3 ms·

I had completely the opposite reaction to you. I thought this was a lovely, heartfelt, clearly-written article. I especially enjoyed the final paragraph - "We k

I had completely the opposite reaction to you. I thought this was a lovely, heartfelt, clearly-written article. I especially enjoyed the final paragraph - "We know that books give people ambitions, expectations, a sense of dignity" - he nailed the power of books for me. As far as the lack of concrete statistics - well, I don't know about you, but until I hear a more-convincing alternate take, I'm going to take his word for it. He clearly knows more about Mexico than me. And his examples are pretty powerful - walking through a giant camp filled with striking teachers, examples of the behaviour of individual teachers, the attitude of the State Minister for Education. And why can't a raging narco war be linked in a small manner to a population lacking imagination, sensitivity and the ability to forge new economic pathways, linked back to a lack of interest in reading? Is that an offensive notion to entertain or something? It's not like you have to ignore other factors like the adjacent drug market, is it? Alternately, why can't these two problems - trafficking and bad education - both be afflicting Mexico simultaneously, feeding off of and reinforcing each other? I mean, seriously, why don't you just chill the fuck out and enjoy the article on its own merits, rather than imposing completely ridiculous standards on it? Do you have more experience of and personal involvement in Mexico than this author?

rohern 14y ago
These are not good forms of reasoning. You have here committed several fallacies that are very common and very worrying, as they tend to lead to the public adoption of poorly reasoned explanations and baseless facts. This is not an attack on you personally. > As far as the lack of concrete statistics - well, I don't know about you, but until I hear a more-convincing alternate take, I'm going to take his word for it. It is still a mystery how life originated on Earth. I know you will enjoy my theory about how the unicorns did it. No. No you won't. I am sure you know that this is a ridiculous argument to make. The fact that you have not heard a better explanation is a terrible reason to accept another explanation. Cogency does not imply correctness. > I mean, seriously, why don't you just chill the fuck out and enjoy the article on its own merits, rather than imposing completely ridiculous standards on it? There is no such thing as "its own merits". That is doublespeak for "do not judge it at all". Either it meets the standards of good reasoning, data presentation, and research, or it doesn't You cannot say that it has it own standards for these things that we the reader are forced to accept. > Do you have more experience of and personal involvement in Mexico than this author? Again, this is not a sensible argument. It does not matter to me that my doctor has had cancer before he treats me for cancer. Engineers at NASA did not personally need to visit the moon before they were able to engineer the moon lander. You do not need personal experience with phenomena to understand them. In fact, personal experience with a thing can lead to horrible mistakes in understanding and judgment backed up by the fallacy that because they come from personal experience, they are especially valid.
- corporalagumbo 14y ago
  P1/1 >The fact that you have not heard a better explanation is a terrible reason to accept another explanation. I think you're throwing my argument way out of proportion. I wasn't arguing that we should automatically accept everything the link author said was true. Nor that we should run out and build a comprehensive reform package in Mexico based on his say-so. I was arguing that there was enough substance in his opinion piece, and enough reason to believe that he might have a clue about what's up with Mexico, that it was an over-reaction for the parent poster to run out and shit all over the piece like it had no merit. In fact, the more that I think about it, and thanks in no small part to having to refine my arguments to meet your retort, the more I see the parent poster's comment as completely unjustified. Read on to see how I come to this conclusion if you wish. >There is no such thing as "its own merits". That is doublespeak for "do not judge it at all". Either it meets the standards of good reasoning, data presentation, and research, or it doesn't You cannot say that it has it own standards for these things that we the reader are forced to accept. Yes, there is such a thing as "its own merits." No, it is not doublespeak for "do not judge it all." I'm all for judging, believe me. I love judging. But the link is an opinion piece. Do I even need to explain this? It's not a scientific article. It's not an extended journalistic essay. It's not a policy recommendation for government. It's not a sociology research project. It's a short, partisan, personal piece of opinion - intended to provoke thought and stir debate - based on a mixture of personal experience, observations and, yes, opinions. As far as standards are concerned, I would argue that a quality opinion piece should meet these criteria: 1) It should be honest - the author should be clear about their intentions, reason for writing about the subject, any vested interests, etc, and should not be guilty of trying to deceive or manipulate the reader for dubious self-serving purposes. 2) It should be heartfelt - the author should feel strongly about the issue. 3) It should be clear and persuasive. 4) It should have substance - the author should explain clearly the grounds for their views. 5) It should get to the point - an opinion piece should not be (necessarily) an in-depth survey of a subject. And I would argue that the link meets these criteria without issue. I've read a lot of opinion pieces over the years and this is not out of place by any means. So I don't see what the big goddamn deal is - other than that it's being posted on HN and today someone feels like making a big fuss over what would normally provoke no reaction. Anyway, maybe it'd be best to attend to the parent post's critique of the link, and assess the claims, arguments and evidence of the link. So, what exactly does the author claim? Well, let's see. He claims: 1) "Nowadays more children attend school than ever before, but they learn much less. They learn almost nothing." 2) "The proportion of the Mexican population that is literate is going up, but in absolute numbers, there are more illiterate people in Mexico now than there were 12 years ago." 3) "Even if baseline literacy, the ability to read a street sign or news bulletin, is rising, the practice of reading an actual book is not." 4) "Once a reasonably well-educated country, Mexico took the penultimate spot, out of 108 countries, in a Unesco assessment of reading habits a few years ago." 5) "Despite recent gains in industrial development and increasing numbers of engineering graduates, Mexico is floundering socially, politically and economically because so many of its citizens do not read" 6) "Sadly, many teachers, who often buy or inherit their jobs, are lacking in education themselves." 7) "In our schools, children are being taught what is easy to teach rather than what they need to learn." 8) "We have turned schools into factories that churn out employees." 9) "With no intellectual challenges, students can advance from one level to the next as long as they attend class and surrender to their teachers." 10) "The educational machine does not need fine-tuning; it needs a complete change of direction. It needs to make students read, read and read." Right. So all together: though school attendance in Mexico has climbed, students learn almost nothing of real value. Illiteracy* has risen. People may be able to read signs but no one reads books. Mexico used to be well-educated but now performs badly in UNESCO assessments. Mexico is failing to progress as a nation because its people don't read books, have no love of learning, and lack imagination. Teachers are uneducated/lack a spirit of education themselves. Schools require no real effort, just plain attendance, and produce dull people suited for menial employment, not free thinkers. Finally, the educational system needs a total change of character, and needs to focus on making students read books.

