Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Monday January 12 2015, @10:43AM   Printer-friendly [Skip to comment(s)]
from the Ask-John-Wayne dept.

Anna North writes in the NYT that self-control, curiosity, and “grit” may seem more personal than academic, but at some schools, they’re now part of the regular curriculum. Some researchers say personality could be even more important than intelligence when it comes to students’ success in school. “We probably need to start rethinking our emphasis on intelligence,” says Arthur E. Poropat citing research that shows that both conscientiousness and openness are more highly correlated with student performance than intelligence. “This isn’t to say that we should throw intelligence out, but we need to pull back on thinking that this is the only game in town.” The KIPP network of charter schools emphasizes grit along with six other “character strengths,” including self-control and curiosity. “We talk a lot about them as being skills or strengths, not necessarily traits, because it’s not innate," says Leyla Bravo-Willey. “If a child happens to be very gritty but has trouble participating in class, we still want them to develop that part of themselves.”

But the focus on character has encountered criticism. “To begin with, not everything is worth doing, let alone doing for extended periods, and not everyone who works hard is pursuing something worthwhile” says Alfie Kohn. "On closer inspection, the concept of grit turns out to be dubious, as does the evidence cited to support it. Persistence can actually backfire and distract from more important goals." There’s other evidence that grit isn’t always desirable. Gritty people sometimes exhibit what psychologists call “nonproductive persistence”: They try, try again, says Dean MacFarlin though the result may be either unremitting failure or “a costly or inefficient success that could have been easily surpassed by alternative courses of action,”

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 12 2015, @11:13AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 12 2015, @11:13AM (#133951)

    Persistence can actually backfire and distract from more important goals.

    So can curiosity, as anyone can confirm who has ever explored an interesting detail that wasn't really relevant.

    And even intelligence can backfire, if you take too much time analysing a situation where immediate action is called for, even if that action may not be the optimal one.

  • (Score: 3, Funny) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday January 12 2015, @11:22AM

    On closer inspection, the concept of grit turns out to be dubious, as does the evidence cited to support it.

    I call that bold talk for a one-eyed, fat man.

    Bloody-minded stubbornness is absolutely a desirable trait. It just has to be tempered with the wisdom to know when to be stubborn and when not to.

    --
    My rights don't end where your fear begins.
    • (Score: 2) by MrGuy on Monday January 12 2015, @01:51PM

      by MrGuy (1007) on Monday January 12 2015, @01:51PM (#133972)

      Being stubborn when you think it's "wise" to do so isn't being stubborn. It's being smart.

      Stubbornness, almost by definition, is clinging to an approach, idea, or belief even when the evidence suggests that it's the wrong thing to be doing. Stubbornness is refusing to be swayed by evidence.

      • (Score: 3, Interesting) by tibman on Monday January 12 2015, @03:36PM

        by tibman (134) Subscriber Badge on Monday January 12 2015, @03:36PM (#134005)

        I've never felt stubbornness was in the face of opposing evidence. I felt it was refusing to be swayed by argument. Obviously some arguments can contain evidence but not all of them. I would call someone stubborn if they refuse to be persuaded by opinion. I would call them stupid if they refuse to change in the face of evidence.

        I also think that smart and lazy often go together. Being smart and stubborn would make you a fantastic bond villain. A smart person is capable of many things but they rarely see those things to the end. They'll start and abandon a dozen projects in the time a stubborn person finishes just one.

        --
        SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.
        • (Score: 2) by urza9814 on Thursday January 15 2015, @02:05PM

          by urza9814 (3954) on Thursday January 15 2015, @02:05PM (#135112) Journal

          I also think that smart and lazy often go together. Being smart and stubborn would make you a fantastic bond villain. A smart person is capable of many things but they rarely see those things to the end. They'll start and abandon a dozen projects in the time a stubborn person finishes just one.

