That was beautiful, and I will make this reply simple.

A child born today could be alive 100 years from now.

And making radical changes would likley result in millions dying but that is okay because it will benefit future generations. You know what I mean when I say we need to be cautious.

Imagine the hardship and suffering it would cause to ban people from using fuel, or switching to vegan diets. The best we can do is attack the problems we foresee from multiple angles. We are already doing so in many sectors and huge strides have been made already in terms of how we manage farming. In the near future we probably won't need farmland as hydroponic will have moved on a lot.

The only real threat I am concerned about is AGI, but I am not entirely sure that can/will happen anytime soon. Hard to say. If it does that has far more potential to ruin our lives as well as improve it dramatically.

I am not overly concerned about the future of humanity tbh. Someone needs to be and it looks like you are so that is enough for me. — I like sushi

I wish everyone knew much more about geology than they do. AL fails to give an adequate explanation of what oil has to do with banking, but at least knowing what it has to say would be helpful. You might Google 'what oil has to do with banking' then get back to me. We need to figure the cost of war into the cost of oil. Taxpayers are paying the real cost of oil even if they don't drive. The division of the rich and the poor is unjust, considering what our tax dollars are paying for and what we get in return.

I think high schools should make Youngquist's books about geology mandatory reading. We can not stop the suffering by ignoring our reality and shifting your responsibility to make sane decisions to others, is not being responsible.

Where are we going to get the water for hydroponic farming? What do you know of our supply of water? Google, areas in the US that have water shortages. If you want nightmares, check the NASA map of groundwater in the US. We get food from Mexico. Check out its underground water supply. We are living on borrowed time, and our populations are increasing while our supply of water is decreasing.

Now check out what oil has to do with farming. You can stick your head in the sand, but that will not come out well. I don't think anything is more important to our decision-making than geology. All I can do is make people aware of what they need to know.

AI agrees Louis Moreau Gottschalk blended culturally different music. A look at all the different sources of music makes the social scene look like a very active beehive. Not the slow and isolated progress that has been my opinion of reality. Like if I were smarter, I would create an interactive map of time and earth space. Where is it happening and why?

This is a little far from raising children, but if we did so with a bigger picture of reality, would that change how we raise them? For example, if we are moving into a period of extreme weather, might we want to prepare our young for this? A man is presenting awesome historical explanations on the internet. He said we have had very long periods of extreme climate change that almost led to our extinction. What if we should prepare our young for that? Ignoring what is happening does not seem intelligent to me. We send our children to church to save their souls, but how about preparing them to deal with a water shortage using science instead of mythology, and thinking the earth has always been as God created it, and nothing of importance changes.

Ragtime was very popular in the Black community where it originated, but it also became popular among middle-class whites. Why? How? — BC

How could it not become popular?! It is energetic and lifts a person's spirits. The total opposite of Jim Crow.

Thank you for mentioning things like the availability of sheet music and pianos. Immediately, I thought of my grandmother. It was obvious in her day that a respectable young lady knew how to play the piano. She gave my sister and me piano lessons. I had no idea how important that was to her but I can see that today.

I googled for more information about the availability of pianos, and the explanation came with mention of the social status in a growing middle class and what the piano had to do with that. The growing middle class and increased availability of sheet music and pianos were the result of developing technology. Which pushes me to ask, when did typewriters become essential, and demand for typewriters and people trained to use them skyrocketed with the First World War.

I am moved to tears, and I am not sure why. Perhaps because I am experiencing a strong connection with my grandmother and her generation. And my head is screaming for a philosophical thought that can bring my experience back in line with a philosophical forum. Can you help me? What am I experiencing? It goes with notions of god and man. That is a reality bigger than myself, and being a part of that bigger reality. We are all in the river of time.

That river can be represented with both music and art. Sorry, folks, you can take me out and shoot me, but I have to use AI to make this post much richer than what I can do without it, and my emotional experience at the moment demands I ride this wave. Question, forces behind ragtime music. AI says.

