5 ms·

Each fact in the document may be true, but the document is so overbroad as to be useless. Who is it intended for? I mean, it is almosth philosophical in start

Each fact in the document may be true, but the document is so overbroad as to be useless. Who is it intended for? I mean, it is almosth philosophical in starting from how senses actually work from science. Each lesson included could / should be broken out for Joe to make the desired outcomes practical and achievable.

NikolaeVarius 5y ago
Why do we assume the everyman is unable to do the most basic of rational thought.
- kahmeal 5y ago
  present day
  - tryauuum 5y ago
    present time
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- lazide 5y ago
  If you have a group of 10 random people, you'll have to count on 1-2 of them not knowing something important you think everyone knows (if you're lucky). If you have a group of 100 random people - that's now 10-20 people. A whole team, maybe two if the cards are particularly bad. The Army has 479, 000 people. They also have significant, predictable turnover, so if they teach everyone all those things once, in 4-5 years no one in some military specialities will know it again. Based on the average time in service (6.7 yrs) data I can see, even if they teach literally everyone everything they might not know that is considered essential, in ~ half a decade at least 1/3 of the people in the Army won't know some or most of it again. Add in that people can only pay attention to and retain so much, and you have to repeat things a lot, explain things from a bunch of different angles, and then test and validate on top of that before you can assume they know it. Even then, they might forget in a week. It's law of large numbers and people.
bovermyer 5y ago
That manual is not meant as a pedagogical tool. It's meant as the source of truth to build those tools from.
djrogers 5y ago
This document is the foundation for a month-long training course for the Army [https://www.benning.army.mil/Armor/316thCav/ASA/index.html https://www.benning.army.mil/Armor/316thCav/ASA/index.html], and likely others in other branches. If you look at it as a textbook, it seems quite a reasonable document. You seem to be making assumptions about how this is intended to be consumed.
kube-system 5y ago
This criticism could just as easily apply to my entire college career. That doesn't mean that the things I learned weren't of any use. Understanding beyond simple application has value.

NikolaeVarius 5y ago

Why do we assume the everyman is unable to do the most basic of rational thought.

kahmeal 5y ago
present day
- tryauuum 5y ago
  present time
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
lazide 5y ago
If you have a group of 10 random people, you'll have to count on 1-2 of them not knowing something important you think everyone knows (if you're lucky). If you have a group of 100 random people - that's now 10-20 people. A whole team, maybe two if the cards are particularly bad. The Army has 479, 000 people. They also have significant, predictable turnover, so if they teach everyone all those things once, in 4-5 years no one in some military specialities will know it again. Based on the average time in service (6.7 yrs) data I can see, even if they teach literally everyone everything they might not know that is considered essential, in ~ half a decade at least 1/3 of the people in the Army won't know some or most of it again. Add in that people can only pay attention to and retain so much, and you have to repeat things a lot, explain things from a bunch of different angles, and then test and validate on top of that before you can assume they know it. Even then, they might forget in a week. It's law of large numbers and people.

bovermyer 5y ago

That manual is not meant as a pedagogical tool. It's meant as the source of truth to build those tools from.

djrogers 5y ago

This document is the foundation for a month-long training course for the Army [https://www.benning.army.mil/Armor/316thCav/ASA/index.html https://www.benning.army.mil/Armor/316thCav/ASA/index.html], and likely others in other branches. If you look at it as a textbook, it seems quite a reasonable document. You seem to be making assumptions about how this is intended to be consumed.

kube-system 5y ago

This criticism could just as easily apply to my entire college career. That doesn't mean that the things I learned weren't of any use. Understanding beyond simple application has value.