          I agree with smart and lazy -- I think humans in general are lazy, evolution should encourage laziness, but smart people are just better at it ;) But I don't know that lazy and stubborn are mutually exclusive like that. I think I'm all three -- smart, stubborn, and lazy. Stubborn isn't the same as persistence -- persistence is seeing things through to the end; stubborn is just doing things your own way. Having your own unbreakable rules. My way happens to be lazy and haphazard, and I'm not changing that for *anyone* goddamnit! ;)

          I wouldn't make much of a Bond villain though. I'd look up the schematics for a death ray and go "Meh, that looks kinda difficult, maybe I'll build a website instead..." I could probably destroy the world with PHP, but hell PHP doesn't need much help to do that! ;)

  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Kell on Monday January 12 2015, @11:47AM

    by Kell (292) on Monday January 12 2015, @11:47AM (#133958)

    I teach engineering at university. Like so many things, it seems that success just can't be boiled down to "Have X and you'll succeed" - you need a bit of everything. Yes, some superstars can make it while deficient in one attribute or another, but I've had many more students who were broadly but moderately talented who did just as well. That said, I've never seen anyone succeed without at least some mix of motivation, some discipline, and some smarts. It's no one thing.

    --
    Scientists ask questions. Engineers solve problems.
  • (Score: 2) by VLM on Monday January 12 2015, @12:32PM

    by VLM (445) on Monday January 12 2015, @12:32PM (#133959)

    I looked at the list.

    "Self Control" seems to adsorb the whole "mindless conformity" aspect of education, the whole being prepared to be a drone on the 1920 assembly line that the class of 2020 really needs (note, sarcasm)

    I didn't see anything about patience. Based on the pix, its for little kids, and little kids are legendary for lack of patience. paraphrased, "But Dad, why can't I learn all of math in five minutes, this is so boring". Not to mention the OMG counter reaction to reading more than ten pages or a half hour.

    No comment about honesty or respect, which I thought odd. I suppose this is one of those "FIRE sector college propaganda" facilities and honesty is a liability in finance, insurance, or real estate, or (generally speaking) in upper management.

    Persistence can actually backfire and distract from more important goals.

    I'd disagree in that the failure of the observer's competence doesn't imply a liability on the part of the observed. You may not like or agree with the goal, but that doesn't mean its inherently wrong or bad. Ya got conspicuous consumption of money or time, the peacock effect of showing off and all the bragging rights associated in a (sub)culture that respects grit, simple entertainment or enjoyment if the activity is even remotely enjoyable by that individual participant. For examples think of cooking or crafts or participation in religion, especially prayer, LOL, go ahead and try to convince someone into prayer that they're talking to themselves and wasting valuable time. For another example, stereotypical college educated white boy talking smack about black inner city kids playing basketball for endless hours, as if he has anything useful to say about it thats not culturally invalid.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 12 2015, @02:53PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 12 2015, @02:53PM (#133991)

      or another example, stereotypical college educated white boy talking smack about black inner city kids playing basketball for endless hours, as if he has anything useful to say about it thats not culturally invalid.

      Yet 1 sentence before you deride that very behavior...

      go ahead and try to convince someone into prayer that they're talking to themselves and wasting valuable time.
      Perhaps *you* find it a waste of time. Many find it a good way to clear their mind and get things in order.

      Perhaps you are just being a bigot. But at least you toss out a shout to the 'inner city youth'. You are what you accuse everyone else to be but just in a different way.

      What many people miss is that one size does not fit all. For example me... I am a good case for rote learning. I am very poor at staying focused. You may think 'wha you need a different way'. Not really. I need it repeated over and over to get the point. Doing it a different way just distracts from doing it at all. Even though I am usually way ahead on everyone and very smart. Focus takes work and repetition for me. Now some people work very well with different styles of learning. But rote learning is very boring and will make you want to hurt someone. It has its place. Sometimes learning is boring. For some reason people have fallen in love with learning should be fun. It can be and its great when it is. But most of the time you are learning something you do not care much for and no amount of 'fun ways to do it' will make it less boring.