The creation and popularity of ragtime music resulted from the fusion of African American folk rhythms with European classical traditions, amplified by the social and economic conditions of post-Civil War America. Key drivers included the rise of a Black middle class, technological advancements in music distribution, and the vibrant culture of saloons, theaters, and dance halls.

Louis Moreau Gottschalk would begin this transfusion, right?

I am reading my post, and I am thinking, women's liberation happened!

I think we agree that the mood of our nation has changed. I think we agree that the difficult times our parents faced shaped them.

But what generation since theirs has (as a generation) experienced similar times? Most Boomers, I think, abandoned any desire they may have had to serve others and elected to serve themselves. They were used to being served, and accepted it as their due. They became the self-indulgent elites that, together with their progeny, rule us now. They feel entitled to rule and tell others what to do, and more than ever have the means to convince us that this is the way it should be.

This is the example they set. — Ciceronianus

Wow, I am so glad you replied! Your observation seems right, but I am not part of that, and the 1970s recession was like the Great Depression where I live. The college and city were fighting for college renters. We had a joke, "It is easy to have a small business in Eugene. Just start with a big one." and in the hills, there was a large colony of homeless men. At the same time, the downtown looked like a ghost town. That area still has not recovered. The recession was severe and lasted a long time. We were a farming and timber town. I had come up from LA, California, and lived in culture shock, but I am so glad I stayed. For a while, hippies ran this place, and I liked that period best. But the economic crash, led to a flood of Californians pouring in, and now property values are too high, housing is scarce, and the traffic is horrible.

All that said, I have been wondering what happened to those of us who believed we would make the world a better place. I know very well that was my mother's generation's belief. They gave a lot to make life better and we claimed their hopes and aspirations with the belief we would do better than they did, but :scream: I am screaming :scream: what happened to the rest of my generation? Why did they become so materialistic? Why are they all about themselves? How could they betray us? I remember being told when we grew up we get back on track with the materialistic and less ideal capitalist way.

Can I slip in a dramatic fact of that time period? Many women of my cohort postponed careers to care for the family, and during the recession, our husbands were experiencing midlife crises and they walked out, leaving us alone to support the children. We had to hide our education to get jobs, and thank heavens the children were teenagers, so we didn't have child care costs, but meth hit the streets, and our teenagers were hurt and angry, and the lack of jobs meant they were not absorbed into mainstream society. They came of age at a very bad time. And as grandparents, we had to fight the state for custody of our grandchildren. And we won. Policy and law radically changed in favor of the family.

Somehow, in all this mess, your words ring true. The reasoning for communal living was sound, but psychologically, we were not prepared for that, and most communes failed. I remember a social war on communal living. Like it just wasn't American!

Edward T Hill was an anthropologist and wrote of how every culture has a consciousness and a subconscious, just as individuals do. I think nations need periodic analysis just like humans do, and for the same reason. What lies in our subconscious can become problematic.

That might not be true, but for sure my life is wrapped around the Great Depression and World War. I don't think that is common. But I am fixated on that past. I am sure our parents were as they were because of what they experienced during the difficult times. It was as important to my mother to make people happy by entertaining them as it was to Bob Hope. It is something that came out of that time in history, as the hippy movement and peace activism came out of my time. When my mother was made aware of hippies, she said she thought she was always one. Yeap, she was. "put another cup of water in the soup, someone is coming to dinner". "Go to your room until you can come out with a smile". 'Don't cry. Be strong for me".

And then came Kennedy. "Don't ask what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country". That nationalism was so different from what it is today. And Kennedy gave us the Older Americans Act, which entitled us to decent housing, transportation, nutrition sites, senior centers, free college classes, and opportunities so we could continue contributing to society. Opportunities like the Senior Companion Program and Grandparents who volunteered in the schools, and we got a stipend of $2.65 for our volunteering if we were low-income. That has all been destroyed as the mood of our nation has changed.

