapons a feminine issue.
Stem subjects have given the world nuclear power, renewable energy sources, nitrogen fertilisers so we can feed a world population, electric cars, anti biotics, medical advances that keep people alive such as pace makers and transplants.....etc etc
What has humanities given that balance the equation so they are equal?
Democracy?
Plato did not study humanities
He did study under Socrates and others, though on a tutorial basis. There were no recognised universities at that time.
Precisely the point though....humanities students learn their thinking from the acceptable ethos of their mentors now. Diverge from that thinking and fail. I for example knew a lot of sociology students and they all said much the same....quote from the accepted ideology and don't disagree if you want to pass. That's not thinking for yourself its indoctrination in the acceptable way to think.
I notice still no one has given me a list of the things humanity students have brought out to improve the human condition despite me listing several examples of what stem students have done so I conclude there are none.
Lee Anderson MP @LeeAndersonMP_ Katy works for me. She is single & earns less than 30k, rents a room for £775pcm in Central London, has student debt, £120 a month on travelling to work saves money every month, goes on foreign holidays & does not need to use a foodbank.
I sometimes wonder what old school Tory nasties like Chope make of social climber 30p Lee?
I eat my share of value brand products, but I draw the line at fake Weetabix. Not even close to the real thing.
We switched to own-brand all-bran a while back (it's among my kids' favourites because it looks like sticks - have managed to convince the younger eater that it isprocessed sticks, I think, athough she also refers to it, quite descriptively, as "all brown"). They do taste different; took a while to realise (comparing two packets' ingredients/nutrition) that the main difference is that the 'real' one is stuffed with a lot more salt. Having got used to the own-brand one, I think I now prefer it.
Weetabix - can any variation be worse than the real thing? Although I must admit I'm the only non-eater in my family.
The issue with Weetabix is with the milk. Too much or too little renders it soggy/dry respectively and the landing zone between the two is very narrow (compared to say Cornflakes). I gave up long ago. Life's too short.
Dunno, I'm pretty sure the issue with Weetabix is the Weetabix. It's horrible with or without milk in whatever quantity. Milk is fine without Weetabix
Heretic, Weetabix is second only to Porridge, Oat Chruchies and Corn flakes
That's fourth then.
Wot, no Crunchy Nut Cornflakes?
Fifth....
No breakfast is even getting started until it has bacon and/or/both eggs. Honourable mention to kippers though. (That's a PB first!)
Bacon and eggs is massively lifted by black pudding....
In a bit of a nap in the afternoon way. Certainly!
Relatedly - I wonder if PB can help with a non-urgent medical condition
Out here in Bangkok I’ve developed a sudden habit of sleeping - quite heavily - for an hour or two after supper. I ascribed it to jet lag but it is persisting. Hmm
Doctor Google says I should not worry it’s “post prandial somnolence” and quite common. But I’ve never had it before and it is beginning to irritate. Also it could be awkward if I dine out - then slump forward, snoring, into the sorbet
Otherwise I feel fine. Indeed robustly healthy - sun, gym and swim
Anyone got any ideas? Anyone had this?
I believe it's called getting old.
Is that it? I find it hard to believe. I know plenty of people older than me who don’t go into REM sleep 50 minutes after dinner
This is the weird thing. It’s not an elderly nap. It’s proper sleep. As I say I feel fine otherwise so it’s a curiosity which is sometimes irritating. No more than that
I've always tended to feel drowsy after a meal, although usually not properly falling asleep drowsy. I imagine the time difference is a factor, although you'd expect that to be worse in the morning if you're in Asia. Maybe you've just been trying to do too much and you need some proper rest or an early night? Travelling is tiring and you will feel it more than you did when you were in your twenties or thirties.
Mm, perhaps. And thanks. I’ve just checked diabetes and pre-diabetes and I’ve got, at most, 2 out of 10 symptoms. So it doesn’t appear to be that
Quite odd
I would suggest that it is post prandial parasympathetic nervous system activity, perhaps also caused by a surge of insulin causing serotonin and melatonin, which both influence sleep.
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
As a former humanities graduate I’d have hoped you’d have had a wittier response… (I agree with your sentiment though!)
I am not saying per se that humanities students are not contributors to the social weal. I am saying that the study of humanities has not made them net contributors to the social weal. Where they have contributed is when they went non humanities based like for example RCS and his insurance business. This is based on actuary which is more or less a stats based subject and hence stem.
There are few uni courses that directly lead to a career in that subject (although oddly my pharamacy students are on one such course). Uni study is about a lot more than the specifics of the three/four years. If every chemistry graduate tried to stay in chemistry there would be 10 for every job. But they also learn to evaluate data, solve problems and so on, skills that take them into a myriad of roles. Humanities will have similar hard and soft skills. At the fringes are some bat shit theories that get academics in the news. And that is often the aim - unis love getting in the news. But don’t forget the science weirdos are there too. From water molecules retaining the memory of molecules that were once dissolved in it, to the idea that having two sudden infant deaths in a family is unbelievably rare (when the chances of a second are more likely if there is a first), to the idea nuclear fusion will ever work as a power source.* Lots of the highest impact stuff in healthcare comes out of fairly soft subjects such as psychology. You can save billions on medication if you work out why patients don’t complete their medication or take them incorrectly.
*The sun doesn’t count.
Bat shit theories are I agree everywhere. Does not change the fact that stem has done a lot to improve the life of humans a lot. Humanities has done the squareroot of fuckall to improve it.
I don't advocate banning humanities studies I just think it should be seen as what it is which is a hobby sort of thing with little relevance to making life better for most people
I think you might want to consider the breadth of what the ‘humanities’ covers. I once attended a chemical weapons conference that was organised out of a social science department. There are serious things that effect peoples lives. Don’t get me wrong, I’m hard core STEM, trying to cure cancer, or at least understand it better, but human life is enhanced by endeavours in all ways.
Organised out of a social science department doesnt make it humanities based I suspect the conference was largely populated by stem people and most subjects were stem. If the WI organised it would not make chemical weapons a feminine issue.
Stem subjects have given the world nuclear power, renewable energy sources, nitrogen fertilisers so we can feed a world population, electric cars, anti biotics, medical advances that keep people alive such as pace makers and transplants.....etc etc
What has humanities given that balance the equation so they are equal?
Democracy?
Plato did not study humanities
Nor did he think much of democracy, putting it very mildly
He was the positor of democracy, just not the democracy we have. I doubt he ever envisioned the vote of someone who sits on their ass all day and watches jeremy kyle having an equal say to someone who actually contributes to society.
YOU WHAT?
YOU actually WHAT?
He hated, loathed and despised democracy, and to think otherwise you'd have to not have read a single word of what he bleedin' wrote. and that was before democracy consemned Socrates to death because it had had enough of experts.
Have a flick through the Republic and get back to me.
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
What big advance has humanity studies ever given us? Please tell. Now do some humanities students do well and enhance the place yes....generally not through the humanities studies they did. You are a case in point....you studied humanites...your contributions to society however are not humanity based
Science, Technology, Engineering and Medicine all help us live, but it is the Arts and Humanities that give us a reason to live.
Well they might you some of us frankly think most modern art is a pile of dross. You think hurst and Emin give you a reason to live thats fine what they give me is a reason to believe the universe would be better off with out humans
Most modern art is figurative realism. I think you mean abstract art, rather than modern art.
Police forces do not have systems that raise the alarm when one of their own officers is arrested, meaning that others like David Carrick could “fall through the cracks and go on to do harm”, says the head of the British Transport Police.
Lucy D’Orsi said it was “high time we sorted it out” after Carrick, a firearms officer who committed 48 rapes over nearly 20 years despite repeated criminal complaints.
D’Orsi wrote on LinkedIn: “If I was to commit a crime, get arrested and give my details, there is no obvious system check that would flag that I’m a police officer if I didn’t choose to tell them. Yes, you read that correctly.
Using LinkedIn though, further proof that the police need to be destroyed and me appointed Head of the Police in this country with Cyclefree as Commissioner of the Met.
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
What big advance has humanity studies ever given us? Please tell. Now do some humanities students do well and enhance the place yes....generally not through the humanities studies they did. You are a case in point....you studied humanites...your contributions to society however are not humanity based
Science, Technology, Engineering and Medicine all help us live, but it is the Arts and Humanities that give us a reason to live.
I'd say it was art and humanity that gives us the reason to live - not the study of them? I'm all for people studying them - but I'm not sure I'd say it was 'up there' with doing them.
Precisely my point....artists never used to need to go study humanities....they just did it. Now they study and produce soulless dross like a bisected shark in formaldehyde
Almost all great artists went to art school (or the equivalent, were apprenticed to an Old Master in Renaissance Italy).
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
What big advance has humanity studies ever given us? Please tell. Now do some humanities students do well and enhance the place yes....generally not through the humanities studies they did. You are a case in point....you studied humanites...your contributions to society however are not humanity based
Science, Technology, Engineering and Medicine all help us live, but it is the Arts and Humanities that give us a reason to live.
Well they might you some of us frankly think most modern art is a pile of dross. You think hurst and Emin give you a reason to live thats fine what they give me is a reason to believe the universe would be better off with out humans
Most modern art is figurative realism. I think you mean abstract art, rather than modern art.
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
What big advance has humanity studies ever given us? Please tell. Now do some humanities students do well and enhance the place yes....generally not through the humanities studies they did. You are a case in point....you studied humanites...your contributions to society however are not humanity based
Science, Technology, Engineering and Medicine all help us live, but it is the Arts and Humanities that give us a reason to live.
Well they might you some of us frankly think most modern art is a pile of dross. You think hurst and Emin give you a reason to live thats fine what they give me is a reason to believe the universe would be better off with out humans
Most modern art is figurative realism. I think you mean abstract art, rather than modern art.
Tracy emins unmade bed was abstract?
That question implies it was art...
No it didn't it was called art, modern art I was just citing it wasn't abstract. I do not accept it as art
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
What big advance has humanity studies ever given us? Please tell. Now do some humanities students do well and enhance the place yes....generally not through the humanities studies they did. You are a case in point....you studied humanites...your contributions to society however are not humanity based
Science, Technology, Engineering and Medicine all help us live, but it is the Arts and Humanities that give us a reason to live.
Well they might you some of us frankly think most modern art is a pile of dross. You think hurst and Emin give you a reason to live thats fine what they give me is a reason to believe the universe would be better off with out humans
Most modern art is figurative realism. I think you mean abstract art, rather than modern art.
Tracy emins unmade bed was abstract?
That question implies it was art...
In my view, well art of order.
The tent containing the name of every man she slept with would qualify though.
Well, as a work of fantasy it bears a resemblance to art.
Lee Anderson MP @LeeAndersonMP_ Katy works for me. She is single & earns less than 30k, rents a room for £775pcm in Central London, has student debt, £120 a month on travelling to work saves money every month, goes on foreign holidays & does not need to use a foodbank.
I sometimes wonder what old school Tory nasties like Chope make of social climber 30p Lee?
I eat my share of value brand products, but I draw the line at fake Weetabix. Not even close to the real thing.
We switched to own-brand all-bran a while back (it's among my kids' favourites because it looks like sticks - have managed to convince the younger eater that it isprocessed sticks, I think, athough she also refers to it, quite descriptively, as "all brown"). They do taste different; took a while to realise (comparing two packets' ingredients/nutrition) that the main difference is that the 'real' one is stuffed with a lot more salt. Having got used to the own-brand one, I think I now prefer it.
Weetabix - can any variation be worse than the real thing? Although I must admit I'm the only non-eater in my family.
The issue with Weetabix is with the milk. Too much or too little renders it soggy/dry respectively and the landing zone between the two is very narrow (compared to say Cornflakes). I gave up long ago. Life's too short.
Dunno, I'm pretty sure the issue with Weetabix is the Weetabix. It's horrible with or without milk in whatever quantity. Milk is fine without Weetabix
Heretic, Weetabix is second only to Porridge, Oat Chruchies and Corn flakes
That's fourth then.
Wot, no Crunchy Nut Cornflakes?
Fifth....
No breakfast is even getting started until it has bacon and/or/both eggs. Honourable mention to kippers though. (That's a PB first!)
Alternatively an Arbroath smoked haddock with a poached egg (or finnan haddock will also do).
That gets in with having eggs. Breakfast rule #1 - pass!
My favourite breakfast. Smoked Haddock with a fat golden-yolk poached egg on top. Crunchy toast and butter. Strong tea. Mmmmmmm
It’s one of the best things about staying in quality British hotels. I’ve never found it anywhere outside the UK
The best possible breakfasts in my view are;
Bacon sandwich (I'm nearly persuaded that an egg topping should be involved, but then a little cheese, and you run away)
Kedgeree - I've no idea why people can't cook it well, admittedly I can't.
Bacon sandwich with white sliced bread and (in my opinion) ketchup, not brown sauce. Brown sauce for sausages.
As for egg, runny scrambled and with the absolute must have ingredient of half a level teaspoon of MSG. Transforms egg into something eggier.
Best breakfast is a breakfast burrito.
No MSG unfortunately.
My son has discovered that the local supermarket sells MSG in little jars that you can simply sprinkle on food.
MSG is a weird one. If the wife eats it, she gets a migraine next day, yet there is no clinical reason for that, apart from my suspicion that it dehydrates her a lot. I experienced this a bit after an all you can eat Chinese buffet. Next day I felt dreadful, huge hangover, but I’d only had a couple of pints. A colleague suggested I drink two pints of water. I did and within 20 mins or so I was fine.
The history of MSG and health / food scares is a fascinating one. There’s clearly something about it somewhere, but most scientific studies into the impacts turn up a blank.
As someone wrote once, if MSG is as bad as people say why doesn’t all of China have a headache?
I have the sprinkling form and use it in eggs, on fresh tomatoes, in gravy and other meaty sauces and broths. It’s great stuff.
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
As a former humanities graduate I’d have hoped you’d have had a wittier response… (I agree with your sentiment though!)
I am not saying per se that humanities students are not contributors to the social weal. I am saying that the study of humanities has not made them net contributors to the social weal. Where they have contributed is when they went non humanities based like for example RCS and his insurance business. This is based on actuary which is more or less a stats based subject and hence stem.
There are few uni courses that directly lead to a career in that subject (although oddly my pharamacy students are on one such course). Uni study is about a lot more than the specifics of the three/four years. If every chemistry graduate tried to stay in chemistry there would be 10 for every job. But they also learn to evaluate data, solve problems and so on, skills that take them into a myriad of roles. Humanities will have similar hard and soft skills. At the fringes are some bat shit theories that get academics in the news. And that is often the aim - unis love getting in the news. But don’t forget the science weirdos are there too. From water molecules retaining the memory of molecules that were once dissolved in it, to the idea that having two sudden infant deaths in a family is unbelievably rare (when the chances of a second are more likely if there is a first), to the idea nuclear fusion will ever work as a power source.* Lots of the highest impact stuff in healthcare comes out of fairly soft subjects such as psychology. You can save billions on medication if you work out why patients don’t complete their medication or take them incorrectly.
*The sun doesn’t count.
