4 ms·

> > What are students doing with their extra free time? Having fun. Instead of being socialized for lives of boring work in hierarchical organizations, they’re

lelanthran 5y ago
> > What are students doing with their extra free time? Having fun. Instead of being socialized for lives of boring work in hierarchical organizations, they’re being socialized for lives of play and self-expression. > If you think this is a bad thing, you are well and truly lost. Well, you were claiming that the book/study did not take this into account so GP posted evidence that the book/study does indeed address your concerns. Whether it is a bad thing or not is irrelevant to the concern you expressed, to wit - that the socialisation and play is not addressed by the study.
- henrikschroder 5y ago
  > Well, you were claiming that the book/study did not take this into account No, I did not. > Whether it is a bad thing or not is irrelevant to the concern you expressed No, the entire point of me asking about it is because I think it has value to people making educational choices. > that the socialisation and play is not addressed by the study. Yes, and the way the study addresses this is batshit insane, unless you are an unfeeling utilitarian robot.
  - lelanthran 5y ago
    >> Well, you were claiming that the book/study did not take this into account > No, I did not. So how exactly is the reader supposed to interpret this statement of yours: > So what about the partying, making friends for life, and learning to be an adult? > > What about care-free student life as a carrot to incentivise young adults to go into careers that might not be good for them personally, but good for society? When someone looks at a study and says "What about $FOO", they generally mean "Why is $FOO not addressed?", and not "Your conclusions about $FOO are wrong". You said > "What about $FOO" but you meant > "Your $FOO conclusions are wrong" Is this correct?

lelanthran 5y ago

> > What are students doing with their extra free time? Having fun. Instead of being socialized for lives of boring work in hierarchical organizations, they’re being socialized for lives of play and self-expression. > If you think this is a bad thing, you are well and truly lost. Well, you were claiming that the book/study did not take this into account so GP posted evidence that the book/study does indeed address your concerns. Whether it is a bad thing or not is irrelevant to the concern you expressed, to wit - that the socialisation and play is not addressed by the study.

henrikschroder 5y ago
> Well, you were claiming that the book/study did not take this into account No, I did not. > Whether it is a bad thing or not is irrelevant to the concern you expressed No, the entire point of me asking about it is because I think it has value to people making educational choices. > that the socialisation and play is not addressed by the study. Yes, and the way the study addresses this is batshit insane, unless you are an unfeeling utilitarian robot.
- lelanthran 5y ago
  >> Well, you were claiming that the book/study did not take this into account > No, I did not. So how exactly is the reader supposed to interpret this statement of yours: > So what about the partying, making friends for life, and learning to be an adult? > > What about care-free student life as a carrot to incentivise young adults to go into careers that might not be good for them personally, but good for society? When someone looks at a study and says "What about $FOO", they generally mean "Why is $FOO not addressed?", and not "Your conclusions about $FOO are wrong". You said > "What about $FOO" but you meant > "Your $FOO conclusions are wrong" Is this correct?