rohern 14y ago

These are not good forms of reasoning. You have here committed several fallacies that are very common and very worrying, as they tend to lead to the public adoption of poorly reasoned explanations and baseless facts. This is not an attack on you personally. > As far as the lack of concrete statistics - well, I don't know about you, but until I hear a more-convincing alternate take, I'm going to take his word for it. It is still a mystery how life originated on Earth. I know you will enjoy my theory about how the unicorns did it. No. No you won't. I am sure you know that this is a ridiculous argument to make. The fact that you have not heard a better explanation is a terrible reason to accept another explanation. Cogency does not imply correctness. > I mean, seriously, why don't you just chill the fuck out and enjoy the article on its own merits, rather than imposing completely ridiculous standards on it? There is no such thing as "its own merits". That is doublespeak for "do not judge it at all". Either it meets the standards of good reasoning, data presentation, and research, or it doesn't You cannot say that it has it own standards for these things that we the reader are forced to accept. > Do you have more experience of and personal involvement in Mexico than this author? Again, this is not a sensible argument. It does not matter to me that my doctor has had cancer before he treats me for cancer. Engineers at NASA did not personally need to visit the moon before they were able to engineer the moon lander. You do not need personal experience with phenomena to understand them. In fact, personal experience with a thing can lead to horrible mistakes in understanding and judgment backed up by the fallacy that because they come from personal experience, they are especially valid.