I follow your mention of the Tao and the notions of unity or separation. I have a problem with believing we are separate from God. The Egyptians believed in a trinity of the soul. One dies with our body, the second part is judged and may or may not go on to the good life, and the third part returns to the Tao. The Egyptians didn't develop a concept of Toa, but we don't have a better word for it.

Following what you just said, our knowledge is limited to our language. I prefer Eastern concepts to Western ones. I resent making the Trinity a trinity of God because that forces the authority of God as separate from our being. That is opposed to the notion of Tao. We are part of Tao. Not separate from the Tao. The authority is within me. It is not separate from my being. I do not fear being rejected by a God, because I am part of God/Tao.

I think our separation from God is an illusion made essential to our being, which is ego. I know I am not one with God because I have so many imperfections. Now I have a choice. I can let go of my ego and be one with God/Tao, or maintain my ego and separateness.

The link begins with "The Depression left deep emotional scars on the American psyche." During this period in time, music gave people an escape and entertainment. Just before the crash, the song "Happy Days Are Here Again" was written for a movie, and it became Franklin Roosevelt's campaign song. I think Roosevelt was a pretty awesome man with encouraging words like "the only we have to fear is fear itself". A personal philosophy he developed because he had asthma and many life-threatening moments. He defied doctors' orders to live a very sheltered life and repeatedly put himself in dangerous circumstances. He was the man we needed in our most difficult times.

The song "Happy Days Are Here Again" was written for a movie just before the crash. Roosevelt used that song for his campaign to be the president of the US. "Pull yourself up by your bootstraps" is an impossible feat, but the saying became a metaphor for achieving success and self-sufficiency through sheer effort. Baby Boomers were the children of those who survived the Great Depression, and we carry the attitudes and memories of tough times. A far cry from today's expectations of immediate gratification.

Roosevelt began Social Security based on age, not need! No one wanted to accept charity because it was so shameful. To protect the dignity of the elderly SS is based on age, and many years later it is followed by the Older Americans Act, which again took care of those who survived the depression. Social Security benefited everyone because by making it possible for the elderly to retire, it opened jobs for the young. And yes, SS was the only income for most people in that generation. They were also the generation that fought in the First World War. What do these have to do with nationalism, the following generation, and today?

In the good old days (which were not so good) censors worried about sexual content -- which back then was more like innuendo and suggestion. — BC

But I like that innuendo and suggestion, and I don't like in-your-face anything. And I don't like being yelled at. When I was dealing with teenagers, I enjoyed heavy metal music, but that is not what I want to hear or watch today. My son liked Kiss, and I am quite sure my mother would say they were good entertainers. Should we start a thread about the popular music we listened to when we came of age?

Philosophically, we come from a long history of believing good music is important. AI makes an interesting statement about the history and science of good music. Too bad it is against the rules to quote AI. The AI statement would be a good way to start that thread.

I think each cohort has its unique music inspired by the time. AI says that during the Great Depression, bands offered escape and entertainment. Performing was very important to my mother and Bob Hope. Both of them wanted to make people happy. Back in the day we did not take happiness for granted.

For sure the mood of the country is different today than when I grew up full of hope that we would make a better world. I am trying to stay connected to the subject of this thread.

My daughter is a member of a LGBTQ group that does shows almost weekly. She lives to perform in the shows as a singer and travels to the cities from Los Vegas, Nevada, to Seattle, Washington. I am so glad she found something that gives her so much happiness. She is her grandmother's daughter.:lol: My mother sang for USO shows and moved the family to Hollywood, California, because she wanted to be in the movies.

About shows, I loved the Chippendale shows. And I don't mind eye candy.:grin:

I lost a very old book about marriage, which said sex is not a bad thing, and in its day, that may have been a shocking thing to say. My grandmother and her friends thought sex was for animals and not humans. In the old book, the author argued that good sex makes a marriage good, and an anthropologist argued that good sex can keep the man and woman together for longer, and that gives their offspring a better chance in life. Love improves our health. Being happy improves our health.