Bat shit theories are I agree everywhere. Does not change the fact that stem has done a lot to improve the life of humans a lot. Humanities has done the squareroot of fuckall to improve it.
I don't advocate banning humanities studies I just think it should be seen as what it is which is a hobby sort of thing with little relevance to making life better for most people
I think you might want to consider the breadth of what the ‘humanities’ covers. I once attended a chemical weapons conference that was organised out of a social science department. There are serious things that effect peoples lives. Don’t get me wrong, I’m hard core STEM, trying to cure cancer, or at least understand it better, but human life is enhanced by endeavours in all ways.
Organised out of a social science department doesnt make it humanities based I suspect the conference was largely populated by stem people and most subjects were stem. If the WI organised it would not make chemical weapons a feminine issue.
Stem subjects have given the world nuclear power, renewable energy sources, nitrogen fertilisers so we can feed a world population, electric cars, anti biotics, medical advances that keep people alive such as pace makers and transplants.....etc etc
What has humanities given that balance the equation so they are equal?
Democracy?
Plato did not study humanities
Nor did he think much of democracy, putting it very mildly
He was the positor of democracy, just not the democracy we have. I doubt he ever envisioned the vote of someone who sits on their ass all day and watches jeremy kyle having an equal say to someone who actually contributes to society.
YOU WHAT?
YOU actually WHAT?
He hated, loathed and despised democracy, and to think otherwise you'd have to not have read a single word of what he bleedin' wrote. and that was before democracy consemned Socrates to death because it had had enough of experts.
Have a flick through the Republic and get back to me.
Loathe is too strong a wrod for it he certainly outlined the dangers of democracy such as we have now where people with no stake or contribution get to vote however he wasnt an advocate of getting rid of it altogether by any means just limiting it
Police forces do not have systems that raise the alarm when one of their own officers is arrested, meaning that others like David Carrick could “fall through the cracks and go on to do harm”, says the head of the British Transport Police.
Lucy D’Orsi said it was “high time we sorted it out” after Carrick, a firearms officer who committed 48 rapes over nearly 20 years despite repeated criminal complaints.
D’Orsi wrote on LinkedIn: “If I was to commit a crime, get arrested and give my details, there is no obvious system check that would flag that I’m a police officer if I didn’t choose to tell them. Yes, you read that correctly.
Using LinkedIn though, further proof that the police need to be destroyed and me appointed Head of the Police in this country with Cyclefree as Commissioner of the Met.
Erm, thanks to PACE, a lot of witnesses are arrested. Will they all be sacked too? And if, after Carrick, criminal complaints will be the trigger, I am sure career criminals will start making complaints about inconveniently effective police.
Carrick committed 48 rapes over 20 years, which raises the question, why was he not caught earlier? So far as I can see, without looking into it, the fact that he was a copper, and should not have been, is irrelevant to the rape question.
There are two separate reasons to be outraged, and nothing to be gained by fudging them together.
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
What big advance has humanity studies ever given us? Please tell. Now do some humanities students do well and enhance the place yes....generally not through the humanities studies they did. You are a case in point....you studied humanites...your contributions to society however are not humanity based
Science, Technology, Engineering and Medicine all help us live, but it is the Arts and Humanities that give us a reason to live.
Well they might you some of us frankly think most modern art is a pile of dross. You think hurst and Emin give you a reason to live thats fine what they give me is a reason to believe the universe would be better off with out humans
Most modern art is figurative realism. I think you mean abstract art, rather than modern art.
Tracy emins unmade bed was abstract?
That question implies it was art...
In my view, well art of order.
The tent containing the name of every man she slept with would qualify though.
Well, as a work of fantasy it bears a resemblance to art.
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
As a former humanities graduate I’d have hoped you’d have had a wittier response… (I agree with your sentiment though!)
I am not saying per se that humanities students are not contributors to the social weal. I am saying that the study of humanities has not made them net contributors to the social weal. Where they have contributed is when they went non humanities based like for example RCS and his insurance business. This is based on actuary which is more or less a stats based subject and hence stem.
There are few uni courses that directly lead to a career in that subject (although oddly my pharamacy students are on one such course). Uni study is about a lot more than the specifics of the three/four years. If every chemistry graduate tried to stay in chemistry there would be 10 for every job. But they also learn to evaluate data, solve problems and so on, skills that take them into a myriad of roles. Humanities will have similar hard and soft skills. At the fringes are some bat shit theories that get academics in the news. And that is often the aim - unis love getting in the news. But don’t forget the science weirdos are there too. From water molecules retaining the memory of molecules that were once dissolved in it, to the idea that having two sudden infant deaths in a family is unbelievably rare (when the chances of a second are more likely if there is a first), to the idea nuclear fusion will ever work as a power source.* Lots of the highest impact stuff in healthcare comes out of fairly soft subjects such as psychology. You can save billions on medication if you work out why patients don’t complete their medication or take them incorrectly.
*The sun doesn’t count.
Bat shit theories are I agree everywhere. Does not change the fact that stem has done a lot to improve the life of humans a lot. Humanities has done the squareroot of fuckall to improve it.
I don't advocate banning humanities studies I just think it should be seen as what it is which is a hobby sort of thing with little relevance to making life better for most people
Depends what you mean by humanities. Geography and history are as or more relevant to working in the 21st century than they’ve ever been, and somewhat more than several other supposedly more vocational subjects.
Ok you say history is more relevant to working in the 21st century....examples please of where it matters
We’ll as a geographer I’m best placed to comment on the manifold things that come out of it (climate change, biodiversity, soil health and erosion, international migration, demographics, geopolitics, global supply chains, urban planning…), but knowing a bit of history - and importantly putting it to good use - might have got us clued up to the threat of Putin a bit earlier, might have discouraged our current government from a number of their recent escapades, and might occasionally give investors pause when piling into the latest bubble claiming this time it’s different.
Lee Anderson MP @LeeAndersonMP_ Katy works for me. She is single & earns less than 30k, rents a room for £775pcm in Central London, has student debt, £120 a month on travelling to work saves money every month, goes on foreign holidays & does not need to use a foodbank.
I sometimes wonder what old school Tory nasties like Chope make of social climber 30p Lee?
I eat my share of value brand products, but I draw the line at fake Weetabix. Not even close to the real thing.
We switched to own-brand all-bran a while back (it's among my kids' favourites because it looks like sticks - have managed to convince the younger eater that it isprocessed sticks, I think, athough she also refers to it, quite descriptively, as "all brown"). They do taste different; took a while to realise (comparing two packets' ingredients/nutrition) that the main difference is that the 'real' one is stuffed with a lot more salt. Having got used to the own-brand one, I think I now prefer it.
Weetabix - can any variation be worse than the real thing? Although I must admit I'm the only non-eater in my family.
The issue with Weetabix is with the milk. Too much or too little renders it soggy/dry respectively and the landing zone between the two is very narrow (compared to say Cornflakes). I gave up long ago. Life's too short.
Dunno, I'm pretty sure the issue with Weetabix is the Weetabix. It's horrible with or without milk in whatever quantity. Milk is fine without Weetabix
Heretic, Weetabix is second only to Porridge, Oat Chruchies and Corn flakes
That's fourth then.
Wot, no Crunchy Nut Cornflakes?
Fifth....
No breakfast is even getting started until it has bacon and/or/both eggs. Honourable mention to kippers though. (That's a PB first!)
Alternatively an Arbroath smoked haddock with a poached egg (or finnan haddock will also do).
That gets in with having eggs. Breakfast rule #1 - pass!
My favourite breakfast. Smoked Haddock with a fat golden-yolk poached egg on top. Crunchy toast and butter. Strong tea. Mmmmmmm
It’s one of the best things about staying in quality British hotels. I’ve never found it anywhere outside the UK
The best possible breakfasts in my view are;
Bacon sandwich (I'm nearly persuaded that an egg topping should be involved, but then a little cheese, and you run away)
Kedgeree - I've no idea why people can't cook it well, admittedly I can't.
Bacon sandwich with white sliced bread and (in my opinion) ketchup, not brown sauce. Brown sauce for sausages.
As for egg, runny scrambled and with the absolute must have ingredient of half a level teaspoon of MSG. Transforms egg into something eggier.
Best breakfast is a breakfast burrito.
No MSG unfortunately.
My son has discovered that the local supermarket sells MSG in little jars that you can simply sprinkle on food.
MSG is a weird one. If the wife eats it, she gets a migraine next day, yet there is no clinical reason for that, apart from my suspicion that it dehydrates her a lot. I experienced this a bit after an all you can eat Chinese buffet. Next day I felt dreadful, huge hangover, but I’d only had a couple of pints. A colleague suggested I drink two pints of water. I did and within 20 mins or so I was fine.
The history of MSG and health / food scares is a fascinating one. There’s clearly something about it somewhere, but most scientific studies into the impacts turn up a blank.
As someone wrote once, if MSG is as bad as people say why doesn’t all of China have a headache?
I have the sprinkling form and use it in eggs, on fresh tomatoes, in gravy and other meaty sauces and broths. It’s great stuff.
In Taiwan all the street stalls and restaurants had "No MSG" in the places where Americans ate and drank. Nowhere else. No locals partook of it.
Police forces do not have systems that raise the alarm when one of their own officers is arrested, meaning that others like David Carrick could “fall through the cracks and go on to do harm”, says the head of the British Transport Police.
Lucy D’Orsi said it was “high time we sorted it out” after Carrick, a firearms officer who committed 48 rapes over nearly 20 years despite repeated criminal complaints.
D’Orsi wrote on LinkedIn: “If I was to commit a crime, get arrested and give my details, there is no obvious system check that would flag that I’m a police officer if I didn’t choose to tell them. Yes, you read that correctly.
Using LinkedIn though, further proof that the police need to be destroyed and me appointed Head of the Police in this country with Cyclefree as Commissioner of the Met.
Erm, thanks to PACE, a lot of witnesses are arrested. Will they all be sacked too? And if, after Carrick, criminal complaints will be the trigger, I am sure career criminals will start making complaints about inconveniently effective police.
Carrick committed 48 rapes over 20 years, which raises the question, why was he not caught earlier? So far as I can see, without looking into it, the fact that he was a copper, and should not have been, is irrelevant to the rape question.
There are two separate reasons to be outraged, and nothing to be gained by fudging them together.
Never speak to the police without a lawyer present even if you are the complainant or a witness
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
As a former humanities graduate I’d have hoped you’d have had a wittier response… (I agree with your sentiment though!)
I am not saying per se that humanities students are not contributors to the social weal. I am saying that the study of humanities has not made them net contributors to the social weal. Where they have contributed is when they went non humanities based like for example RCS and his insurance business. This is based on actuary which is more or less a stats based subject and hence stem.
There are few uni courses that directly lead to a career in that subject (although oddly my pharamacy students are on one such course). Uni study is about a lot more than the specifics of the three/four years. If every chemistry graduate tried to stay in chemistry there would be 10 for every job. But they also learn to evaluate data, solve problems and so on, skills that take them into a myriad of roles. Humanities will have similar hard and soft skills. At the fringes are some bat shit theories that get academics in the news. And that is often the aim - unis love getting in the news. But don’t forget the science weirdos are there too. From water molecules retaining the memory of molecules that were once dissolved in it, to the idea that having two sudden infant deaths in a family is unbelievably rare (when the chances of a second are more likely if there is a first), to the idea nuclear fusion will ever work as a power source.* Lots of the highest impact stuff in healthcare comes out of fairly soft subjects such as psychology. You can save billions on medication if you work out why patients don’t complete their medication or take them incorrectly.
*The sun doesn’t count.
Bat shit theories are I agree everywhere. Does not change the fact that stem has done a lot to improve the life of humans a lot. Humanities has done the squareroot of fuckall to improve it.
I don't advocate banning humanities studies I just think it should be seen as what it is which is a hobby sort of thing with little relevance to making life better for most people
Depends what you mean by humanities. Geography and history are as or more relevant to working in the 21st century than they’ve ever been, and somewhat more than several other supposedly more vocational subjects.
Ok you say history is more relevant to working in the 21st century....examples please of where it matters
We’ll as a geographer I’m best placed to comment on the manifold things that come out of it (climate change, biodiversity, soil health and erosion, international migration, demographics, geopolitics, global supply chains, urban planning…), but knowing a bit of history - and importantly putting it to good use - might have got us clued up to the threat of Putin a bit earlier, might have discouraged our current government from a number of their recent escapades, and might occasionally give investors pause when piling into the latest bubble claiming this time it’s different.
I use my geography in my job on a daily basis.
Well we have both geographers and historians yet all those things still happened so seems you are as useful as a chocolate teapot in that regard so we may as well as not have had you
There was a fascinating documentary on R4 recently that most hated by the anti-woke of subjects, sociology. Probably still available to listen to and I’d recommend.
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
As a former humanities graduate I’d have hoped you’d have had a wittier response… (I agree with your sentiment though!)
I am not saying per se that humanities students are not contributors to the social weal. I am saying that the study of humanities has not made them net contributors to the social weal. Where they have contributed is when they went non humanities based like for example RCS and his insurance business. This is based on actuary which is more or less a stats based subject and hence stem.
There are few uni courses that directly lead to a career in that subject (although oddly my pharamacy students are on one such course). Uni study is about a lot more than the specifics of the three/four years. If every chemistry graduate tried to stay in chemistry there would be 10 for every job. But they also learn to evaluate data, solve problems and so on, skills that take them into a myriad of roles. Humanities will have similar hard and soft skills. At the fringes are some bat shit theories that get academics in the news. And that is often the aim - unis love getting in the news. But don’t forget the science weirdos are there too. From water molecules retaining the memory of molecules that were once dissolved in it, to the idea that having two sudden infant deaths in a family is unbelievably rare (when the chances of a second are more likely if there is a first), to the idea nuclear fusion will ever work as a power source.* Lots of the highest impact stuff in healthcare comes out of fairly soft subjects such as psychology. You can save billions on medication if you work out why patients don’t complete their medication or take them incorrectly.
*The sun doesn’t count.
Bat shit theories are I agree everywhere. Does not change the fact that stem has done a lot to improve the life of humans a lot. Humanities has done the squareroot of fuckall to improve it.
I don't advocate banning humanities studies I just think it should be seen as what it is which is a hobby sort of thing with little relevance to making life better for most people
Depends what you mean by humanities. Geography and history are as or more relevant to working in the 21st century than they’ve ever been, and somewhat more than several other supposedly more vocational subjects.
Ok you say history is more relevant to working in the 21st century....examples please of where it matters
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
As a former humanities graduate I’d have hoped you’d have had a wittier response… (I agree with your sentiment though!)
I am not saying per se that humanities students are not contributors to the social weal. I am saying that the study of humanities has not made them net contributors to the social weal. Where they have contributed is when they went non humanities based like for example RCS and his insurance business. This is based on actuary which is more or less a stats based subject and hence stem.