      Intelligence is good and all. I have known many who are dumb as bricks end up with very sweet fulfilled lives. I have also known some *very* smart people who have 0 motivation to do anything (because it is all easy) who live very unfulfilled lives. Do something with it or who cares... In life you will have to work for what you want. That is the way of most of the world. There is a tiny tiny tiny tiny fraction of the world that does not work that way. Do not worry about them. Worry about what you are going to do to make it better. A good place is to set aside your bigotry. Maybe both groups have something to offer? Just because you are smart does not mean you know 'the right way'. It just means you are smart, and nothing more.

      • (Score: 2) by Yog-Yogguth on Monday January 12 2015, @04:26PM

        by Yog-Yogguth (1862) Subscriber Badge on Monday January 12 2015, @04:26PM (#134031) Journal

        A friendly nudge to point out that someone ran out of reading comprehension mid-paragraph.

        He didn't say what you say he did. Sure you read it that way but he still didn't write what you read into it. You two seem to actually agree on those things you're both talking about.

        Don't worry too much about it, we all do it.

        --
        Bite harder Ouroboros, bite! tails.boum.org/ linux USB CD secure desktop IRC *crypt tor (not endorsements (XKeyScore))
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 12 2015, @05:18PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 12 2015, @05:18PM (#134067)

      "Self Control" seems to adsorb the whole "mindless conformity" aspect of education, the whole being prepared to be a drone on the 1920 assembly line that the class of 2020 really needs (note, sarcasm)

      Thank you for explicitly stating that this was sarcasm because there were absolutely no other indicators for that, as it is not only completely reasonable that traits you needed for 1920's assembly line would be important for 2020, but also there's no way anyone could have recognized otherwise that your mentioning of those years might perhaps be done in order to hint at the opposite.

  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by kaszz on Monday January 12 2015, @01:04PM

    by kaszz (4211) on Monday January 12 2015, @01:04PM (#133962) Journal

    Sometimes the most important factor is to be "functionally stupid" as Alvesson writes in this article "A Stupidity-Based Theory of Organizations [wiley.com]". It makes organizations (and corporations) work efficiently without critical reflection and with unity and consensus. It makes the staff avoid to question decisions, structures and visions.

    It most likely also makes them easily deluded to work themselves efficiently over the edge. Or being used as a unit of useful fools. This of course also affect recruiting patterns. An organizations that is required to be functionally stupid will not look for the most bright people.

    What you have to ask yourself is sometimes "best" for whom? and in what situation?

    • (Score: 2) by aristarchus on Tuesday January 13 2015, @06:45AM

      by aristarchus (2645) on Tuesday January 13 2015, @06:45AM (#134300) Journal

      I don't understand this at all. Perhaps that is why I am still employed? If I had to think about what I do for a living. . . OMG!!! Kill it with fire! It is the only way to be sure, other than nuking it from orbit, which appears to be beyond our current capabilities. What kind of tech firm is this that we cannot nuke ourselves from orbit, if such a thing were necessary? And, where is my stapler?

      --
      You are currently banned from moderating. The last day of your ban is 2022-03-25.
  • (Score: 0) by curunir_wolf on Monday January 12 2015, @01:52PM

    by curunir_wolf (4772) on Monday January 12 2015, @01:52PM (#133974)

    conscientiousness and openness are more highly correlated with student performance than intelligence

    That's simply because teachers no longer grade students on their grasp of the academic material being taught, but the amount of "work" or "effort" they put in. How much of the grade these days is based on "homework completion" (getting the right answers not required) and "classroom participation" (which includes answering stupid questions), etc., etc.