corporalagumbo 14y ago
P1/1 >The fact that you have not heard a better explanation is a terrible reason to accept another explanation. I think you're throwing my argument way out of proportion. I wasn't arguing that we should automatically accept everything the link author said was true. Nor that we should run out and build a comprehensive reform package in Mexico based on his say-so. I was arguing that there was enough substance in his opinion piece, and enough reason to believe that he might have a clue about what's up with Mexico, that it was an over-reaction for the parent poster to run out and shit all over the piece like it had no merit. In fact, the more that I think about it, and thanks in no small part to having to refine my arguments to meet your retort, the more I see the parent poster's comment as completely unjustified. Read on to see how I come to this conclusion if you wish. >There is no such thing as "its own merits". That is doublespeak for "do not judge it at all". Either it meets the standards of good reasoning, data presentation, and research, or it doesn't You cannot say that it has it own standards for these things that we the reader are forced to accept. Yes, there is such a thing as "its own merits." No, it is not doublespeak for "do not judge it all." I'm all for judging, believe me. I love judging. But the link is an opinion piece. Do I even need to explain this? It's not a scientific article. It's not an extended journalistic essay. It's not a policy recommendation for government. It's not a sociology research project. It's a short, partisan, personal piece of opinion - intended to provoke thought and stir debate - based on a mixture of personal experience, observations and, yes, opinions. As far as standards are concerned, I would argue that a quality opinion piece should meet these criteria: 1) It should be honest - the author should be clear about their intentions, reason for writing about the subject, any vested interests, etc, and should not be guilty of trying to deceive or manipulate the reader for dubious self-serving purposes. 2) It should be heartfelt - the author should feel strongly about the issue. 3) It should be clear and persuasive. 4) It should have substance - the author should explain clearly the grounds for their views. 5) It should get to the point - an opinion piece should not be (necessarily) an in-depth survey of a subject. And I would argue that the link meets these criteria without issue. I've read a lot of opinion pieces over the years and this is not out of place by any means. So I don't see what the big goddamn deal is - other than that it's being posted on HN and today someone feels like making a big fuss over what would normally provoke no reaction. Anyway, maybe it'd be best to attend to the parent post's critique of the link, and assess the claims, arguments and evidence of the link. So, what exactly does the author claim? Well, let's see. He claims: 1) "Nowadays more children attend school than ever before, but they learn much less. They learn almost nothing." 2) "The proportion of the Mexican population that is literate is going up, but in absolute numbers, there are more illiterate people in Mexico now than there were 12 years ago." 3) "Even if baseline literacy, the ability to read a street sign or news bulletin, is rising, the practice of reading an actual book is not." 4) "Once a reasonably well-educated country, Mexico took the penultimate spot, out of 108 countries, in a Unesco assessment of reading habits a few years ago." 5) "Despite recent gains in industrial development and increasing numbers of engineering graduates, Mexico is floundering socially, politically and economically because so many of its citizens do not read" 6) "Sadly, many teachers, who often buy or inherit their jobs, are lacking in education themselves." 7) "In our schools, children are being taught what is easy to teach rather than what they need to learn." 8) "We have turned schools into factories that churn out employees." 9) "With no intellectual challenges, students can advance from one level to the next as long as they attend class and surrender to their teachers." 10) "The educational machine does not need fine-tuning; it needs a complete change of direction. It needs to make students read, read and read." Right. So all together: though school attendance in Mexico has climbed, students learn almost nothing of real value. Illiteracy* has risen. People may be able to read signs but no one reads books. Mexico used to be well-educated but now performs badly in UNESCO assessments. Mexico is failing to progress as a nation because its people don't read books, have no love of learning, and lack imagination. Teachers are uneducated/lack a spirit of education themselves. Schools require no real effort, just plain attendance, and produce dull people suited for menial employment, not free thinkers. Finally, the educational system needs a total change of character, and needs to focus on making students read books.