There are few uni courses that directly lead to a career in that subject (although oddly my pharamacy students are on one such course). Uni study is about a lot more than the specifics of the three/four years. If every chemistry graduate tried to stay in chemistry there would be 10 for every job. But they also learn to evaluate data, solve problems and so on, skills that take them into a myriad of roles. Humanities will have similar hard and soft skills. At the fringes are some bat shit theories that get academics in the news. And that is often the aim - unis love getting in the news. But don’t forget the science weirdos are there too. From water molecules retaining the memory of molecules that were once dissolved in it, to the idea that having two sudden infant deaths in a family is unbelievably rare (when the chances of a second are more likely if there is a first), to the idea nuclear fusion will ever work as a power source.* Lots of the highest impact stuff in healthcare comes out of fairly soft subjects such as psychology. You can save billions on medication if you work out why patients don’t complete their medication or take them incorrectly.
*The sun doesn’t count.
Bat shit theories are I agree everywhere. Does not change the fact that stem has done a lot to improve the life of humans a lot. Humanities has done the squareroot of fuckall to improve it.
I don't advocate banning humanities studies I just think it should be seen as what it is which is a hobby sort of thing with little relevance to making life better for most people
I think you might want to consider the breadth of what the ‘humanities’ covers. I once attended a chemical weapons conference that was organised out of a social science department. There are serious things that effect peoples lives. Don’t get me wrong, I’m hard core STEM, trying to cure cancer, or at least understand it better, but human life is enhanced by endeavours in all ways.
Organised out of a social science department doesnt make it humanities based I suspect the conference was largely populated by stem people and most subjects were stem. If the WI organised it would not make chemical weapons a feminine issue.
Stem subjects have given the world nuclear power, renewable energy sources, nitrogen fertilisers so we can feed a world population, electric cars, anti biotics, medical advances that keep people alive such as pace makers and transplants.....etc etc
What has humanities given that balance the equation so they are equal?
Democracy?
Plato did not study humanities
Nor did he think much of democracy, putting it very mildly
He was the positor of democracy, just not the democracy we have. I doubt he ever envisioned the vote of someone who sits on their ass all day and watches jeremy kyle having an equal say to someone who actually contributes to society.
YOU WHAT?
YOU actually WHAT?
He hated, loathed and despised democracy, and to think otherwise you'd have to not have read a single word of what he bleedin' wrote. and that was before democracy consemned Socrates to death because it had had enough of experts.
Have a flick through the Republic and get back to me.
Loathe is too strong a wrod for it he certainly outlined the dangers of democracy such as we have now where people with no stake or contribution get to vote however he wasnt an advocate of getting rid of it altogether by any means just limiting it
Sorry, but that is utter, utter nonsense. Exactly the problem with Athenian democracy was people with no stake having a vote.
I am not a fan of appeals to one's own authority, but I have a first from Oxford in knowing what Plato thought about democracy. Literally. I cannot think what you are talking about. A reference to a specific dialogue would help.
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
As a former humanities graduate I’d have hoped you’d have had a wittier response… (I agree with your sentiment though!)
I am not saying per se that humanities students are not contributors to the social weal. I am saying that the study of humanities has not made them net contributors to the social weal. Where they have contributed is when they went non humanities based like for example RCS and his insurance business. This is based on actuary which is more or less a stats based subject and hence stem.
There are few uni courses that directly lead to a career in that subject (although oddly my pharamacy students are on one such course). Uni study is about a lot more than the specifics of the three/four years. If every chemistry graduate tried to stay in chemistry there would be 10 for every job. But they also learn to evaluate data, solve problems and so on, skills that take them into a myriad of roles. Humanities will have similar hard and soft skills. At the fringes are some bat shit theories that get academics in the news. And that is often the aim - unis love getting in the news. But don’t forget the science weirdos are there too. From water molecules retaining the memory of molecules that were once dissolved in it, to the idea that having two sudden infant deaths in a family is unbelievably rare (when the chances of a second are more likely if there is a first), to the idea nuclear fusion will ever work as a power source.* Lots of the highest impact stuff in healthcare comes out of fairly soft subjects such as psychology. You can save billions on medication if you work out why patients don’t complete their medication or take them incorrectly.
*The sun doesn’t count.
Bat shit theories are I agree everywhere. Does not change the fact that stem has done a lot to improve the life of humans a lot. Humanities has done the squareroot of fuckall to improve it.
I don't advocate banning humanities studies I just think it should be seen as what it is which is a hobby sort of thing with little relevance to making life better for most people
Depends what you mean by humanities. Geography and history are as or more relevant to working in the 21st century than they’ve ever been, and somewhat more than several other supposedly more vocational subjects.
Ok you say history is more relevant to working in the 21st century....examples please of where it matters
We’ll as a geographer I’m best placed to comment on the manifold things that come out of it (climate change, biodiversity, soil health and erosion, international migration, demographics, geopolitics, global supply chains, urban planning…), but knowing a bit of history - and importantly putting it to good use - might have got us clued up to the threat of Putin a bit earlier, might have discouraged our current government from a number of their recent escapades, and might occasionally give investors pause when piling into the latest bubble claiming this time it’s different.
I use my geography in my job on a daily basis.
Well we have both geographers and historians yet all those things still happened so seems you are as useful as a chocolate teapot in that regard so we may as well as not have had you
See I asked for a list of contributions to human good and you give me a list of things you have failed at providing. Hardly a glowing accolade for humanities
Lee Anderson MP @LeeAndersonMP_ Katy works for me. She is single & earns less than 30k, rents a room for £775pcm in Central London, has student debt, £120 a month on travelling to work saves money every month, goes on foreign holidays & does not need to use a foodbank.
I sometimes wonder what old school Tory nasties like Chope make of social climber 30p Lee?
I eat my share of value brand products, but I draw the line at fake Weetabix. Not even close to the real thing.
We switched to own-brand all-bran a while back (it's among my kids' favourites because it looks like sticks - have managed to convince the younger eater that it isprocessed sticks, I think, athough she also refers to it, quite descriptively, as "all brown"). They do taste different; took a while to realise (comparing two packets' ingredients/nutrition) that the main difference is that the 'real' one is stuffed with a lot more salt. Having got used to the own-brand one, I think I now prefer it.
Weetabix - can any variation be worse than the real thing? Although I must admit I'm the only non-eater in my family.
The issue with Weetabix is with the milk. Too much or too little renders it soggy/dry respectively and the landing zone between the two is very narrow (compared to say Cornflakes). I gave up long ago. Life's too short.
Dunno, I'm pretty sure the issue with Weetabix is the Weetabix. It's horrible with or without milk in whatever quantity. Milk is fine without Weetabix
Heretic, Weetabix is second only to Porridge, Oat Chruchies and Corn flakes
That's fourth then.
Wot, no Crunchy Nut Cornflakes?
Fifth....
No breakfast is even getting started until it has bacon and/or/both eggs. Honourable mention to kippers though. (That's a PB first!)
Alternatively an Arbroath smoked haddock with a poached egg (or finnan haddock will also do).
That gets in with having eggs. Breakfast rule #1 - pass!
My favourite breakfast. Smoked Haddock with a fat golden-yolk poached egg on top. Crunchy toast and butter. Strong tea. Mmmmmmm
It’s one of the best things about staying in quality British hotels. I’ve never found it anywhere outside the UK
The best possible breakfasts in my view are;
Bacon sandwich (I'm nearly persuaded that an egg topping should be involved, but then a little cheese, and you run away)
Kedgeree - I've no idea why people can't cook it well, admittedly I can't.
Bacon sandwich with white sliced bread and (in my opinion) ketchup, not brown sauce. Brown sauce for sausages.
As for egg, runny scrambled and with the absolute must have ingredient of half a level teaspoon of MSG. Transforms egg into something eggier.
Best breakfast is a breakfast burrito.
No MSG unfortunately.
My son has discovered that the local supermarket sells MSG in little jars that you can simply sprinkle on food.
MSG is a weird one. If the wife eats it, she gets a migraine next day, yet there is no clinical reason for that, apart from my suspicion that it dehydrates her a lot. I experienced this a bit after an all you can eat Chinese buffet. Next day I felt dreadful, huge hangover, but I’d only had a couple of pints. A colleague suggested I drink two pints of water. I did and within 20 mins or so I was fine.
The history of MSG and health / food scares is a fascinating one. There’s clearly something about it somewhere, but most scientific studies into the impacts turn up a blank.
As someone wrote once, if MSG is as bad as people say why doesn’t all of China have a headache?
I have the sprinkling form and use it in eggs, on fresh tomatoes, in gravy and other meaty sauces and broths. It’s great stuff.
In Taiwan all the street stalls and restaurants had "No MSG" in the places where Americans ate and drank. Nowhere else. No locals partook of it.
They chug the stuff by the bucketload (or at least they do on the mainland):
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
As a former humanities graduate I’d have hoped you’d have had a wittier response… (I agree with your sentiment though!)
I am not saying per se that humanities students are not contributors to the social weal. I am saying that the study of humanities has not made them net contributors to the social weal. Where they have contributed is when they went non humanities based like for example RCS and his insurance business. This is based on actuary which is more or less a stats based subject and hence stem.
There are few uni courses that directly lead to a career in that subject (although oddly my pharamacy students are on one such course). Uni study is about a lot more than the specifics of the three/four years. If every chemistry graduate tried to stay in chemistry there would be 10 for every job. But they also learn to evaluate data, solve problems and so on, skills that take them into a myriad of roles. Humanities will have similar hard and soft skills. At the fringes are some bat shit theories that get academics in the news. And that is often the aim - unis love getting in the news. But don’t forget the science weirdos are there too. From water molecules retaining the memory of molecules that were once dissolved in it, to the idea that having two sudden infant deaths in a family is unbelievably rare (when the chances of a second are more likely if there is a first), to the idea nuclear fusion will ever work as a power source.* Lots of the highest impact stuff in healthcare comes out of fairly soft subjects such as psychology. You can save billions on medication if you work out why patients don’t complete their medication or take them incorrectly.
*The sun doesn’t count.
Bat shit theories are I agree everywhere. Does not change the fact that stem has done a lot to improve the life of humans a lot. Humanities has done the squareroot of fuckall to improve it.
I don't advocate banning humanities studies I just think it should be seen as what it is which is a hobby sort of thing with little relevance to making life better for most people
Depends what you mean by humanities. Geography and history are as or more relevant to working in the 21st century than they’ve ever been, and somewhat more than several other supposedly more vocational subjects.
Ok you say history is more relevant to working in the 21st century....examples please of where it matters
Warfare.
I suspect a knowledge of ww1 battles is that applicable to modern day warfare as technology has changed so much
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
As a former humanities graduate I’d have hoped you’d have had a wittier response… (I agree with your sentiment though!)
I am not saying per se that humanities students are not contributors to the social weal. I am saying that the study of humanities has not made them net contributors to the social weal. Where they have contributed is when they went non humanities based like for example RCS and his insurance business. This is based on actuary which is more or less a stats based subject and hence stem.
There are few uni courses that directly lead to a career in that subject (although oddly my pharamacy students are on one such course). Uni study is about a lot more than the specifics of the three/four years. If every chemistry graduate tried to stay in chemistry there would be 10 for every job. But they also learn to evaluate data, solve problems and so on, skills that take them into a myriad of roles. Humanities will have similar hard and soft skills. At the fringes are some bat shit theories that get academics in the news. And that is often the aim - unis love getting in the news. But don’t forget the science weirdos are there too. From water molecules retaining the memory of molecules that were once dissolved in it, to the idea that having two sudden infant deaths in a family is unbelievably rare (when the chances of a second are more likely if there is a first), to the idea nuclear fusion will ever work as a power source.* Lots of the highest impact stuff in healthcare comes out of fairly soft subjects such as psychology. You can save billions on medication if you work out why patients don’t complete their medication or take them incorrectly.
*The sun doesn’t count.
Bat shit theories are I agree everywhere. Does not change the fact that stem has done a lot to improve the life of humans a lot. Humanities has done the squareroot of fuckall to improve it.
I don't advocate banning humanities studies I just think it should be seen as what it is which is a hobby sort of thing with little relevance to making life better for most people
No STEM: no AGW, no nuclear weapons, no holocaust. Not really seeing it.
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
As a former humanities graduate I’d have hoped you’d have had a wittier response… (I agree with your sentiment though!)
I am not saying per se that humanities students are not contributors to the social weal. I am saying that the study of humanities has not made them net contributors to the social weal. Where they have contributed is when they went non humanities based like for example RCS and his insurance business. This is based on actuary which is more or less a stats based subject and hence stem.
There are few uni courses that directly lead to a career in that subject (although oddly my pharamacy students are on one such course). Uni study is about a lot more than the specifics of the three/four years. If every chemistry graduate tried to stay in chemistry there would be 10 for every job. But they also learn to evaluate data, solve problems and so on, skills that take them into a myriad of roles. Humanities will have similar hard and soft skills. At the fringes are some bat shit theories that get academics in the news. And that is often the aim - unis love getting in the news. But don’t forget the science weirdos are there too. From water molecules retaining the memory of molecules that were once dissolved in it, to the idea that having two sudden infant deaths in a family is unbelievably rare (when the chances of a second are more likely if there is a first), to the idea nuclear fusion will ever work as a power source.* Lots of the highest impact stuff in healthcare comes out of fairly soft subjects such as psychology. You can save billions on medication if you work out why patients don’t complete their medication or take them incorrectly.
*The sun doesn’t count.
Bat shit theories are I agree everywhere. Does not change the fact that stem has done a lot to improve the life of humans a lot. Humanities has done the squareroot of fuckall to improve it.
I don't advocate banning humanities studies I just think it should be seen as what it is which is a hobby sort of thing with little relevance to making life better for most people
Depends what you mean by humanities. Geography and history are as or more relevant to working in the 21st century than they’ve ever been, and somewhat more than several other supposedly more vocational subjects.
Ok you say history is more relevant to working in the 21st century....examples please of where it matters
We’ll as a geographer I’m best placed to comment on the manifold things that come out of it (climate change, biodiversity, soil health and erosion, international migration, demographics, geopolitics, global supply chains, urban planning…), but knowing a bit of history - and importantly putting it to good use - might have got us clued up to the threat of Putin a bit earlier, might have discouraged our current government from a number of their recent escapades, and might occasionally give investors pause when piling into the latest bubble claiming this time it’s different.
I use my geography in my job on a daily basis.
Well we have both geographers and historians yet all those things still happened so seems you are as useful as a chocolate teapot in that regard so we may as well as not have had you
Let’s…abolish oncologists because people still get cancer?
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
What big advance has humanity studies ever given us? Please tell. Now do some humanities students do well and enhance the place yes....generally not through the humanities studies they did. You are a case in point....you studied humanites...your contributions to society however are not humanity based
What an ignorant and philistine statement? Where would our historians, archaeologists and philosophers come from if not for humanities? You don't just need to teach and research it either, plenty of museum curators, journalists, actors, authors and poets and senior civil servants studied humanities today.
As did a few PMs and top politicians, Harold Wilson and Gordon Brown, Douglas Hurd and George Osborne read History and Boris Johnson read classics and Andy Burnham read English. It probably made them more rounded than doing a social science degree like PPE or Politics.
The King read History too of course and the Princess of Wales read History of Art
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
As a former humanities graduate I’d have hoped you’d have had a wittier response… (I agree with your sentiment though!)
