On 9/7/2016 9:02 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 9/7/16 8:59 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 9/6/2016 11:43 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 6 Sep 2016 23:01:28 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:
wrote:
On Tue, 6 Sep 2016 21:49:23 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:
wrote:
Why would I want Navy electronics training?
I know, it is a science, you are an artist.
I took and got A's in a good number of university math and science
classes.
As I have and had no interest in being in the navy, why would I
want navy
electronics training?
I suppose if you want to spend 2 years learning what you could learn
in 6 weeks, go for it.
Ahh. Your anti-intellectual nonsense
Why is learning things faster anti intellectual?
It seems to me they dumb down schools to the lowest common denominator
and call it being intellectual. How is that right?
It is funny that the only schools who operate that way are the ones
that charge you by the hour so it is not all that amazing.
Schools run by people who have an interest in teaching you quickly, go
much faster with classes 7 or 8 hours a day at a much faster tempo and
if you can't keep up, you get kicked out.
Personally I prefer going fast. Even the IBM schools and the navy
school was not really challenging me. Public school was a joke to me
and my private school was barely holding my attention.
Give me the books and a little nudge in the right direction and I will
ace your test.
Heh. Having attended both Navy technical schools and civilian college,
there is no question which of the two is the most efficient in getting
knowledge that can be put to good use beyond contemplating your belly
button. Most of the college courses were simply a matter of putting in
the required hours to earn the credits. Some were worthwhile, but for
the most part it was just a time consuming process. For example, in my
post-Navy civilian career a requirement to use advanced calculus ...
specifically in the application of Fourier Transforms arose. I took
calculus in college but the Navy schools had covered it as well ... even
though they didn't specifically call it by that name. The Navy
education was far more helpful in my civilian career.
I am lousy at writing advertising jingles though.
My guess is that the college course was designed to stretch your
thinking processes, and the navy course was designed to teach you to do
tasks. Thinking, after all, isn't really important, eh?
Like many, I don't think I've ever had a problem with "thinking",
critical or otherwise. I certainly didn't learn to "think" while
attending civilian college courses ... mostly at night school after I
left the Navy. I was older than most of the students, having spent 9
years in the Navy, and was generally regarded as being "seasoned" and
more advanced in my "critical thinking" capabilities, both by my fellow
students and by the instructor.
Why do you seem to insist that there is only *one* path to education?