It is good for the children when the parents are loving and happy, and today, the parents can be of the same sex. Hopefully, we can work on having healthy attitudes with better science.

I find that the idea of 'God' and what it means for such a being to exist to be one of the most extremely perplexing philosophy problems. — Jack Cummins

I have a problem with believing God is a being with a personality, likes, and dislikes, just like a real person. For sure, this is a humanized god, but originally it is not the personal god many people want, so Jesus is deified and created as the "loving god" we want. Jesus replaced the jealous, revengeful, and punishing god, who was feared, along with fearing Satan, for over a thousand years. Not until our bellies were full did we think god is a "loving god".

When you speak of Zeus and Shiva, they are images of what greater reality may exist. From my reading of Jung I came to see the Judaeo- Christian picture developed in the Bible as an image. My mother told me how at times she used to imagine God the father as the old man and Jesus as the young man. — Jack Cummins

All the gods are concepts. Whenever the ancients realized a new concept, they created a god to explain that concept. This got completely out of control, and an Egyptian pharaoh's grandfather ordered a search of the archives for the real god. This led to the pharaoh building a city for this new god and forbidding the worship of all other gods. That made things very bad for all those priests who profited from the belief in many gods, so they attempted to wipe that pharaoh out of history. They ended up preserving his memory when they crushed and buried his city.

However, I am not sure that the energy from the moment of the Big Bang is not also a unifying energy evolving into self-consciousness.

It seems to imply that an individual is an independent being. Nothing could be further from the truth. — praxis

Oh, but it is a long-standing American myth. I think especially the 1950-1960 cowboy TV shows and the John Wayne portrayal of a man fed into the myth. But the Western movement may have also given us the notion that we are individuals who can go it alone. Many of us move when the neighbors get too close. We are not as social as I have heard people of other countries are social. That mythology requires an unsettled West with lots of land and resources just waiting to be taken. It does not work in today's world. Now we need to get along with others and share. Those values were taught in old textbooks, but I don't think they are standards in textbooks for a technological society.

We have been running on the belief that true science is amoral and has nothing to do with our feelings. @AmadeusD is a man of his time.

If I'm following correctly you're saying:
Offense can't be given.
Thought can be given.
Meaning can't be given.

Is that right? — praxis

I think that is an example of poor emotional intelligence. We might be at the beginning of a new shift where emotional intelligence increases to right the wrongs of the past. Right now, the daily news may be creating a backlash to the opinion that emotions are bad and are to be suppressed or completely ignored. I am thinking of beginning a new thread about what economic crashes and wars have to do with our emotional and economic well-being.

I am working with the notion of a New Age, a time of high tech and peace, and the end of tyranny. The transition is difficult, and I am not sure we will succeed.

The most pointed attempt I know to “prove someone wrong” would be Austin’s reading of Ayer in “Sense and Sensibilia” which we read through here. But even there, Ayer is just a straw man of the argument for “sense data” that Austin uses to actually figure it out, not just prove Ayer “wrong”—it is actually fair and (somewhat) understanding. The most generous and in-depth reading that I know of (while still a complete reversal) has to be Wittgenstein’s examination in “Philosophical Investigations” of his own earlier positions. Austin is waaay more readable though (plus it’s only like 70 pages). — Antony Nickles

Some days my brain works better than other days. This morning I understand the reason I have trouble understanding what you said is I don't know enough. I regret I missed out on reading "Sense and Sensibilia" . It must be a good book because ThriftBooks is selling it for a relatively high price. :gasp: Wittgenstein's book is even more. I will resist the urge to buy the books until I have read the pile of books I have. Can you explain more about it?

Discussions and debates also contribute to teamwork involving a conjecture--- so the more polite we are to each other, the more gets done and the more gets properly filtered. There is no point in suppressive techniques unless the conjecture has already been through the filter and doesn't require an easy team effort. — Barkon

I have a dear, younger friend who earns the big bucks in high-tech research. The teamwork you speak of is essential to her job.