    Even when I was in grade school (many years ago), it didn't matter much that I aced most of the tests - I was a "lazy" student that often did not turn in home work and fell asleep in class too often. That meant that even though I got A's on all the tests I would get C's and D's on my report card. They have created a self-fulfilling prophesy where personality determines "performance" because your performance is measured on how well you are following orders.

    --
    I am a crackpot
    • (Score: 1) by fritsd on Monday January 12 2015, @02:01PM

      by fritsd (4586) on Monday January 12 2015, @02:01PM (#133976) Journal

      I feel sorry for you, really, that your teachers didn't see this and gave you more difficult homework (from the next year, perhaps).

      • (Score: 2) by GungnirSniper on Monday January 12 2015, @05:43PM

        by GungnirSniper (1671) on Monday January 12 2015, @05:43PM (#134079) Journal

        In America, our relentless pursuit of equality drives our educators to eliminate most differentiation between grade levels. This means that smarter students, or at least ones who pick up material faster, are stuck with the weakest links. There are special education programs for the slower students and often well-funded ones, but there is nothing like that for the faster ones. It is one of the reasons private, parent-funded education is so popular here. We can't have the smarter kids pulling too far ahead, can we?

        This is one of the reasons I dislike Common Core and most testing. It reinforces the idea that everyone has the same intellect everywhere.

    • (Score: 2) by kaszz on Monday January 12 2015, @02:03PM

      by kaszz (4211) on Monday January 12 2015, @02:03PM (#133978) Journal

      And no escape path to a school that measures performance?

      • (Score: 2) by GungnirSniper on Monday January 12 2015, @05:47PM

        by GungnirSniper (1671) on Monday January 12 2015, @05:47PM (#134082) Journal

        And no escape path to a school that measures performance?

        Not unless his parents have an extra 10K+ a year to spend per child. The teachers' unions are doing a great job at keeping the current system as-is.

        • (Score: 2) by kaszz on Monday January 12 2015, @06:06PM

          by kaszz (4211) on Monday January 12 2015, @06:06PM (#134093) Journal

          Change country?

          • (Score: 2) by GungnirSniper on Monday January 12 2015, @06:19PM

            by GungnirSniper (1671) on Monday January 12 2015, @06:19PM (#134099) Journal

            The Greatest Country in the World(tm), America.

          • (Score: 2) by Common Joe on Tuesday January 13 2015, @05:52AM

            by Common Joe (33) <reversethis-{moc ... 1010.eoj.nommoc}> on Tuesday January 13 2015, @05:52AM (#134296) Journal

            Change country?

            Having changed countries away from America (for non-political reasons) to a European country, I cannot say that it is the panacea that many think it is. I cannot tell you how many people told me they were jealous when I said I was moving to Europe; they had some sort of romantic notion about living here. All I expected was a lot of hard work. And even with those expectations and plans to overcome, and the amount of work I have put, and the successes I have achieved, the move still continues to kick my ass on a daily basis many months into it.

            Directly addressing education: all countries have serious problems in that department. And even if education is better than in the U.S., it will probably have some sort of significant failure elsewhere in the infrastructure.

            • (Score: 2) by kaszz on Tuesday January 13 2015, @06:48AM

              by kaszz (4211) on Tuesday January 13 2015, @06:48AM (#134301) Journal

              So what's the problem with the stay in Europe besides the move itself? schools in Europe differ also on nation basis.

              • (Score: 2) by Common Joe on Tuesday January 13 2015, @09:53AM

                by Common Joe (33) <reversethis-{moc ... 1010.eoj.nommoc}> on Tuesday January 13 2015, @09:53AM (#134330) Journal

                So what's the problem with the stay in Europe besides the move itself? schools in Europe differ also on nation basis.

                I don't have the time to properly addresses both of your questions, but I'll try to give a broad answer.

