4 ms·
No one said "smarter", they said "more skilled". A perfectly legitimate answer to that question might be that we stopped teaching them.
by lolinder 2y ago
No one said "smarter", they said "more skilled".
A perfectly legitimate answer to that question might be that we stopped teaching them.
- Wytwwww 2y agoWell, presumably outliers exist. I don't think we have a large enough sample to conclude anything. Pretty sure there are plenty of children these days who are significantly more "skilled" (just like back then). Of course modern writing/drawing utensils are on an entirely different level and paper was very expensive back then e.g. an average labourer supposedly only made enough per day to purchase less than 100 sheets, so practising was expensive.
- lolinder 2y agoOh, agreed! I think the premise of the question was wrong, I just also think this answer was based on a misunderstanding of the question.
- latexr 2y ago> No one said "smarter", they said "more skilled". No one said dogs, either, they said schoolchildren. It’s an analogy. Either way, it makes zero difference to the point. You could change my word to “skilled” and it would work the same. Skills are learned and thought, that’s what matters. > A perfectly legitimate answer to that question might be that we stopped teaching them. Which is what I wrote as the first sentence. The second is merely an analogy to exemplify that notion.