I am not saying per se that humanities students are not contributors to the social weal. I am saying that the study of humanities has not made them net contributors to the social weal. Where they have contributed is when they went non humanities based like for example RCS and his insurance business. This is based on actuary which is more or less a stats based subject and hence stem.
There are few uni courses that directly lead to a career in that subject (although oddly my pharamacy students are on one such course). Uni study is about a lot more than the specifics of the three/four years. If every chemistry graduate tried to stay in chemistry there would be 10 for every job. But they also learn to evaluate data, solve problems and so on, skills that take them into a myriad of roles. Humanities will have similar hard and soft skills. At the fringes are some bat shit theories that get academics in the news. And that is often the aim - unis love getting in the news. But don’t forget the science weirdos are there too. From water molecules retaining the memory of molecules that were once dissolved in it, to the idea that having two sudden infant deaths in a family is unbelievably rare (when the chances of a second are more likely if there is a first), to the idea nuclear fusion will ever work as a power source.* Lots of the highest impact stuff in healthcare comes out of fairly soft subjects such as psychology. You can save billions on medication if you work out why patients don’t complete their medication or take them incorrectly.
*The sun doesn’t count.
Bat shit theories are I agree everywhere. Does not change the fact that stem has done a lot to improve the life of humans a lot. Humanities has done the squareroot of fuckall to improve it.
I don't advocate banning humanities studies I just think it should be seen as what it is which is a hobby sort of thing with little relevance to making life better for most people
No STEM: no AGW, no nuclear weapons, no holocaust. Not really seeing it.
He does seem particularly worked up about this for some reason. It’s an oddly reductive type of thinking, like the sciency equivalent of Nick Cave claiming AI could never write a pop song.
Lee Anderson MP @LeeAndersonMP_ Katy works for me. She is single & earns less than 30k, rents a room for £775pcm in Central London, has student debt, £120 a month on travelling to work saves money every month, goes on foreign holidays & does not need to use a foodbank.
I sometimes wonder what old school Tory nasties like Chope make of social climber 30p Lee?
I eat my share of value brand products, but I draw the line at fake Weetabix. Not even close to the real thing.
We switched to own-brand all-bran a while back (it's among my kids' favourites because it looks like sticks - have managed to convince the younger eater that it isprocessed sticks, I think, athough she also refers to it, quite descriptively, as "all brown"). They do taste different; took a while to realise (comparing two packets' ingredients/nutrition) that the main difference is that the 'real' one is stuffed with a lot more salt. Having got used to the own-brand one, I think I now prefer it.
Weetabix - can any variation be worse than the real thing? Although I must admit I'm the only non-eater in my family.
The issue with Weetabix is with the milk. Too much or too little renders it soggy/dry respectively and the landing zone between the two is very narrow (compared to say Cornflakes). I gave up long ago. Life's too short.
Dunno, I'm pretty sure the issue with Weetabix is the Weetabix. It's horrible with or without milk in whatever quantity. Milk is fine without Weetabix
Heretic, Weetabix is second only to Porridge, Oat Chruchies and Corn flakes
That's fourth then.
Wot, no Crunchy Nut Cornflakes?
Fifth....
No breakfast is even getting started until it has bacon and/or/both eggs. Honourable mention to kippers though. (That's a PB first!)
Alternatively an Arbroath smoked haddock with a poached egg (or finnan haddock will also do).
That gets in with having eggs. Breakfast rule #1 - pass!
My favourite breakfast. Smoked Haddock with a fat golden-yolk poached egg on top. Crunchy toast and butter. Strong tea. Mmmmmmm
It’s one of the best things about staying in quality British hotels. I’ve never found it anywhere outside the UK
The best possible breakfasts in my view are;
Bacon sandwich (I'm nearly persuaded that an egg topping should be involved, but then a little cheese, and you run away)
Kedgeree - I've no idea why people can't cook it well, admittedly I can't.
Bacon sandwich with white sliced bread and (in my opinion) ketchup, not brown sauce. Brown sauce for sausages.
As for egg, runny scrambled and with the absolute must have ingredient of half a level teaspoon of MSG. Transforms egg into something eggier.
Best breakfast is a breakfast burrito.
No MSG unfortunately.
My son has discovered that the local supermarket sells MSG in little jars that you can simply sprinkle on food.
MSG is a weird one. If the wife eats it, she gets a migraine next day, yet there is no clinical reason for that, apart from my suspicion that it dehydrates her a lot. I experienced this a bit after an all you can eat Chinese buffet. Next day I felt dreadful, huge hangover, but I’d only had a couple of pints. A colleague suggested I drink two pints of water. I did and within 20 mins or so I was fine.
The history of MSG and health / food scares is a fascinating one. There’s clearly something about it somewhere, but most scientific studies into the impacts turn up a blank.
As someone wrote once, if MSG is as bad as people say why doesn’t all of China have a headache?
I have the sprinkling form and use it in eggs, on fresh tomatoes, in gravy and other meaty sauces and broths. It’s great stuff.
In Taiwan all the street stalls and restaurants had "No MSG" in the places where Americans ate and drank. Nowhere else. No locals partook of it.
They chug the stuff by the bucketload (or at least they do on the mainland):
Yeah. I didn't phrase that well. I meant no locals would go for the No MSG option. It is literally on almost everything.
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
As a former humanities graduate I’d have hoped you’d have had a wittier response… (I agree with your sentiment though!)
I am not saying per se that humanities students are not contributors to the social weal. I am saying that the study of humanities has not made them net contributors to the social weal. Where they have contributed is when they went non humanities based like for example RCS and his insurance business. This is based on actuary which is more or less a stats based subject and hence stem.
There are few uni courses that directly lead to a career in that subject (although oddly my pharamacy students are on one such course). Uni study is about a lot more than the specifics of the three/four years. If every chemistry graduate tried to stay in chemistry there would be 10 for every job. But they also learn to evaluate data, solve problems and so on, skills that take them into a myriad of roles. Humanities will have similar hard and soft skills. At the fringes are some bat shit theories that get academics in the news. And that is often the aim - unis love getting in the news. But don’t forget the science weirdos are there too. From water molecules retaining the memory of molecules that were once dissolved in it, to the idea that having two sudden infant deaths in a family is unbelievably rare (when the chances of a second are more likely if there is a first), to the idea nuclear fusion will ever work as a power source.* Lots of the highest impact stuff in healthcare comes out of fairly soft subjects such as psychology. You can save billions on medication if you work out why patients don’t complete their medication or take them incorrectly.
*The sun doesn’t count.
Bat shit theories are I agree everywhere. Does not change the fact that stem has done a lot to improve the life of humans a lot. Humanities has done the squareroot of fuckall to improve it.
I don't advocate banning humanities studies I just think it should be seen as what it is which is a hobby sort of thing with little relevance to making life better for most people
Depends what you mean by humanities. Geography and history are as or more relevant to working in the 21st century than they’ve ever been, and somewhat more than several other supposedly more vocational subjects.
Ok you say history is more relevant to working in the 21st century....examples please of where it matters
Warfare.
I suspect a knowledge of ww1 battles is that applicable to modern day warfare as technology has changed so much
Lee Anderson MP @LeeAndersonMP_ Katy works for me. She is single & earns less than 30k, rents a room for £775pcm in Central London, has student debt, £120 a month on travelling to work saves money every month, goes on foreign holidays & does not need to use a foodbank.
I sometimes wonder what old school Tory nasties like Chope make of social climber 30p Lee?
I eat my share of value brand products, but I draw the line at fake Weetabix. Not even close to the real thing.
We switched to own-brand all-bran a while back (it's among my kids' favourites because it looks like sticks - have managed to convince the younger eater that it isprocessed sticks, I think, athough she also refers to it, quite descriptively, as "all brown"). They do taste different; took a while to realise (comparing two packets' ingredients/nutrition) that the main difference is that the 'real' one is stuffed with a lot more salt. Having got used to the own-brand one, I think I now prefer it.
Weetabix - can any variation be worse than the real thing? Although I must admit I'm the only non-eater in my family.
The issue with Weetabix is with the milk. Too much or too little renders it soggy/dry respectively and the landing zone between the two is very narrow (compared to say Cornflakes). I gave up long ago. Life's too short.
Dunno, I'm pretty sure the issue with Weetabix is the Weetabix. It's horrible with or without milk in whatever quantity. Milk is fine without Weetabix
Heretic, Weetabix is second only to Porridge, Oat Chruchies and Corn flakes
That's fourth then.
Wot, no Crunchy Nut Cornflakes?
Fifth....
No breakfast is even getting started until it has bacon and/or/both eggs. Honourable mention to kippers though. (That's a PB first!)
Bacon and eggs is massively lifted by black pudding....
In a bit of a nap in the afternoon way. Certainly!
Relatedly - I wonder if PB can help with a non-urgent medical condition
Out here in Bangkok I’ve developed a sudden habit of sleeping - quite heavily - for an hour or two after supper. I ascribed it to jet lag but it is persisting. Hmm
Doctor Google says I should not worry it’s “post prandial somnolence” and quite common. But I’ve never had it before and it is beginning to irritate. Also it could be awkward if I dine out - then slump forward, snoring, into the sorbet
Otherwise I feel fine. Indeed robustly healthy - sun, gym and swim
Anyone got any ideas? Anyone had this?
I believe it's called getting old.
Is that it? I find it hard to believe. I know plenty of people older than me who don’t go into REM sleep 50 minutes after dinner
This is the weird thing. It’s not an elderly nap. It’s proper sleep. As I say I feel fine otherwise so it’s a curiosity which is sometimes irritating. No more than that
I've always tended to feel drowsy after a meal, although usually not properly falling asleep drowsy. I imagine the time difference is a factor, although you'd expect that to be worse in the morning if you're in Asia. Maybe you've just been trying to do too much and you need some proper rest or an early night? Travelling is tiring and you will feel it more than you did when you were in your twenties or thirties.
Mm, perhaps. And thanks. I’ve just checked diabetes and pre-diabetes and I’ve got, at most, 2 out of 10 symptoms. So it doesn’t appear to be that
Quite odd
I would suggest that it is post prandial parasympathetic nervous system activity, perhaps also caused by a surge of insulin causing serotonin and melatonin, which both influence sleep.
Lee Anderson MP @LeeAndersonMP_ Katy works for me. She is single & earns less than 30k, rents a room for £775pcm in Central London, has student debt, £120 a month on travelling to work saves money every month, goes on foreign holidays & does not need to use a foodbank.
I sometimes wonder what old school Tory nasties like Chope make of social climber 30p Lee?
I eat my share of value brand products, but I draw the line at fake Weetabix. Not even close to the real thing.
We switched to own-brand all-bran a while back (it's among my kids' favourites because it looks like sticks - have managed to convince the younger eater that it isprocessed sticks, I think, athough she also refers to it, quite descriptively, as "all brown"). They do taste different; took a while to realise (comparing two packets' ingredients/nutrition) that the main difference is that the 'real' one is stuffed with a lot more salt. Having got used to the own-brand one, I think I now prefer it.
Weetabix - can any variation be worse than the real thing? Although I must admit I'm the only non-eater in my family.
The issue with Weetabix is with the milk. Too much or too little renders it soggy/dry respectively and the landing zone between the two is very narrow (compared to say Cornflakes). I gave up long ago. Life's too short.
Dunno, I'm pretty sure the issue with Weetabix is the Weetabix. It's horrible with or without milk in whatever quantity. Milk is fine without Weetabix
Heretic, Weetabix is second only to Porridge, Oat Chruchies and Corn flakes
That's fourth then.
Wot, no Crunchy Nut Cornflakes?
Fifth....
No breakfast is even getting started until it has bacon and/or/both eggs. Honourable mention to kippers though. (That's a PB first!)
Alternatively an Arbroath smoked haddock with a poached egg (or finnan haddock will also do).
That gets in with having eggs. Breakfast rule #1 - pass!
My favourite breakfast. Smoked Haddock with a fat golden-yolk poached egg on top. Crunchy toast and butter. Strong tea. Mmmmmmm
It’s one of the best things about staying in quality British hotels. I’ve never found it anywhere outside the UK
The best possible breakfasts in my view are;
Bacon sandwich (I'm nearly persuaded that an egg topping should be involved, but then a little cheese, and you run away)
Kedgeree - I've no idea why people can't cook it well, admittedly I can't.
Bacon sandwich with white sliced bread and (in my opinion) ketchup, not brown sauce. Brown sauce for sausages.
As for egg, runny scrambled and with the absolute must have ingredient of half a level teaspoon of MSG. Transforms egg into something eggier.
Best breakfast is a breakfast burrito.
No MSG unfortunately.
My son has discovered that the local supermarket sells MSG in little jars that you can simply sprinkle on food.
MSG is a weird one. If the wife eats it, she gets a migraine next day, yet there is no clinical reason for that, apart from my suspicion that it dehydrates her a lot. I experienced this a bit after an all you can eat Chinese buffet. Next day I felt dreadful, huge hangover, but I’d only had a couple of pints. A colleague suggested I drink two pints of water. I did and within 20 mins or so I was fine.
The history of MSG and health / food scares is a fascinating one. There’s clearly something about it somewhere, but most scientific studies into the impacts turn up a blank.
As someone wrote once, if MSG is as bad as people say why doesn’t all of China have a headache?
I have the sprinkling form and use it in eggs, on fresh tomatoes, in gravy and other meaty sauces and broths. It’s great stuff.
In Taiwan all the street stalls and restaurants had "No MSG" in the places where Americans ate and drank. Nowhere else. No locals partook of it.
They chug the stuff by the bucketload (or at least they do on the mainland):
Yeah. I didn't phrase that well. I meant no locals would go for the No MSG option. It is literally on almost everything.
Ah, got it. Yes indeed. Frankly it’s one of the main reasons East Asian cuisine is delicious.
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
What big advance has humanity studies ever given us? Please tell. Now do some humanities students do well and enhance the place yes....generally not through the humanities studies they did. You are a case in point....you studied humanites...your contributions to society however are not humanity based
What an ignorant and philistine statement? Where would our historians, archaeologists and philosophers come from if not for humanities? You don't just need to teach and research it either, plenty of museum curators, journalists, actors, authors and poets and senior civil servants studied humanities today.
As did a few PMs and top politicians, Harold Wilson and Gordon Brown and George Osborne read History and Boris Johnson read classics and Andy Burnham read English. It probably made them more rounded than doing a social science degree like PPE or Politics.
The King read History too of course and the Princess of Wales read History of Art
You were doing well and I was finding myself agreeing with you until you got on to Boris Johnson.
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
As a former humanities graduate I’d have hoped you’d have had a wittier response… (I agree with your sentiment though!)
I am not saying per se that humanities students are not contributors to the social weal. I am saying that the study of humanities has not made them net contributors to the social weal. Where they have contributed is when they went non humanities based like for example RCS and his insurance business. This is based on actuary which is more or less a stats based subject and hence stem.