                Your original answer to school problems was "change country", but that opens up a whole host of other problems -- so this answer is more than just about schools. Germany (where I am) is pretty open minded toward foreigners -- especially the city I live in. With that said, most Americans will never be able to get a job unless you speak the German language fluently. Very fluently. It has been a struggle for me and many others I met to learn the language to proper fluency (which takes years). In my case, my computer skills grew old as I learned the language. Who wants to hire a person who can barely speak German and has outdated computer skills? Cultural job hiring practices are complicating matters. That is the problem I am currently facing.

                Sure, with the right connections or if you're lighting-strike lucky, you can get an English only job and go that route, but most English speaking jobs require that you live in America (or Britain) initially and come here for only a year or two. Then you go back. I came here for family reasons. I have no good connections and I'm not a linguist person.

                Going to the doctor for a small problems or even just for a dental / eye checkup has been frustrating. There are language barriers and I-don't-care attitudes. I've been yelled at by ice cream vendors because I was having problems with the language despite my wife who was interpreting.

                It's lonely... even for an introvert such as myself. Native Germans (your best source for learning the German language) don't want to associate with you too much especially during the day. If you're young and don't have family, then going out at night to meet people is an option that can open up doors. Having a family makes that much, much more difficult. One of my classmates (from my language course) had his marriage fall apart because he never saw his wife.

                English speaking foreigners will eagerly become your friends as they have the same problems you do, but going out with foreigners will not help you learn the local language. So... either go out with a bunch of foreigners so you can have friends or face years of loneliness as you try to become friends with Germans so you can learn the language. Fluency requires four hard earned skills: reading, writing, listening, and speaking. Learning to read and write does not necessarily help you communicate verbally.

                The problems I face apply to every country in the world including America. Once you have language fluency, a decent job, a way to easily get around, friends you can hang with and keep you sane, and your everyday affairs aren't demanding all of your attention, then things become much easier.

                The most important things? A fantastic network and fluency in the local language.

                But to simply say "change countries" means years of work and hundreds of thousands of dollars. It's not so simple.

    • (Score: 2) by GungnirSniper on Monday January 12 2015, @09:16PM

      by GungnirSniper (1671) on Monday January 12 2015, @09:16PM (#134171) Journal

      That's simply because teachers no longer grade students on their grasp of the academic material being taught, but the amount of "work" or "effort" they put in. How much of the grade these days is based on "homework completion" (getting the right answers not required) and "classroom participation" (which includes answering stupid questions), etc., etc.

      Sometimes having a half-assed answer is better than no answer at all. Just ask a Sales Engineer.

    • (Score: 2) by aristarchus on Tuesday January 13 2015, @06:27AM

      by aristarchus (2645) on Tuesday January 13 2015, @06:27AM (#134299) Journal

      That's simply because teachers no longer grade students on their grasp of the academic material being taught, but the amount of "work" or "effort" they put in. How much of the grade these days is based on "homework completion" (getting the right answers not required) and "classroom participation" (which includes answering stupid questions), etc., etc.

      And you know this how? I call bullshit, and as an educator (though serveral millenia prior), I fail you on basic reasoning. I hope your answering of "stupid questions" which obviously you do not understand, serves you well in the future. You moron. Wait, you didn't actually complete the homework, either, did you? Loser. Fail. Idiot. You are expelled from the church of reason and learning. May you prosper amoungst the thieves and poltroons of the business class. May God forgive you, too. Any God. You need all the help you can get.

      --
      You are currently banned from moderating. The last day of your ban is 2022-03-25.
  • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Monday January 12 2015, @02:22PM

    by FatPhil (863) <reversethis-{if.fdsa} {ta} {tnelyos-cp}> on Monday January 12 2015, @02:22PM (#133984) Homepage
    "Genius is one percent inspiration, ninety nine percent perspiration."
    --
    I know I'm God, because every time I pray to him, I find I'm talking to myself.
    • (Score: 2) by Zinho on Monday January 12 2015, @04:06PM

      by Zinho (759) on Monday January 12 2015, @04:06PM (#134022)

