SemiAntics

Are you tired of seeing the same old idiots in office? Well, to follow up on my posting a few weeks ago, I will repeat the timeless saying, “Insanity is doing the same thing over and expecting different results.” Something like that. If you think Obama is change, or if you think McCain is a “maverick,” you might want to think about it again. I hope that whichever one gets elected is going to be different, but that goes against every bit of evidence I’ve seen so far.

To be sure, you may be swayed into voting for the lesser of two evils, but that should only affect you if you live in a swing state. In those states that are solid one way or another, why not cast a vote for what you believe? I am not going to waste my vote on someone I don’t believe in, and I am certainly in a swing state at this point, maybe one of the swinging-est out there!

If you care to learn why the two major candidates are just more of the same, you can look around. Here is a video of the third party debate between Chuck Baldwin and Ralph Nader. At the risk of being laughed at (they laughed at me in 2004 too, and look what happened!) I would suggest you will at least see some different views by watching it. You may not like either candidate, but between the two of them they present a little different view on what’s going on in the world these days. I’m sorry to say it doesn’t include at least two other candidates, Cynthia McKinney and Bob Barr.

Why would I take baking bread so seriously? Because it is something I can brag about. At least that is what Grace thinks. Is she right?

This is my first attempt at making sourdough bread. It looks pretty good; we’ll have to see how it tastes

When I was high school-aged, things or people that were uncool were “gay.” I stopped hearing that terminology once I got to college. There the uncool were “rednecks.” Here in North Carolina, everything uncool is referred to as “Mexican”….usually with some profanity in front of the “Mexican.” I hear this language all the time at work, in the grocery store, on the radio–it is everywhere. All kinds of people use these words too. I even hear immigrants or first-generation Americans talking about the “%*&*#$@ Mexicans.”

And, people wonder how genocide occurs.

How are regular people able to chop up their neighbors with machetes without blinking an eye? How were the majority of Germans able to allow their own government to slaughter six million human beings?

I think the answer, or at least a portion of it, lies in our everyday speech.

We use language to set certain groups outside the realm of social responsibility. Everyday we stereotype people, either consciously or unconsciously placing them into the in group or into the out group. Once we’ve placed our homosexual friends, our rural cousins, and our immigrant brothers into the out group, it becomes easier to think of them as different. The in group attributes the out group with all those characteristics that it finds unpalatable. It becomes very easy just to blame the undesirables for all the ills of society. If the in group starts to feel threatened by the out group, there are calls to action to protect our values, our country, our language, etc…The in group feels it necessary for its protection to deny the out group such things as the right to get married, the right to an education, or even the right to speak their own language. Or, the in group might find it necessary to slaughter the out group in concentration camps or to start chasing after their neighbors with machetes.

I don’t think we’ve gotten that far in America yet. But, we are certainly moving in that direction with our border fence, work place raids, English only laws, and Minutemen patrols…

As innocent as it may seem at first glance, stereotyping easily turns into dehumanization. Even if you mean no harm in using “redneck” or “gay,” you are contributing to the phenomenon. The more people stereotype others, the more acceptable the stereotyping becomes.

Please speak carefully.

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

I am a math teaching assistant, and one of my job duties is grading exams. I’m grading the second exam of the semester for what we call “Calculus Lite”. It’s basically calculus for people who need to know how to use some basic calculus tools, but who don’t need to know or understand much theory.

I’ve heard a lot of people say, “Math is not a spectator sport.” It’s true. Math is a subject that you only get good at by doing it. What varies is how much you have to do to become comfortable. Some people only need to work a couple problems, others have to practice much more.

When the students prepared for the first exam they didn’t work problems; they tried to memorize procedures and formulas. (That sort of approach is good for life sciences sorts of classes, but not so good for math). The average of the test was ok, but a lot of people failed or got Ds and Cs.

The instructor and I warned the students they would need to actually do problems to prepare for the second exam. They didn’t, and the average this time was much lower.

I wonder if any of the students will learn this time, or will they take the same approach to exam 3?

I attribute the problem to a failed education system. The failures must begin in elementary school, but they are certainly present in high school. What use is 12 years of “education” if, when you graduate, you have to take four years of college to be considered useful in the workplace?

In fact, most four year degrees are not considered “terminal” – the word terminal refers to the level of college education required to get the most out of a particular field. The truth is, many students spend their first two years of college learning things that should be learned in high school. That leaves about two years, the equivalent of an Associate’s degree, for real education. It is no wonder at all that a four year degree is not good enough.