There are few uni courses that directly lead to a career in that subject (although oddly my pharamacy students are on one such course). Uni study is about a lot more than the specifics of the three/four years. If every chemistry graduate tried to stay in chemistry there would be 10 for every job. But they also learn to evaluate data, solve problems and so on, skills that take them into a myriad of roles. Humanities will have similar hard and soft skills. At the fringes are some bat shit theories that get academics in the news. And that is often the aim - unis love getting in the news. But don’t forget the science weirdos are there too. From water molecules retaining the memory of molecules that were once dissolved in it, to the idea that having two sudden infant deaths in a family is unbelievably rare (when the chances of a second are more likely if there is a first), to the idea nuclear fusion will ever work as a power source.* Lots of the highest impact stuff in healthcare comes out of fairly soft subjects such as psychology. You can save billions on medication if you work out why patients don’t complete their medication or take them incorrectly.
*The sun doesn’t count.
Bat shit theories are I agree everywhere. Does not change the fact that stem has done a lot to improve the life of humans a lot. Humanities has done the squareroot of fuckall to improve it.
I don't advocate banning humanities studies I just think it should be seen as what it is which is a hobby sort of thing with little relevance to making life better for most people
I think you might want to consider the breadth of what the ‘humanities’ covers. I once attended a chemical weapons conference that was organised out of a social science department. There are serious things that effect peoples lives. Don’t get me wrong, I’m hard core STEM, trying to cure cancer, or at least understand it better, but human life is enhanced by endeavours in all ways.
Organised out of a social science department doesnt make it humanities based I suspect the conference was largely populated by stem people and most subjects were stem. If the WI organised it would not make chemical weapons a feminine issue.
Stem subjects have given the world nuclear power, renewable energy sources, nitrogen fertilisers so we can feed a world population, electric cars, anti biotics, medical advances that keep people alive such as pace makers and transplants.....etc etc
What has humanities given that balance the equation so they are equal?
Democracy?
Plato did not study humanities
Nor did he think much of democracy, putting it very mildly
He was the positor of democracy, just not the democracy we have. I doubt he ever envisioned the vote of someone who sits on their ass all day and watches jeremy kyle having an equal say to someone who actually contributes to society.
YOU WHAT?
YOU actually WHAT?
He hated, loathed and despised democracy, and to think otherwise you'd have to not have read a single word of what he bleedin' wrote. and that was before democracy consemned Socrates to death because it had had enough of experts.
Have a flick through the Republic and get back to me.
Loathe is too strong a wrod for it he certainly outlined the dangers of democracy such as we have now where people with no stake or contribution get to vote however he wasnt an advocate of getting rid of it altogether by any means just limiting it
Sorry, but that is utter, utter nonsense. Exactly the problem with Athenian democracy was people with no stake having a vote.
I am not a fan of appeals to one's own authority, but I have a first from Oxford in knowing what Plato thought about democracy. Literally. I cannot think what you are talking about. A reference to a specific dialogue would help.
From plato's 5 regimes he seems to see democracy as a stage that replaces oligarchy... "in democracy, the lower class grows bigger and bigger. A visually appealing demagogue is soon lifted up to protect the interests of the lower class, who can exploit them to take power in order to maintain order. Democracy then degenerates into tyranny where no one has discipline and society exists in chaos. In a tyrannical government, the city is enslaved to the tyrant, who uses his guards to remove the best social elements and individuals from the city to retain power (since they pose a threat), while leaving the worst. He will also provoke warfare to consolidate his position as leader. In this way, tyranny is the most unjust regime of all."
What I got was he saw a cycle of governements each collapsing in turn to another as the weight of each brought it down. His view was democracy collapsed as the lower class got bigger into the next type of governement. I don't perceive he felt democracy as inherently bad merely as a part of a natural cycle
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
What big advance has humanity studies ever given us? Please tell. Now do some humanities students do well and enhance the place yes....generally not through the humanities studies they did. You are a case in point....you studied humanites...your contributions to society however are not humanity based
What an ignorant and philistine statement? Where would our historians, archaeologists and philosophers come from if not for humanities? You don't just need to teach and research it either, plenty of museum curators, journalists, actors, authors and poets and senior civil servants studied humanities today.
As did a few PMs and top politicians, Harold Wilson and Gordon Brown and George Osborne read History and Boris Johnson read classics and Andy Burnham read English. It probably made them more rounded than doing a social science degree like PPE or Politics.
The King read History too of course and the Princess of Wales read History of Art
Point of order: archeology is a science, surely?
Point of puzzlement: aren't you rather demolishing your argument with your last sentence?
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
What big advance has humanity studies ever given us? Please tell. Now do some humanities students do well and enhance the place yes....generally not through the humanities studies they did. You are a case in point....you studied humanites...your contributions to society however are not humanity based
What an ignorant and philistine statement? Where would our historians, archaeologists and philosophers come from if not for humanities? You don't just need to teach and research it either, plenty of museum curators, journalists, actors, authors and poets and senior civil servants studied humanities today.
As did a few PMs and top politicians, Harold Wilson and Gordon Brown, Douglas Hurd and George Osborne read History and Boris Johnson read classics and Andy Burnham read English. It probably made them more rounded than doing a social science degree like PPE or Politics.
The King read History too of course and the Princess of Wales read History of Art
Michael Portillo read History too of course, as did Wes Streeting and Michael Gove read English
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
As a former humanities graduate I’d have hoped you’d have had a wittier response… (I agree with your sentiment though!)
I am not saying per se that humanities students are not contributors to the social weal. I am saying that the study of humanities has not made them net contributors to the social weal. Where they have contributed is when they went non humanities based like for example RCS and his insurance business. This is based on actuary which is more or less a stats based subject and hence stem.
There are few uni courses that directly lead to a career in that subject (although oddly my pharamacy students are on one such course). Uni study is about a lot more than the specifics of the three/four years. If every chemistry graduate tried to stay in chemistry there would be 10 for every job. But they also learn to evaluate data, solve problems and so on, skills that take them into a myriad of roles. Humanities will have similar hard and soft skills. At the fringes are some bat shit theories that get academics in the news. And that is often the aim - unis love getting in the news. But don’t forget the science weirdos are there too. From water molecules retaining the memory of molecules that were once dissolved in it, to the idea that having two sudden infant deaths in a family is unbelievably rare (when the chances of a second are more likely if there is a first), to the idea nuclear fusion will ever work as a power source.* Lots of the highest impact stuff in healthcare comes out of fairly soft subjects such as psychology. You can save billions on medication if you work out why patients don’t complete their medication or take them incorrectly.
*The sun doesn’t count.
Bat shit theories are I agree everywhere. Does not change the fact that stem has done a lot to improve the life of humans a lot. Humanities has done the squareroot of fuckall to improve it.
I don't advocate banning humanities studies I just think it should be seen as what it is which is a hobby sort of thing with little relevance to making life better for most people
Depends what you mean by humanities. Geography and history are as or more relevant to working in the 21st century than they’ve ever been, and somewhat more than several other supposedly more vocational subjects.
Ok you say history is more relevant to working in the 21st century....examples please of where it matters
Warfare.
I suspect a knowledge of ww1 battles is that applicable to modern day warfare as technology has changed so much
Studying logistics, strategy, tactics, the group cohesion of soldiers, the success and failure of coups d’etat and ruses of war, ways of winning over, and of alienating, civilians in occupied territory, counter-insurgency, is enormously important.
There’s a reason why Sun Tzu, Thucidydes, Macchiavelli and Clausewitzare still read today.
Police forces do not have systems that raise the alarm when one of their own officers is arrested, meaning that others like David Carrick could “fall through the cracks and go on to do harm”, says the head of the British Transport Police.
Lucy D’Orsi said it was “high time we sorted it out” after Carrick, a firearms officer who committed 48 rapes over nearly 20 years despite repeated criminal complaints.
D’Orsi wrote on LinkedIn: “If I was to commit a crime, get arrested and give my details, there is no obvious system check that would flag that I’m a police officer if I didn’t choose to tell them. Yes, you read that correctly.
Using LinkedIn though, further proof that the police need to be destroyed and me appointed Head of the Police in this country with Cyclefree as Commissioner of the Met.
Erm, thanks to PACE, a lot of witnesses are arrested. Will they all be sacked too? And if, after Carrick, criminal complaints will be the trigger, I am sure career criminals will start making complaints about inconveniently effective police.
Carrick committed 48 rapes over 20 years, which raises the question, why was he not caught earlier? So far as I can see, without looking into it, the fact that he was a copper, and should not have been, is irrelevant to the rape question.
There are two separate reasons to be outraged, and nothing to be gained by fudging them together.
Never speak to the police without a lawyer present even if you are the complainant or a witness
Police forces do not have systems that raise the alarm when one of their own officers is arrested, meaning that others like David Carrick could “fall through the cracks and go on to do harm”, says the head of the British Transport Police.
Lucy D’Orsi said it was “high time we sorted it out” after Carrick, a firearms officer who committed 48 rapes over nearly 20 years despite repeated criminal complaints.
D’Orsi wrote on LinkedIn: “If I was to commit a crime, get arrested and give my details, there is no obvious system check that would flag that I’m a police officer if I didn’t choose to tell them. Yes, you read that correctly.
Using LinkedIn though, further proof that the police need to be destroyed and me appointed Head of the Police in this country with Cyclefree as Commissioner of the Met.
Erm, thanks to PACE, a lot of witnesses are arrested. Will they all be sacked too? And if, after Carrick, criminal complaints will be the trigger, I am sure career criminals will start making complaints about inconveniently effective police.
Carrick committed 48 rapes over 20 years, which raises the question, why was he not caught earlier? So far as I can see, without looking into it, the fact that he was a copper, and should not have been, is irrelevant to the rape question.
There are two separate reasons to be outraged, and nothing to be gained by fudging them together.
Never speak to the police without a lawyer present even if you are the complainant or a witness
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
As a former humanities graduate I’d have hoped you’d have had a wittier response… (I agree with your sentiment though!)
I am not saying per se that humanities students are not contributors to the social weal. I am saying that the study of humanities has not made them net contributors to the social weal. Where they have contributed is when they went non humanities based like for example RCS and his insurance business. This is based on actuary which is more or less a stats based subject and hence stem.
There are few uni courses that directly lead to a career in that subject (although oddly my pharamacy students are on one such course). Uni study is about a lot more than the specifics of the three/four years. If every chemistry graduate tried to stay in chemistry there would be 10 for every job. But they also learn to evaluate data, solve problems and so on, skills that take them into a myriad of roles. Humanities will have similar hard and soft skills. At the fringes are some bat shit theories that get academics in the news. And that is often the aim - unis love getting in the news. But don’t forget the science weirdos are there too. From water molecules retaining the memory of molecules that were once dissolved in it, to the idea that having two sudden infant deaths in a family is unbelievably rare (when the chances of a second are more likely if there is a first), to the idea nuclear fusion will ever work as a power source.* Lots of the highest impact stuff in healthcare comes out of fairly soft subjects such as psychology. You can save billions on medication if you work out why patients don’t complete their medication or take them incorrectly.
*The sun doesn’t count.
Bat shit theories are I agree everywhere. Does not change the fact that stem has done a lot to improve the life of humans a lot. Humanities has done the squareroot of fuckall to improve it.
I don't advocate banning humanities studies I just think it should be seen as what it is which is a hobby sort of thing with little relevance to making life better for most people
No STEM: no AGW, no nuclear weapons, no holocaust. Not really seeing it.
no iphones, no internet, subsistence farming, high infant mortality, no protection against infection....well its a view
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
What big advance has humanity studies ever given us? Please tell. Now do some humanities students do well and enhance the place yes....generally not through the humanities studies they did. You are a case in point....you studied humanites...your contributions to society however are not humanity based
What an ignorant and philistine statement? Where would our historians, archaeologists and philosophers come from if not for humanities? You don't just need to teach and research it either, plenty of museum curators, journalists, actors, authors and poets and senior civil servants studied humanities today.
As did a few PMs and top politicians, Harold Wilson and Gordon Brown and George Osborne read History and Boris Johnson read classics and Andy Burnham read English. It probably made them more rounded than doing a social science degree like PPE or Politics.
The King read History too of course and the Princess of Wales read History of Art
Point of order: archeology is a science, surely?
Point of puzzlement: aren't you rather demolishing your argument with your last sentence?
It can be considered a humanities subject or a social science
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
What big advance has humanity studies ever given us? Please tell. Now do some humanities students do well and enhance the place yes....generally not through the humanities studies they did. You are a case in point....you studied humanites...your contributions to society however are not humanity based
What an ignorant and philistine statement? Where would our historians, archaeologists and philosophers come from if not for humanities? You don't just need to teach and research it either, plenty of museum curators, journalists, actors, authors and poets and senior civil servants studied humanities today.
As did a few PMs and top politicians, Harold Wilson and Gordon Brown and George Osborne read History and Boris Johnson read classics and Andy Burnham read English. It probably made them more rounded than doing a social science degree like PPE or Politics.
The King read History too of course and the Princess of Wales read History of Art
Point of order: archeology is a science, surely?
Depends on which bit of it you're thinking of. Assessing artefacts yes, considering literary sources rather less so.
Rather like geography, which is also considered one of the humanities but has large scientific elements within it.
Police forces do not have systems that raise the alarm when one of their own officers is arrested, meaning that others like David Carrick could “fall through the cracks and go on to do harm”, says the head of the British Transport Police.
Lucy D’Orsi said it was “high time we sorted it out” after Carrick, a firearms officer who committed 48 rapes over nearly 20 years despite repeated criminal complaints.
D’Orsi wrote on LinkedIn: “If I was to commit a crime, get arrested and give my details, there is no obvious system check that would flag that I’m a police officer if I didn’t choose to tell them. Yes, you read that correctly.
Using LinkedIn though, further proof that the police need to be destroyed and me appointed Head of the Police in this country with Cyclefree as Commissioner of the Met.
Erm, thanks to PACE, a lot of witnesses are arrested. Will they all be sacked too? And if, after Carrick, criminal complaints will be the trigger, I am sure career criminals will start making complaints about inconveniently effective police.
Carrick committed 48 rapes over 20 years, which raises the question, why was he not caught earlier? So far as I can see, without looking into it, the fact that he was a copper, and should not have been, is irrelevant to the rape question.
There are two separate reasons to be outraged, and nothing to be gained by fudging them together.
Never speak to the police without a lawyer present even if you are the complainant or a witness
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
What big advance has humanity studies ever given us? Please tell. Now do some humanities students do well and enhance the place yes....generally not through the humanities studies they did. You are a case in point....you studied humanites...your contributions to society however are not humanity based
What an ignorant and philistine statement? Where would our historians, archaeologists and philosophers come from if not for humanities? You don't just need to teach and research it either, plenty of museum curators, journalists, actors, authors and poets and senior civil servants studied humanities today.
As did a few PMs and top politicians, Harold Wilson and Gordon Brown and George Osborne read History and Boris Johnson read classics and Andy Burnham read English. It probably made them more rounded than doing a social science degree like PPE or Politics.
The King read History too of course and the Princess of Wales read History of Art
Point of order: archeology is a science, surely?
Point of puzzlement: aren't you rather demolishing your argument with your last sentence?