      "Genius is one percent inspiration, ninety nine percent perspiration."
      -Thomas Edison

      If Edison had spent more time thinking he'd have done a lot less sweating
      -Not a real quote from Nikola Tesla

      What he really said:

      “If Edison had a needle to find in a haystack, he would proceed at once with the diligence of the bee to examine straw after straw until he found the object of his search.
      I was a sorry witness of such doings, knowing that a little theory and calculation would have saved him ninety per cent of his labor.”
      -Nikola Tesla

      --
      "Space Exploration is not endless circles in low earth orbit." -Buzz Aldrin
      • (Score: 3, Funny) by Zinho on Monday January 12 2015, @04:13PM

        by Zinho (759) on Monday January 12 2015, @04:13PM (#134024)

        Here's a more constructive quote from Tesla regarding the article's subject:

        “I am credited with being one of the hardest workers and perhaps I am, if thought is the equivalent of labour, for I have devoted to it almost all of my waking hours. But if work is interpreted to be a definite performance in a specified time according to a rigid rule, then I may be the worst of idlers.”
        -Nikola Tesla

        There's more than one way to be gritty
        =)

        --
        "Space Exploration is not endless circles in low earth orbit." -Buzz Aldrin
      • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Monday January 12 2015, @05:11PM

        by FatPhil (863) <reversethis-{if.fdsa} {ta} {tnelyos-cp}> on Monday January 12 2015, @05:11PM (#134058) Homepage
        Yeah - when I googled, and found out it was an Edison quote, I did cringe more than a little. But I decided to post it anyway. I'm glad Tesla, who I have enormously more respect for (kinda like a 99:1 ratio, say), had a response.
        --
        I know I'm God, because every time I pray to him, I find I'm talking to myself.
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Covalent on Monday January 12 2015, @02:34PM

    by Covalent (43) on Monday January 12 2015, @02:34PM (#133986) Journal

    Next question.

    All joking aside, one without the other is completely useless, so a person must have sufficient measures of both to be useful at all.

    Since neither is easily quantifiable, the only correct answer is "yes".

    --
    You can't rationally argue somebody out of a position they didn't rationally get into.
  • (Score: 2) by ikanreed on Monday January 12 2015, @02:51PM

    by ikanreed (3164) on Monday January 12 2015, @02:51PM (#133988) Journal

    This article is going to rub some people who've gotten by in life by being smart a bit wrong.

    That said, there's some good things to concerning yourself less with IQ, and more with big five personality traits:
    1. Unlike IQ, big five traits show some amenability to adult interventions. To de-psychologify that: it's known that making a recurring, serious attempt to change, say, conscientiousness, in certain ways works. Fluid IQ doesn't respond much at all.
    2. It's less one dimensional. When you reduce your evaluation criteria down to one characteristic, it becomes too easy to trap yourself in a mode of thinking where people are on a number line from good to bad. Common experience says that's not how people really work.
    3. Better correlations. When you can control for X, the actual effects of Y can become more apparent.

  • (Score: 2) by Yog-Yogguth on Monday January 12 2015, @03:40PM

    by Yog-Yogguth (1862) Subscriber Badge on Monday January 12 2015, @03:40PM (#134007) Journal

    “Hey Ms. Survivor Bias why are you always such a psycho bitch? Why aren't you intelligent despite being the US president or running global omniscient surveillance or huge supranational companies? Oh well guess we'll just have to redefine what is supposed to matter to become successful because everyone is starting to realize all the old stuff just isn't true.”

    The really smart people are scary smart. You need to watch all of this carefully and realize what he's saying when the cozy introduction is over [youtube.com] so that you get your head smashed in (figuratively, not literary). Then watch it again, you likely missed more than one thing. Then watch it again, watch him closely, and think about what you're seeing and hearing.