I so wish America would ditch its autocratic industrial model and switch to Deming's democratic model. It would be nice to do that before we have an economic crash that takes us down, like Rome went down.
Not only could this save our economy, but it would be great for families as well.

Cormac McCarthy's The Road was a disturbing story. I was going to watch the movie as well, but decided it would load way too many disturbing images into my head. I've read a couple of science fiction stories where the same thing applied -- the text was disturbing enough. So yes, material that is disturbing to adults is likely to be just as disturbing to children. — BC

Okay, and should we subject our children to that? When we had sensorship, we could tell the stories but make the show less sensational. Have you seen the original King Kong movie? The sexuality was there, but not in-your-face like the modern version of the movie. I much prefer the indoendo to the in-your-face sensationalism we have today; that is cheap and a jolt to my nervous system.

I watched Cat on a Hot Tin Roof with friends, and we were shocked by all the sexuality we did not remember being in the show. Disney's Fantasia is also very sexual. However, it is doubtful that those who are not sexually experienced would notice the sexuality. It is the difference between a strip tease and the in-your-face experience common today. And frankly, it is to me, a little gross. I think I am pretty liberal. I just don't like things done with no class. :lol: Oh dear, I may be a snub. But I think having standards are important to a civilization. I don't like bringing everything down to the lowest level, and I don't think that is good for society.

Reality check, I remember hearing songs were written by adults with standards until the Beatles came along with their own songs. AI agrees with me. :lol: This is appropriate for this thread because there is a long history of musical revolutions and parents fighting against it. I mean, touching while dancing is shocking! The waltz is immoral. :wink: How do we keep our children good when we are falling into evil?

At least we stopped advertising cigarettes. I think some agree there is a connection between what we see and what we do. For a very short time, I did advertising research until I realized how unethical that is. The average person has no defenses against the manipulation of advertising that is largely subliminal. People earn good money figuring out how to manipulate potential customers.

AI gives a different intent to Disney's Fantasia than I expected. :lol: It was not marketed for children, but adults, and it is too bad we cannot use AI quotes that make our post more interesting.

I have at least two reactions to what you said.

The first one comes from having social studies classes in college, and the impression that once something gets through the process of research, it resymbolizes reality as much as a plastic-wrapped steak resymbolizes the cow it came from.

You mentioned imagination, and I am thinking of the copycat crimes, and wonder if lives would be saved if we didn't give the world bad things to copy? The news might be important, and so might the delivery of the news be important. Personally, I am in favor of a higher standard of ethical professionalism.

Many people hold the parents responsible and say they should be able to prevent their child from watching TV programs that could have a bad effect. I think that is not realistic because this involves more than our own children. I think violent and cruel TV shows are socially bad for everyone. Kind of like Socrates saying we should be careful about the stories of the gods that we spread.

I know a frightening show can leave me feeling frightened, and one that makes me feel bad, such a show about a man abusing his wife, can cause me to feel bad for 3 days. I have to be careful about what I watch, and I know everyone is not like me. But I would not want my children to watch a show that is upsetting to me. Perhaps asking our children how they react to different shows could result in reasoning that is good for our own families?

And music- have you seen how Elvis moves his hips? :gasp: My mother thought he was an excellent entertainer. I think the music in my day got us out of Vietnam. Music is very important. And some rap music is good, and some is socially very bad.

Good for her. Yes, in a way teen years are a form of 'insanity'. The overriding principles are recalcitrance and insubordination. — L'éléphant

I just read

BC — BC

reality check on my fantasy of pioneer women having the internet, and maybe back in the day, survival needs made parenting easier. He sure drew a good picture of life being more challenging than it is now.