I am sorry here you are advancing the fact wilson, brown, osborne, johnson and burnham were humanities students as a point of view humanities students are great?.....may need to rethink that one because they were all complete and utter incompetents
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
What big advance has humanity studies ever given us? Please tell. Now do some humanities students do well and enhance the place yes....generally not through the humanities studies they did. You are a case in point....you studied humanites...your contributions to society however are not humanity based
What an ignorant and philistine statement? Where would our historians, archaeologists and philosophers come from if not for humanities? You don't just need to teach and research it either, plenty of museum curators, journalists, actors, authors and poets and senior civil servants studied humanities today.
As did a few PMs and top politicians, Harold Wilson and Gordon Brown and George Osborne read History and Boris Johnson read classics and Andy Burnham read English. It probably made them more rounded than doing a social science degree like PPE or Politics.
The King read History too of course and the Princess of Wales read History of Art
Point of order, archeology is a science, surely?
It feels to me like one of those rare subjects that blend science and humanities (and often address scientific topics in a human context). You need the methods, the chemistry, soil stratigraphy etc but you also need to understand the human context and history.
Like geography, economics, psychology, statistics and so on.
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
After some consideration, a bottle or 2 of red, and some port.
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
As a former humanities graduate I’d have hoped you’d have had a wittier response… (I agree with your sentiment though!)
I am not saying per se that humanities students are not contributors to the social weal. I am saying that the study of humanities has not made them net contributors to the social weal. Where they have contributed is when they went non humanities based like for example RCS and his insurance business. This is based on actuary which is more or less a stats based subject and hence stem.
There are few uni courses that directly lead to a career in that subject (although oddly my pharamacy students are on one such course). Uni study is about a lot more than the specifics of the three/four years. If every chemistry graduate tried to stay in chemistry there would be 10 for every job. But they also learn to evaluate data, solve problems and so on, skills that take them into a myriad of roles. Humanities will have similar hard and soft skills. At the fringes are some bat shit theories that get academics in the news. And that is often the aim - unis love getting in the news. But don’t forget the science weirdos are there too. From water molecules retaining the memory of molecules that were once dissolved in it, to the idea that having two sudden infant deaths in a family is unbelievably rare (when the chances of a second are more likely if there is a first), to the idea nuclear fusion will ever work as a power source.* Lots of the highest impact stuff in healthcare comes out of fairly soft subjects such as psychology. You can save billions on medication if you work out why patients don’t complete their medication or take them incorrectly.
*The sun doesn’t count.
Bat shit theories are I agree everywhere. Does not change the fact that stem has done a lot to improve the life of humans a lot. Humanities has done the squareroot of fuckall to improve it.
I don't advocate banning humanities studies I just think it should be seen as what it is which is a hobby sort of thing with little relevance to making life better for most people
Depends what you mean by humanities. Geography and history are as or more relevant to working in the 21st century than they’ve ever been, and somewhat more than several other supposedly more vocational subjects.
Ok you say history is more relevant to working in the 21st century....examples please of where it matters
Warfare.
I suspect a knowledge of ww1 battles is that applicable to modern day warfare as technology has changed so much
Studying logistics, strategy, tactics, the group cohesion of soldiers, the success and failure of coups d’etat and ruses of war, ways of winning over, and of alienating, civilians in occupied territory, counter-insurgency, is enormously important.
There’s a reason why Sun Tzu, Thucidydes, Macchiavelli and Clausewitzare still read today.
Do you need to go to university to read their works? I have read 3 of the 4 and they aren't that complicated I need a "professor" to tell me how to interpret what they say
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
As a former humanities graduate I’d have hoped you’d have had a wittier response… (I agree with your sentiment though!)
I am not saying per se that humanities students are not contributors to the social weal. I am saying that the study of humanities has not made them net contributors to the social weal. Where they have contributed is when they went non humanities based like for example RCS and his insurance business. This is based on actuary which is more or less a stats based subject and hence stem.
There are few uni courses that directly lead to a career in that subject (although oddly my pharamacy students are on one such course). Uni study is about a lot more than the specifics of the three/four years. If every chemistry graduate tried to stay in chemistry there would be 10 for every job. But they also learn to evaluate data, solve problems and so on, skills that take them into a myriad of roles. Humanities will have similar hard and soft skills. At the fringes are some bat shit theories that get academics in the news. And that is often the aim - unis love getting in the news. But don’t forget the science weirdos are there too. From water molecules retaining the memory of molecules that were once dissolved in it, to the idea that having two sudden infant deaths in a family is unbelievably rare (when the chances of a second are more likely if there is a first), to the idea nuclear fusion will ever work as a power source.* Lots of the highest impact stuff in healthcare comes out of fairly soft subjects such as psychology. You can save billions on medication if you work out why patients don’t complete their medication or take them incorrectly.
*The sun doesn’t count.
Bat shit theories are I agree everywhere. Does not change the fact that stem has done a lot to improve the life of humans a lot. Humanities has done the squareroot of fuckall to improve it.
I don't advocate banning humanities studies I just think it should be seen as what it is which is a hobby sort of thing with little relevance to making life better for most people
Depends what you mean by humanities. Geography and history are as or more relevant to working in the 21st century than they’ve ever been, and somewhat more than several other supposedly more vocational subjects.
Ok you say history is more relevant to working in the 21st century....examples please of where it matters
Warfare.
I suspect a knowledge of ww1 battles is that applicable to modern day warfare as technology has changed so much
Studying logistics, strategy, tactics, the group cohesion of soldiers, the success and failure of coups d’etat and ruses of war, ways of winning over, and of alienating, civilians in occupied territory, counter-insurgency, is enormously important.
There’s a reason why Sun Tzu, Thucidydes, Macchiavelli and Clausewitzare still read today.
There's a quote about how amateurs talk of strategy and tactics, while professionals talk of logistics.
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
What big advance has humanity studies ever given us? Please tell. Now do some humanities students do well and enhance the place yes....generally not through the humanities studies they did. You are a case in point....you studied humanites...your contributions to society however are not humanity based
What an ignorant and philistine statement? Where would our historians, archaeologists and philosophers come from if not for humanities? You don't just need to teach and research it either, plenty of museum curators, journalists, actors, authors and poets and senior civil servants studied humanities today.
As did a few PMs and top politicians, Harold Wilson and Gordon Brown and George Osborne read History and Boris Johnson read classics and Andy Burnham read English. It probably made them more rounded than doing a social science degree like PPE or Politics.
The King read History too of course and the Princess of Wales read History of Art
Point of order: archeology is a science, surely?
Point of puzzlement: aren't you rather demolishing your argument with your last sentence?
It can be considered a humanities subject or a social science
"Archaeology or archeology is the scientific study of human activity through the recovery and analysis of material culture."
"The science of archaeology (from Greek ἀρχαιολογία, archaiologia from ἀρχαῖος, arkhaios, "ancient" and -λογία, -logia, "-logy") grew out of the older multi-disciplinary study known as antiquarianism."
It seems I'm as far behind the news as a selling plater is behind the Derby winner.
Never mind - Jacinda Ardern's resignation has certainly galvanised NZ politics - of course it wouldn't be the first time a party has replaced a successful election-winning leader who inflicted a landslide defeat on the opposition yet this time it is the leader herself who has walked rather than the Party's MPs getting involved.
Who replaces her? Grant Robertson has ruled himself out yet he wants to stay Finance Minister and the likely alternative is Chris Hipkins. Hipkins wouldn't be Continuity Ardern - he's arguably more of a centrist and could well encroach onto National's lawn.
Christopher Luxon, the National leader, was formerly CEO of Air New Zealand and got mixed reviews for that. As a politician, apart from the odd gaffe, he's done well but, pace Starmer, he's framed himself more for what he isn't in respect to Ardern rather than what he is. I don't see a Bolger or Muldoon type figure at all - possibly nearer a John Key. He also has ACT on his right flank and their leader, David Seymour, has done very well of late.
NZ vote in September and it's going to be fascinating.
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
What big advance has humanity studies ever given us? Please tell. Now do some humanities students do well and enhance the place yes....generally not through the humanities studies they did. You are a case in point....you studied humanites...your contributions to society however are not humanity based
What an ignorant and philistine statement? Where would our historians, archaeologists and philosophers come from if not for humanities? You don't just need to teach and research it either, plenty of museum curators, journalists, actors, authors and poets and senior civil servants studied humanities today.
As did a few PMs and top politicians, Harold Wilson and Gordon Brown and George Osborne read History and Boris Johnson read classics and Andy Burnham read English. It probably made them more rounded than doing a social science degree like PPE or Politics.
The King read History too of course and the Princess of Wales read History of Art
Point of order: archeology is a science, surely?
Depends on which bit of it you're thinking of. Assessing artefacts yes, considering literary sources rather less so.
Rather like geography, which is also considered one of the humanities but has large scientific elements within it.
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
What big advance has humanity studies ever given us? Please tell. Now do some humanities students do well and enhance the place yes....generally not through the humanities studies they did. You are a case in point....you studied humanites...your contributions to society however are not humanity based
What an ignorant and philistine statement? Where would our historians, archaeologists and philosophers come from if not for humanities? You don't just need to teach and research it either, plenty of museum curators, journalists, actors, authors and poets and senior civil servants studied humanities today.
As did a few PMs and top politicians, Harold Wilson and Gordon Brown and George Osborne read History and Boris Johnson read classics and Andy Burnham read English. It probably made them more rounded than doing a social science degree like PPE or Politics.
The King read History too of course and the Princess of Wales read History of Art
Point of order: archeology is a science, surely?
Point of puzzlement: aren't you rather demolishing your argument with your last sentence?
It can be considered a humanities subject or a social science
The trick in life is not to have intellectual time for those who define their outlooks according to whatever they took formal qualifications in or by whatever they get paid for working at.
Especially if they're academics or scientists. And among them, especially if they're "computer scientists". There is a cartoon figure in one of the Molesworth books that says it all, but I can't be bothered to look for it.
Anyone who goes on about "humanities" probably got it from Private Eye anyway.
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
As a former humanities graduate I’d have hoped you’d have had a wittier response… (I agree with your sentiment though!)
I am not saying per se that humanities students are not contributors to the social weal. I am saying that the study of humanities has not made them net contributors to the social weal. Where they have contributed is when they went non humanities based like for example RCS and his insurance business. This is based on actuary which is more or less a stats based subject and hence stem.
There are few uni courses that directly lead to a career in that subject (although oddly my pharamacy students are on one such course). Uni study is about a lot more than the specifics of the three/four years. If every chemistry graduate tried to stay in chemistry there would be 10 for every job. But they also learn to evaluate data, solve problems and so on, skills that take them into a myriad of roles. Humanities will have similar hard and soft skills. At the fringes are some bat shit theories that get academics in the news. And that is often the aim - unis love getting in the news. But don’t forget the science weirdos are there too. From water molecules retaining the memory of molecules that were once dissolved in it, to the idea that having two sudden infant deaths in a family is unbelievably rare (when the chances of a second are more likely if there is a first), to the idea nuclear fusion will ever work as a power source.* Lots of the highest impact stuff in healthcare comes out of fairly soft subjects such as psychology. You can save billions on medication if you work out why patients don’t complete their medication or take them incorrectly.
*The sun doesn’t count.
Bat shit theories are I agree everywhere. Does not change the fact that stem has done a lot to improve the life of humans a lot. Humanities has done the squareroot of fuckall to improve it.
I don't advocate banning humanities studies I just think it should be seen as what it is which is a hobby sort of thing with little relevance to making life better for most people
No STEM: no AGW, no nuclear weapons, no holocaust. Not really seeing it.
no iphones, no internet, subsistence farming, high infant mortality, no protection against infection....well its a view
What we’re all saying, if you’re ready to listen, that the academic subjects we study all exist for good reasons. From the hard sciences to the fine arts and everything in between.
Some are for the good of the body, or the production of goods, or the understanding of nature. Others for the cohesion of society, or the appreciation of language, the administration of a country or simply the joy of living.
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
What big advance has humanity studies ever given us? Please tell. Now do some humanities students do well and enhance the place yes....generally not through the humanities studies they did. You are a case in point....you studied humanites...your contributions to society however are not humanity based
Science, Technology, Engineering and Medicine all help us live, but it is the Arts and Humanities that give us a reason to live.
Well they might you some of us frankly think most modern art is a pile of dross. You think hurst and Emin give you a reason to live thats fine what they give me is a reason to believe the universe would be better off with out humans
Most modern art is figurative realism. I think you mean abstract art, rather than modern art.
Tracy emins unmade bed was abstract?
That question implies it was art...
No it didn't it was called art, modern art I was just citing it wasn't abstract. I do not accept it as art
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
As a former humanities graduate I’d have hoped you’d have had a wittier response… (I agree with your sentiment though!)
I am not saying per se that humanities students are not contributors to the social weal. I am saying that the study of humanities has not made them net contributors to the social weal. Where they have contributed is when they went non humanities based like for example RCS and his insurance business. This is based on actuary which is more or less a stats based subject and hence stem.
There are few uni courses that directly lead to a career in that subject (although oddly my pharamacy students are on one such course). Uni study is about a lot more than the specifics of the three/four years. If every chemistry graduate tried to stay in chemistry there would be 10 for every job. But they also learn to evaluate data, solve problems and so on, skills that take them into a myriad of roles. Humanities will have similar hard and soft skills. At the fringes are some bat shit theories that get academics in the news. And that is often the aim - unis love getting in the news. But don’t forget the science weirdos are there too. From water molecules retaining the memory of molecules that were once dissolved in it, to the idea that having two sudden infant deaths in a family is unbelievably rare (when the chances of a second are more likely if there is a first), to the idea nuclear fusion will ever work as a power source.* Lots of the highest impact stuff in healthcare comes out of fairly soft subjects such as psychology. You can save billions on medication if you work out why patients don’t complete their medication or take them incorrectly.
*The sun doesn’t count.
Bat shit theories are I agree everywhere. Does not change the fact that stem has done a lot to improve the life of humans a lot. Humanities has done the squareroot of fuckall to improve it.
I don't advocate banning humanities studies I just think it should be seen as what it is which is a hobby sort of thing with little relevance to making life better for most people
I think you might want to consider the breadth of what the ‘humanities’ covers. I once attended a chemical weapons conference that was organised out of a social science department. There are serious things that effect peoples lives. Don’t get me wrong, I’m hard core STEM, trying to cure cancer, or at least understand it better, but human life is enhanced by endeavours in all ways.
Organised out of a social science department doesnt make it humanities based I suspect the conference was largely populated by stem people and most subjects were stem. If the WI organised it would not make chemical weapons a feminine issue.
Stem subjects have given the world nuclear power, renewable energy sources, nitrogen fertilisers so we can feed a world population, electric cars, anti biotics, medical advances that keep people alive such as pace makers and transplants.....etc etc
What has humanities given that balance the equation so they are equal?
Democracy?
Plato did not study humanities
Nor did he think much of democracy, putting it very mildly
He was the positor of democracy, just not the democracy we have. I doubt he ever envisioned the vote of someone who sits on their ass all day and watches jeremy kyle having an equal say to someone who actually contributes to society.
YOU WHAT?
YOU actually WHAT?
He hated, loathed and despised democracy, and to think otherwise you'd have to not have read a single word of what he bleedin' wrote. and that was before democracy consemned Socrates to death because it had had enough of experts.