    --
    Bite harder Ouroboros, bite! tails.boum.org/ linux USB CD secure desktop IRC *crypt tor (not endorsements (XKeyScore))
    • (Score: 2) by kaszz on Monday January 12 2015, @04:19PM

      by kaszz (4211) on Monday January 12 2015, @04:19PM (#134029) Journal

      To be the most successful you have to be a psycho bitch?

      • (Score: 2) by Yog-Yogguth on Monday January 12 2015, @04:37PM

        by Yog-Yogguth (1862) Subscriber Badge on Monday January 12 2015, @04:37PM (#134043) Journal

        Seems that way doesn't it? However nobody is named Ms. Survivor Bias and the US president isn't female so what was I talking about? What or who is it that is being a psycho bitch? Maybe it's the survivor bias [wikipedia.org] itself? What is luck and what isn't really luck or not as much luck? Why are we all running around trying to be better slaves?

        Did you watch the video? We need more skull-cracking.

        --
        Bite harder Ouroboros, bite! tails.boum.org/ linux USB CD secure desktop IRC *crypt tor (not endorsements (XKeyScore))
      • (Score: 2) by Yog-Yogguth on Monday January 12 2015, @04:49PM

        by Yog-Yogguth (1862) Subscriber Badge on Monday January 12 2015, @04:49PM (#134050) Journal

        And although it might not be needed maybe I should emphasize that I'm responding to TFS and TFA, because maybe it looks like I'm not but I am. I'm partly ridiculing it, partly pointing out its obscenity, and partly making fun of how deficient and deceitful and even unimportant it is. Which in turn is why I linked to a video smashing such puerile illusions that we all get stuck in all too easily. Maybe it can make a small difference, maybe someone less prone to the flaws all sides display in TFA will see it and be better off because of it, heed the warning, that sort of thing.

        --
        Bite harder Ouroboros, bite! tails.boum.org/ linux USB CD secure desktop IRC *crypt tor (not endorsements (XKeyScore))
  • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 12 2015, @04:18PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 12 2015, @04:18PM (#134028)

    Depends. Are we talking about sandpaper here, or people?

  • (Score: 2) by PizzaRollPlinkett on Monday January 12 2015, @04:32PM

    by PizzaRollPlinkett (4512) on Monday January 12 2015, @04:32PM (#134037)

    Without mindfulness, being aware of yourself, your mental states, and your environment, and being able to concentrate and focus, none of the other stuff matters much. To accomplish something, you must have the focus to actually do it (good ideas are a dime a dozen) and the equanimity to persevere through both success and failure. This is the "difference that makes the difference" and is ignored in the education industry because there's no profit angle. There's nothing to sell. There's nothing to market.

    Intelligence, in Wittgenstein's sense, is a meaningless abstraction. To justify the "intelligence industry" there are metrics like I.Q. which appear to measure intelligence, but are really just bogus numbers. You can't quantify or even talk about "intelligence" because it doesn't exist as an abstraction. You can talk about facility with certain concepts or applications, but there is no such thing as "intelligence" which exists independently of some context.

    --
    (E-mail me if you want a pizza roll!)
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 12 2015, @06:25PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 12 2015, @06:25PM (#134101)

      If you think the word intelligence fails the picture theory of language then how can you talk about mindfulness, self-awareness, and mental states? They would also fail. You could not talk about facility with any concepts. The later Wittgenstein rubbished the picture theory of language..

    • (Score: 2) by Thexalon on Monday January 12 2015, @09:31PM

      by Thexalon (636) on Monday January 12 2015, @09:31PM (#134178)

      The qualities that somebody things are the most important usually are closely related to those qualities that they believe themselves to have. If the person in question has generally succeeding in achieving their goals, they will say those qualities were what led to their success (even if what really led to their success was to a large degree dumb luck). If, on the contrast, the person in question has not yet succeeded, they may complain about the obvious benefits of those same qualities not being properly taken into account.

      --
      The inverse of "I told you so" is "Nobody could have predicted"