Hacker News Reader

Comment by hintymad | Hacker News Reader

I don't understand how these people could consistently ignore facts. Case in point, I could earn way more than Scott Aaronson or had way more social privilege than him, but you'd think I'm crazy if I claim that I can be as good at maths or quantum computing as Aaronson.

View on HN

That kind of arguments goes in favour of the CMS. If you assume that only a handful of geniuses can do maths then as a society it makes little sense to allocate resources toward something completely inaccessible to the masses. Designing the education system for Scott Aaronson to the detriment of everybody else would be a mistake socially and economically. That is how these people think, not some nonsense blank slate theory.

In reality it's not quantum computing that we're talking about, it's high school calculus and algebra. You don't have to be a hardcore blank slate proponent to believe that most people can learn it. And that is what these people don't believe.

It's important to consider the goals of this committee. They propose this reform because they oppose the blank slate theory. The current structure really isn't appropriate to most people. Because it relies on a wrong form of the blank slate theory. They offer the wrong solution in my opinion, because they end up going too far the other way.

They're working with a bizarro Blank Slate theory according to which every student should simply be learning their math by themselves, and if they fail it's their own darn fault, or perhaps society's fault, or anyone else's fault, but certainly not the teacher's fault. Because the teachers all have Education degrees, and that's what they were told in Ed School. So don't anyone dare "demean" their job by suggesting that they have actual work to do in properly educating their students.

> Because the teachers all have Education degrees, and that's what they were told in Ed School. So don't anyone dare "demean" their job by suggesting that they have actual work to do in properly educating their students.

You have been to a remarkably bad college of education, if that was your experience. Which is saying something, because most of them aren't great, but for very different reasons.

It actually is possible that geniuses are rare but still contribute a significant fraction to the society. (Which means allocating resources to them will be the socially optimal choice.)

Not that taking calculus takes a genius, as evidenced by more sensible countries.

it’s not about being better than him. it’s about the theoretical possibility of being better + the virtue signaling that comes with the theoretical possibility

Reply on news.ycombinator.com