On Fri, 2003-11-14 at 15:12, David Palmer. wrote: > On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 14:44:33 -0600 > Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Fri, 2003-11-14 at 14:48, David Palmer. wrote: > > > On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 10:41:32 -0800 > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > On Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at 01:35:20PM -0500, Alfredo Valles wrote: > > > > > On Friday 14 November 2003 1:14 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On the upside, those with the brains to move > > > > > > themselves up on the socioeconomic ladder will do quite well. > > > > > > > > > > I don't think they will do so well with the number of guns you > > > > > have in the streets, bullets don't distinguish Ph degrees. > > > > > > > > PhDs and brains don't go hand-in-hand; part of being smart is > > > > knowing how to work within whatever cultural limitations you must; > > > > in the case of firearm-owning Americans, you just need to be smart > > > > enough not to not get on their bad side. Social engineering at > > > > its most useful. > > > > > > > Agreed. > > > Einstein failed a maths exam, didn't see the sense in memorising > > > multiplication tables when they were already written down. > > > The education programme, which varies extensively with any > > > particular environment, is initiated from approved texts. The most > > > successful(individuals?) within the restrictions of the imposed > > > paradigms gains the appropriate marks of social approval. Thinking > > > outside the square and other symptoms of intelligence are looked > > > down upon. and even derogated. > > > The modern 'educational' process is there to teach people how to > > > read just well enough so that they no longer need to think. > > > Regards, > > > > It seems to me that the "most successful" would be those who can > > master the social needs (get good grades from approved testbooks, > > etc), while still being able to think outside the box. > > > These potentially highly dangerous individuals are confined to > institutions known as 'research centres', and if non conforming are seen > as a disruptive and undesirable element by the established social order, > and are further relegated to the classification of 'terrorist'.
Jeez, *I* got good grades in school, yet still (I think) think out- side the box, yet don't live in a "research centre", the established social order doesn't think I'm a disruptive and undesirable element, and hasn't yet classified me a "terrorist". -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- Ron Johnson, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jefferson, LA USA "I went home with a waitress the way I always do. How was I to know she was with the Russians, too?" -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
