3 ms·
> 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 yo
by 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?