Have a flick through the Republic and get back to me.
Loathe is too strong a wrod for it he certainly outlined the dangers of democracy such as we have now where people with no stake or contribution get to vote however he wasnt an advocate of getting rid of it altogether by any means just limiting it
Sorry, but that is utter, utter nonsense. Exactly the problem with Athenian democracy was people with no stake having a vote.
I am not a fan of appeals to one's own authority, but I have a first from Oxford in knowing what Plato thought about democracy. Literally. I cannot think what you are talking about. A reference to a specific dialogue would help.
From plato's 5 regimes he seems to see democracy as a stage that replaces oligarchy... "in democracy, the lower class grows bigger and bigger. A visually appealing demagogue is soon lifted up to protect the interests of the lower class, who can exploit them to take power in order to maintain order. Democracy then degenerates into tyranny where no one has discipline and society exists in chaos. In a tyrannical government, the city is enslaved to the tyrant, who uses his guards to remove the best social elements and individuals from the city to retain power (since they pose a threat), while leaving the worst. He will also provoke warfare to consolidate his position as leader. In this way, tyranny is the most unjust regime of all."
What I got was he saw a cycle of governements each collapsing in turn to another as the weight of each brought it down. His view was democracy collapsed as the lower class got bigger into the next type of governement. I don't perceive he felt democracy as inherently bad merely as a part of a natural cycle
He thought it was rubbish, precisely because it was part of that cycle. Hence his proposal of a guardian class, which is as anti democratic as it gets.
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
What big advance has humanity studies ever given us? Please tell. Now do some humanities students do well and enhance the place yes....generally not through the humanities studies they did. You are a case in point....you studied humanites...your contributions to society however are not humanity based
What an ignorant and philistine statement? Where would our historians, archaeologists and philosophers come from if not for humanities? You don't just need to teach and research it either, plenty of museum curators, journalists, actors, authors and poets and senior civil servants studied humanities today.
As did a few PMs and top politicians, Harold Wilson and Gordon Brown and George Osborne read History and Boris Johnson read classics and Andy Burnham read English. It probably made them more rounded than doing a social science degree like PPE or Politics.
The King read History too of course and the Princess of Wales read History of Art
Point of order: archeology is a science, surely?
Point of puzzlement: aren't you rather demolishing your argument with your last sentence?
I am sorry here you are advancing the fact wilson, brown, osborne, johnson and burnham were humanities students as a point of view humanities students are great?.....may need to rethink that one because they were all complete and utter incompetents
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
What big advance has humanity studies ever given us? Please tell. Now do some humanities students do well and enhance the place yes....generally not through the humanities studies they did. You are a case in point....you studied humanites...your contributions to society however are not humanity based
What an ignorant and philistine statement? Where would our historians, archaeologists and philosophers come from if not for humanities? You don't just need to teach and research it either, plenty of museum curators, journalists, actors, authors and poets and senior civil servants studied humanities today.
As did a few PMs and top politicians, Harold Wilson and Gordon Brown and George Osborne read History and Boris Johnson read classics and Andy Burnham read English. It probably made them more rounded than doing a social science degree like PPE or Politics.
The King read History too of course and the Princess of Wales read History of Art
Point of order: archeology is a science, surely?
Depends on which bit of it you're thinking of. Assessing artefacts yes, considering literary sources rather less so.
Rather like geography, which is also considered one of the humanities but has large scientific elements within it.
That's antiquarianism, shirley?
Then somebody should have told Jeff Davis that when he was teaching me archaeology 20 years ago and wouldn't shut up about the fecking original literature.
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
What big advance has humanity studies ever given us? Please tell. Now do some humanities students do well and enhance the place yes....generally not through the humanities studies they did. You are a case in point....you studied humanites...your contributions to society however are not humanity based
What an ignorant and philistine statement? Where would our historians, archaeologists and philosophers come from if not for humanities? You don't just need to teach and research it either, plenty of museum curators, journalists, actors, authors and poets and senior civil servants studied humanities today.
As did a few PMs and top politicians, Harold Wilson and Gordon Brown and George Osborne read History and Boris Johnson read classics and Andy Burnham read English. It probably made them more rounded than doing a social science degree like PPE or Politics.
The King read History too of course and the Princess of Wales read History of Art
Point of order: archeology is a science, surely?
Point of puzzlement: aren't you rather demolishing your argument with your last sentence?
It can be considered a humanities subject or a social science
The trick in life is not to have intellectual time for those who define their outlooks according to whatever they took formal qualifications in or by whatever they get paid for working at.
Especially if they're academics or scientists. And among them, especially if they're "computer scientists". There is a cartoon figure in one of the Molesworth books that says it all, but I can't be bothered to look for it.
Anyone who goes on about "humanities" probably got it from Private Eye anyway.
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
What big advance has humanity studies ever given us? Please tell. Now do some humanities students do well and enhance the place yes....generally not through the humanities studies they did. You are a case in point....you studied humanites...your contributions to society however are not humanity based
What an ignorant and philistine statement? Where would our historians, archaeologists and philosophers come from if not for humanities? You don't just need to teach and research it either, plenty of museum curators, journalists, actors, authors and poets and senior civil servants studied humanities today.
As did a few PMs and top politicians, Harold Wilson and Gordon Brown and George Osborne read History and Boris Johnson read classics and Andy Burnham read English. It probably made them more rounded than doing a social science degree like PPE or Politics.
The King read History too of course and the Princess of Wales read History of Art
Point of order: archeology is a science, surely?
Point of puzzlement: aren't you rather demolishing your argument with your last sentence?
It can be considered a humanities subject or a social science
"Archaeology or archeology is the scientific study of human activity through the recovery and analysis of material culture."
"The science of archaeology (from Greek ἀρχαιολογία, archaiologia from ἀρχαῖος, arkhaios, "ancient" and -λογία, -logia, "-logy") grew out of the older multi-disciplinary study known as antiquarianism."
Line 6 'Archaeology can be considered both a social science and a branch of humanities'
Police forces do not have systems that raise the alarm when one of their own officers is arrested, meaning that others like David Carrick could “fall through the cracks and go on to do harm”, says the head of the British Transport Police.
Lucy D’Orsi said it was “high time we sorted it out” after Carrick, a firearms officer who committed 48 rapes over nearly 20 years despite repeated criminal complaints.
D’Orsi wrote on LinkedIn: “If I was to commit a crime, get arrested and give my details, there is no obvious system check that would flag that I’m a police officer if I didn’t choose to tell them. Yes, you read that correctly.
Using LinkedIn though, further proof that the police need to be destroyed and me appointed Head of the Police in this country with Cyclefree as Commissioner of the Met.
Erm, thanks to PACE, a lot of witnesses are arrested. Will they all be sacked too? And if, after Carrick, criminal complaints will be the trigger, I am sure career criminals will start making complaints about inconveniently effective police.
Carrick committed 48 rapes over 20 years, which raises the question, why was he not caught earlier? So far as I can see, without looking into it, the fact that he was a copper, and should not have been, is irrelevant to the rape question.
There are two separate reasons to be outraged, and nothing to be gained by fudging them together.
Never speak to the police without a lawyer present even if you are the complainant or a witness
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
What big advance has humanity studies ever given us? Please tell. Now do some humanities students do well and enhance the place yes....generally not through the humanities studies they did. You are a case in point....you studied humanites...your contributions to society however are not humanity based
What an ignorant and philistine statement? Where would our historians, archaeologists and philosophers come from if not for humanities? You don't just need to teach and research it either, plenty of museum curators, journalists, actors, authors and poets and senior civil servants studied humanities today.
As did a few PMs and top politicians, Harold Wilson and Gordon Brown and George Osborne read History and Boris Johnson read classics and Andy Burnham read English. It probably made them more rounded than doing a social science degree like PPE or Politics.
The King read History too of course and the Princess of Wales read History of Art
Point of order: archeology is a science, surely?
Point of puzzlement: aren't you rather demolishing your argument with your last sentence?
It can be considered a humanities subject or a social science
"Archaeology or archeology is the scientific study of human activity through the recovery and analysis of material culture."
"The science of archaeology (from Greek ἀρχαιολογία, archaiologia from ἀρχαῖος, arkhaios, "ancient" and -λογία, -logia, "-logy") grew out of the older multi-disciplinary study known as antiquarianism."
If Wikipedia didn't exist, someone taking the piss out of sophomores would have had to have invented it.
Police forces do not have systems that raise the alarm when one of their own officers is arrested, meaning that others like David Carrick could “fall through the cracks and go on to do harm”, says the head of the British Transport Police.
Lucy D’Orsi said it was “high time we sorted it out” after Carrick, a firearms officer who committed 48 rapes over nearly 20 years despite repeated criminal complaints.
D’Orsi wrote on LinkedIn: “If I was to commit a crime, get arrested and give my details, there is no obvious system check that would flag that I’m a police officer if I didn’t choose to tell them. Yes, you read that correctly.
Using LinkedIn though, further proof that the police need to be destroyed and me appointed Head of the Police in this country with Cyclefree as Commissioner of the Met.
Erm, thanks to PACE, a lot of witnesses are arrested. Will they all be sacked too? And if, after Carrick, criminal complaints will be the trigger, I am sure career criminals will start making complaints about inconveniently effective police.
Carrick committed 48 rapes over 20 years, which raises the question, why was he not caught earlier? So far as I can see, without looking into it, the fact that he was a copper, and should not have been, is irrelevant to the rape question.
There are two separate reasons to be outraged, and nothing to be gained by fudging them together.
Never speak to the police without a lawyer present even if you are the complainant or a witness
Isn’t law one of the humanities ?
No, it is a social science
A distinction almost without a difference.
You could say the same of history or linguistics.
Aspects but generally History comes under humanities, law always comes under social science unless perhaps jurisprudence or history of our constitutional law
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
As a former humanities graduate I’d have hoped you’d have had a wittier response… (I agree with your sentiment though!)
I am not saying per se that humanities students are not contributors to the social weal. I am saying that the study of humanities has not made them net contributors to the social weal. Where they have contributed is when they went non humanities based like for example RCS and his insurance business. This is based on actuary which is more or less a stats based subject and hence stem.
There are few uni courses that directly lead to a career in that subject (although oddly my pharamacy students are on one such course). Uni study is about a lot more than the specifics of the three/four years. If every chemistry graduate tried to stay in chemistry there would be 10 for every job. But they also learn to evaluate data, solve problems and so on, skills that take them into a myriad of roles. Humanities will have similar hard and soft skills. At the fringes are some bat shit theories that get academics in the news. And that is often the aim - unis love getting in the news. But don’t forget the science weirdos are there too. From water molecules retaining the memory of molecules that were once dissolved in it, to the idea that having two sudden infant deaths in a family is unbelievably rare (when the chances of a second are more likely if there is a first), to the idea nuclear fusion will ever work as a power source.* Lots of the highest impact stuff in healthcare comes out of fairly soft subjects such as psychology. You can save billions on medication if you work out why patients don’t complete their medication or take them incorrectly.
*The sun doesn’t count.
Bat shit theories are I agree everywhere. Does not change the fact that stem has done a lot to improve the life of humans a lot. Humanities has done the squareroot of fuckall to improve it.
I don't advocate banning humanities studies I just think it should be seen as what it is which is a hobby sort of thing with little relevance to making life better for most people
Depends what you mean by humanities. Geography and history are as or more relevant to working in the 21st century than they’ve ever been, and somewhat more than several other supposedly more vocational subjects.
Ok you say history is more relevant to working in the 21st century....examples please of where it matters
Warfare.
I suspect a knowledge of ww1 battles is that applicable to modern day warfare as technology has changed so much
Studying logistics, strategy, tactics, the group cohesion of soldiers, the success and failure of coups d’etat and ruses of war, ways of winning over, and of alienating, civilians in occupied territory, counter-insurgency, is enormously important.
There’s a reason why Sun Tzu, Thucidydes, Macchiavelli and Clausewitzare still read today.
Do you need to go to university to read their works? I have read 3 of the 4 and they aren't that complicated I need a "professor" to tell me how to interpret what they say
No dark sarcasm in the classroom. Me, I find dem professors quite helpful.
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
What big advance has humanity studies ever given us? Please tell. Now do some humanities students do well and enhance the place yes....generally not through the humanities studies they did. You are a case in point....you studied humanites...your contributions to society however are not humanity based
What an ignorant and philistine statement? Where would our historians, archaeologists and philosophers come from if not for humanities? You don't just need to teach and research it either, plenty of museum curators, journalists, actors, authors and poets and senior civil servants studied humanities today.
As did a few PMs and top politicians, Harold Wilson and Gordon Brown and George Osborne read History and Boris Johnson read classics and Andy Burnham read English. It probably made them more rounded than doing a social science degree like PPE or Politics.
The King read History too of course and the Princess of Wales read History of Art
Point of order: archeology is a science, surely?
Point of puzzlement: aren't you rather demolishing your argument with your last sentence?
It can be considered a humanities subject or a social science
The trick in life is not to have intellectual time for those who define their outlooks according to whatever they took formal qualifications in or by whatever they get paid for working at.
Especially if they're academics or scientists. And among them, especially if they're "computer scientists". There is a cartoon figure in one of the Molesworth books that says it all, but I can't be bothered to look for it.
Anyone who goes on about "humanities" probably got it from Private Eye anyway.
How very dare you! Wikipedia is one of the greatest pluses of the internet.
Police are looking into Rishi Sunak’s admission that he failed to wear a seatbelt while filming a video for his Instagram account in the back of a moving vehicle – an apparent breach of the law.
A spokesman for Lancashire Constabulary said on Thursday evening they were aware of matter and were making inquiries. According to his government’s own safety campaign, any driver or passenger not wearing a seatbelt is breaking the law and is liable to be fined up to £500.
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
What big advance has humanity studies ever given us? Please tell. Now do some humanities students do well and enhance the place yes....generally not through the humanities studies they did. You are a case in point....you studied humanites...your contributions to society however are not humanity based
Science, Technology, Engineering and Medicine all help us live, but it is the Arts and Humanities that give us a reason to live.
Well they might you some of us frankly think most modern art is a pile of dross. You think hurst and Emin give you a reason to live thats fine what they give me is a reason to believe the universe would be better off with out humans
Most modern art is figurative realism. I think you mean abstract art, rather than modern art.
Tracy emins unmade bed was abstract?
That question implies it was art...
In my view, well art of order.
The tent containing the name of every man she slept with would qualify though.
Well, as a work of fantasy it bears a resemblance to art.
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
What big advance has humanity studies ever given us? Please tell. Now do some humanities students do well and enhance the place yes....generally not through the humanities studies they did. You are a case in point....you studied humanites...your contributions to society however are not humanity based
Science, Technology, Engineering and Medicine all help us live, but it is the Arts and Humanities that give us a reason to live.
Well they might you some of us frankly think most modern art is a pile of dross. You think hurst and Emin give you a reason to live thats fine what they give me is a reason to believe the universe would be better off with out humans
Most modern art is figurative realism. I think you mean abstract art, rather than modern art.
Tracy emins unmade bed was abstract?
That question implies it was art...
In my view, well art of order.
The tent containing the name of every man she slept with would qualify though.
Well, as a work of fantasy it bears a resemblance to art.
Lee Anderson MP @LeeAndersonMP_ Katy works for me. She is single & earns less than 30k, rents a room for £775pcm in Central London, has student debt, £120 a month on travelling to work saves money every month, goes on foreign holidays & does not need to use a foodbank.
I sometimes wonder what old school Tory nasties like Chope make of social climber 30p Lee?
I eat my share of value brand products, but I draw the line at fake Weetabix. Not even close to the real thing.
We switched to own-brand all-bran a while back (it's among my kids' favourites because it looks like sticks - have managed to convince the younger eater that it isprocessed sticks, I think, athough she also refers to it, quite descriptively, as "all brown"). They do taste different; took a while to realise (comparing two packets' ingredients/nutrition) that the main difference is that the 'real' one is stuffed with a lot more salt. Having got used to the own-brand one, I think I now prefer it.
Weetabix - can any variation be worse than the real thing? Although I must admit I'm the only non-eater in my family.
The issue with Weetabix is with the milk. Too much or too little renders it soggy/dry respectively and the landing zone between the two is very narrow (compared to say Cornflakes). I gave up long ago. Life's too short.
Dunno, I'm pretty sure the issue with Weetabix is the Weetabix. It's horrible with or without milk in whatever quantity. Milk is fine without Weetabix
Heretic, Weetabix is second only to Porridge, Oat Chruchies and Corn flakes
That's fourth then.
Wot, no Crunchy Nut Cornflakes?
Fifth....
No breakfast is even getting started until it has bacon and/or/both eggs. Honourable mention to kippers though. (That's a PB first!)
Alternatively an Arbroath smoked haddock with a poached egg (or finnan haddock will also do).
That gets in with having eggs. Breakfast rule #1 - pass!
My favourite breakfast. Smoked Haddock with a fat golden-yolk poached egg on top. Crunchy toast and butter. Strong tea. Mmmmmmm
It’s one of the best things about staying in quality British hotels. I’ve never found it anywhere outside the UK
The best possible breakfasts in my view are;
Bacon sandwich (I'm nearly persuaded that an egg topping should be involved, but then a little cheese, and you run away)
Kedgeree - I've no idea why people can't cook it well, admittedly I can't.
Bacon sandwich with white sliced bread and (in my opinion) ketchup, not brown sauce. Brown sauce for sausages.
As for egg, runny scrambled and with the absolute must have ingredient of half a level teaspoon of MSG. Transforms egg into something eggier.
The bread should not be presliced but still hot from the bakery
Presliced at the bakery. Best of all worlds. We get ours from Nunhead’s finest.
Nun head is the best. Fnarr.
My mother in law had a Mini with the reg NUN 69.....
Why would a doc/runner apparently turned quack personal motivator not be right about this?
He could be. The elephant in the room for the past 30 years has been, wtf are the humanities actually for? Now that GPT has made them into a perfect closed loop, why borrow 50k to "study" them?
Those things called 'humanities' in academia are, for me basically those things that make life interesting and worthwhile. History, philosophy, literature, music, ideas, anthropology, politics and so on.
The though of 'doing' them at HE level for some other ulterior reason like getting better jobs is just meaningless and repellent.
If people want to read King Lear or the Eumenides because they want a better HR job in a widget factory and not because they love the stuff, then close the institution and open the library to the public.
BTW let us all know when AI produces something as worthwhile as Emma, Barnaby Rudge, Kant's first critique, the Summa contra Gentiles, Einstein's 1905 papers or the Origin of Species.
Roughly Michael Gove's position, iirc, on the value of a humanities or liberal arts education. A right wing position here but left wing in America.
Rather than right wing or left wing maybe the words needed are more like 'humanist'. Humanities are the weapons with and from which people can evaluate and appraise all political posturing.
Humaities students are the twats that gift us things like cultural appropriation frankly they can go die in a fire they have no use whatsoever
As a former humanities student, can I just say f*ck off.
What big advance has humanity studies ever given us? Please tell. Now do some humanities students do well and enhance the place yes....generally not through the humanities studies they did. You are a case in point....you studied humanites...your contributions to society however are not humanity based
What an ignorant and philistine statement? Where would our historians, archaeologists and philosophers come from if not for humanities? You don't just need to teach and research it either, plenty of museum curators, journalists, actors, authors and poets and senior civil servants studied humanities today.
As did a few PMs and top politicians, Harold Wilson and Gordon Brown and George Osborne read History and Boris Johnson read classics and Andy Burnham read English. It probably made them more rounded than doing a social science degree like PPE or Politics.
The King read History too of course and the Princess of Wales read History of Art
Point of order: archeology is a science, surely?
Point of puzzlement: aren't you rather demolishing your argument with your last sentence?
It can be considered a humanities subject or a social science
The trick in life is not to have intellectual time for those who define their outlooks according to whatever they took formal qualifications in or by whatever they get paid for working at.
Especially if they're academics or scientists. And among them, especially if they're "computer scientists". There is a cartoon figure in one of the Molesworth books that says it all, but I can't be bothered to look for it.
Anyone who goes on about "humanities" probably got it from Private Eye anyway.
How very dare you! Wikipedia is one of the greatest pluses of the internet.
(That and PB.com obvs)
A superior repository of general knowledge to the DJ41 database, I think.
Lee Anderson MP @LeeAndersonMP_ Katy works for me. She is single & earns less than 30k, rents a room for £775pcm in Central London, has student debt, £120 a month on travelling to work saves money every month, goes on foreign holidays & does not need to use a foodbank.
I sometimes wonder what old school Tory nasties like Chope make of social climber 30p Lee?
I eat my share of value brand products, but I draw the line at fake Weetabix. Not even close to the real thing.
We switched to own-brand all-bran a while back (it's among my kids' favourites because it looks like sticks - have managed to convince the younger eater that it isprocessed sticks, I think, athough she also refers to it, quite descriptively, as "all brown"). They do taste different; took a while to realise (comparing two packets' ingredients/nutrition) that the main difference is that the 'real' one is stuffed with a lot more salt. Having got used to the own-brand one, I think I now prefer it.
Weetabix - can any variation be worse than the real thing? Although I must admit I'm the only non-eater in my family.
The issue with Weetabix is with the milk. Too much or too little renders it soggy/dry respectively and the landing zone between the two is very narrow (compared to say Cornflakes). I gave up long ago. Life's too short.
Dunno, I'm pretty sure the issue with Weetabix is the Weetabix. It's horrible with or without milk in whatever quantity. Milk is fine without Weetabix
Heretic, Weetabix is second only to Porridge, Oat Chruchies and Corn flakes
That's fourth then.
Wot, no Crunchy Nut Cornflakes?
Fifth....
No breakfast is even getting started until it has bacon and/or/both eggs. Honourable mention to kippers though. (That's a PB first!)
Alternatively an Arbroath smoked haddock with a poached egg (or finnan haddock will also do).
That gets in with having eggs. Breakfast rule #1 - pass!
My favourite breakfast. Smoked Haddock with a fat golden-yolk poached egg on top. Crunchy toast and butter. Strong tea. Mmmmmmm
It’s one of the best things about staying in quality British hotels. I’ve never found it anywhere outside the UK
The best possible breakfasts in my view are;
Bacon sandwich (I'm nearly persuaded that an egg topping should be involved, but then a little cheese, and you run away)
Kedgeree - I've no idea why people can't cook it well, admittedly I can't.
Bacon sandwich with white sliced bread and (in my opinion) ketchup, not brown sauce. Brown sauce for sausages.
As for egg, runny scrambled and with the absolute must have ingredient of half a level teaspoon of MSG. Transforms egg into something eggier.
The bread should not be presliced but still hot from the bakery
Presliced at the bakery. Best of all worlds. We get ours from Nunhead’s finest.
Nun head is the best. Fnarr.
My mother in law had a Mini with the reg NUN 69.....
Police are looking into Rishi Sunak’s admission that he failed to wear a seatbelt while filming a video for his Instagram account in the back of a moving vehicle – an apparent breach of the law.
A spokesman for Lancashire Constabulary said on Thursday evening they were aware of matter and were making inquiries. According to his government’s own safety campaign, any driver or passenger not wearing a seatbelt is breaking the law and is liable to be fined up to £500.
While travelling back from running the London Marathon a few years back I travelled for 30 mins on the M3 after Fleet without my seatbelt on. I think I I was just too knackered to realise. As soon as I did I felt weird and put it straight on. It’s such an automatic thing for most people. I kinda wonder if he’s done this before, just not been noticed.
Comments
https://www.armadainternational.com/2022/10/abrams-x-next-generation-mbt-technology/
I notice still no one has given me a list of the things humanity students have brought out to improve the human condition despite me listing several examples of what stem students have done so I conclude there are none.
YOU actually WHAT?
He hated, loathed and despised democracy, and to think otherwise you'd have to not have read a single word of what he bleedin' wrote. and that was before democracy consemned Socrates to death because it had had enough of experts.
Have a flick through the Republic and get back to me.
Police forces do not have systems that raise the alarm when one of their own officers is arrested, meaning that others like David Carrick could “fall through the cracks and go on to do harm”, says the head of the British Transport Police.
Lucy D’Orsi said it was “high time we sorted it out” after Carrick, a firearms officer who committed 48 rapes over nearly 20 years despite repeated criminal complaints.
D’Orsi wrote on LinkedIn: “If I was to commit a crime, get arrested and give my details, there is no obvious system check that would flag that I’m a police officer if I didn’t choose to tell them. Yes, you read that correctly.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/david-carrick-police-systems-cannot-flag-suspect-officers-bbfqnsztk
Using LinkedIn though, further proof that the police need to be destroyed and me appointed Head of the Police in this country with Cyclefree as Commissioner of the Met.
Well, as a work of fantasy it bears a resemblance to art.
Supreme Court could not identify who shared draft abortion opinion
An investigation by the Supreme Court has been unable to determine who disclosed to POLITICO last year a draft opinion overturning the federal constitutional right to abortion.
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/01/19/supreme-court-could-not-identify-who-shared-draft-abortion-opinion-00078602
As someone wrote once, if MSG is as bad as people say why doesn’t all of China have a headache?
I have the sprinkling form and use it in eggs, on fresh tomatoes, in gravy and other meaty sauces and broths. It’s great stuff.
Carrick committed 48 rapes over 20 years, which raises the question, why was he not caught earlier? So far as I can see, without looking into it, the fact that he was a copper, and should not have been, is irrelevant to the rape question.
There are two separate reasons to be outraged, and nothing to be gained by fudging them together.
I use my geography in my job on a daily basis.
Nowhere else.
No locals partook of it.
I am not a fan of appeals to one's own authority, but I have a first from Oxford in knowing what Plato thought about democracy. Literally. I cannot think what you are talking about. A reference to a specific dialogue would help.
As did a few PMs and top politicians, Harold Wilson and Gordon Brown, Douglas Hurd and George Osborne read History and Boris Johnson read classics and Andy Burnham read English. It probably made them more rounded than doing a social science degree like PPE or Politics.
The King read History too of course and the Princess of Wales read History of Art
I meant no locals would go for the No MSG option.
It is literally on almost everything.
"in democracy, the lower class grows bigger and bigger. A visually appealing demagogue is soon lifted up to protect the interests of the lower class, who can exploit them to take power in order to maintain order. Democracy then degenerates into tyranny where no one has discipline and society exists in chaos. In a tyrannical government, the city is enslaved to the tyrant, who uses his guards to remove the best social elements and individuals from the city to retain power (since they pose a threat), while leaving the worst. He will also provoke warfare to consolidate his position as leader. In this way, tyranny is the most unjust regime of all."
What I got was he saw a cycle of governements each collapsing in turn to another as the weight of each brought it down. His view was democracy collapsed as the lower class got bigger into the next type of governement. I don't perceive he felt democracy as inherently bad merely as a part of a natural cycle
Point of puzzlement: aren't you rather demolishing your argument with your last sentence?
There’s a reason why Sun Tzu, Thucidydes, Macchiavelli and Clausewitzare still read today.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaeology
Rather like geography, which is also considered one of the humanities but has large scientific elements within it.
Like geography, economics, psychology, statistics and so on.
Yes, you can say “fuck off”
"Archaeology or archeology is the scientific study of human activity through the recovery and analysis of material culture."
"The science of archaeology (from Greek ἀρχαιολογία, archaiologia from ἀρχαῖος, arkhaios, "ancient" and -λογία, -logia, "-logy") grew out of the older multi-disciplinary study known as antiquarianism."
It seems I'm as far behind the news as a selling plater is behind the Derby winner.
Never mind - Jacinda Ardern's resignation has certainly galvanised NZ politics - of course it wouldn't be the first time a party has replaced a successful election-winning leader who inflicted a landslide defeat on the opposition yet this time it is the leader herself who has walked rather than the Party's MPs getting involved.
Who replaces her? Grant Robertson has ruled himself out yet he wants to stay Finance Minister and the likely alternative is Chris Hipkins. Hipkins wouldn't be Continuity Ardern - he's arguably more of a centrist and could well encroach onto National's lawn.
Christopher Luxon, the National leader, was formerly CEO of Air New Zealand and got mixed reviews for that. As a politician, apart from the odd gaffe, he's done well but, pace Starmer, he's framed himself more for what he isn't in respect to Ardern rather than what he is. I don't see a Bolger or Muldoon type figure at all - possibly nearer a John Key. He also has ACT on his right flank and their leader, David Seymour, has done very well of late.
NZ vote in September and it's going to be fascinating.
The trick in life is not to have intellectual time for those who define their outlooks according to whatever they took formal qualifications in or by whatever they get paid for working at.
Especially if they're academics or scientists.
And among them, especially if they're "computer scientists".
There is a cartoon figure in one of the Molesworth books that says it all, but I can't be bothered to look for it.
Anyone who goes on about "humanities" probably got it from Private Eye anyway.
Some are for the good of the body, or the production of goods, or the understanding of nature. Others for the cohesion of society, or the appreciation of language, the administration of a country or simply the joy of living.
Apology accepted.
Lancashire Police to investigate Sunak.
You could say the same of history or linguistics.
Well, it worked for Cummings...
(I am just imagining how many officers would have loved the chance to tell the PM to belt up.
Not when he's driving either...)
"Neutral point of view", my crapper.
Yes archaeology and law.
Well jurisprudence anyways.
https://www.amacad.org/humanities-indicators/scope-of-humanities
(That and PB.com obvs)
No real precedent for criminalising that in Britain.
A spokesman for Lancashire Constabulary said on Thursday evening they were aware of matter and were making inquiries. According to his government’s own safety campaign, any driver or passenger not wearing a seatbelt is breaking the law and is liable to be fined up to £500.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/jan/19/sunak-apologises-for-failing-to-wear-seatbelt-while-filming-in-car
I was just too knackered to realise. As soon as I did I felt weird and put it straight on.
It’s such an automatic thing for most people. I kinda wonder if he’s done this before, just not been noticed.
archaeology is totally a science, and advises anyone who disagrees to check out the NEW THREAD