I keep studying just in case I find myself sitting at the large dining table in the sky with the Great Thinkers of history. I would love to hear what they have to say about our times. However, we do have the sentiments of a Sumerian father, whose son did not appreciate the good life his father gave him and did not focus on his education to become a scribe. It seems to be our nature to have difficulty getting through our teen years.

:lol: You really messed up my fantasy with your reality check.

Funny thing about "liberal education" is those few with the most of it have always, in theory and practice, substantially denied it to the many who need it to help liberate themselves. Modern history shows that "liberal education" (as e.g. Jefferson / Paine / Marx suggest) is only a necessary, but not a sufficient, condition for liberty of the many. — 180 Proof

Interesting. What must go with a liberal education to manifest liberty?

I came across the notion that those who want liberty have the least freedom because of being self-regulating. That is, we do not do whatever we feel like doing, but we choose to do the right thing, even when we don't want to. I have heard the way to protect our liberty is to obey the law. But sometimes the law is unjust, and then action must be taken to correct that wrong.

I am usually arguing the importance of a liberal education, and Jefferson would not deny anyone a liberal education. Jefferson held that universal education is the most effective means of preserving democracy and good government.

Our antipathy isn't directed at what you've described what you use it for, at least. You're not copy-pasting directly out of it, and you're willing to hear other sources rather than rely upon it as a source -- it's a tool for seeing something you may not have heard about, but you're not parading it about like an authority. — Moliere

Old age is a double-edged sword. My brain isn't doing some things so well, but it is doing other things much better. What I like best is that I totally get that even the best of minds are very limited. Even the best authority is limited to a very tiny bit of information compared to all there is to know. Now I don't have the words for what I want to say, but I have a better understanding of the meaning. This is a moment when I have to Google for the words I am trying to remember. And here are the words I wanted to remember. "The More You Know The More You Realize You Don't Know".

:grin: That is a perfect explanation of why I want to use AI. The information is in my brain but I can't think of the right words.

Secondly, I am a fighter if the cause is important to me, and in this forum, everyone is so nice that there is nothing to be upset about. I keep thinking if I think of the right words to say, everyone will agree with my reasoning. :lol: Or maybe not. :lol: As long as everyone is nice about it, it doesn't really matter if we disagree.

We are mostly singing from the same hymn sheet then. But I think it's OK to educate kids in how to use technology if they understand its situatedness with regard to subjectivity. And that can start simply by telling them: This stuff is not just something you use, but that if you use it, will use you. Here's how... — Baden

I am the one fighting to make it okay to use AI. Insisting people have liberal educations is not being anti-technology. However, a high IQ and being able to program computers or make mass destruction weapons does not equal wisdom, and we are the dumbest animal on the planet if we don't realize how important wisdom is. That requires a liberal education, and feeling responsible for what one knows and how one uses that knowledge.

I argue for liberal education as Christians argue for the Bible. Ever since the beginning of the US there has been a conflict between religious people and those who believe the Enlightenment is the most important source of knowledge.

I don't think we want to stop technology, but we need the wisdom to use it. Give us the liberty to use AI and work on our wisdom to use it well.

[

Unfortunately, it's almost inevitable now that Al will become in the near future THE general authority. — Baden

Something is wrong with humanity if that happens. My experience with AI this morning was not that impressive. How it answers a question depends on how the question is worded. A person can get different answers by asking the same question differently. That can be like pulling back the curtain and exposing the Wizard of Oz.

However, the things AI can do, like create false pictures, are threatening. I have a friend who is working on high-tech computer chips, and I can hardly wait to visit with her and discuss the threats she sees. But I also see vacs deniers and other conspiracy theories, and I am shocked by what people believe. Like not only is the technology threatening, but people's willingness to believe lies is frightening. We need to work on our logic skills.

Where it is difficult for a child to hear 30 million positive (non-command / non-curse) words is in poor families, especially poor black families. Children from these families may arrive at school with a 10 million-word deficit, and a lot of the words they have heard have been negative, commands, or curses. Again, it is the language of the caregiver, not the television or uninvolved people, that matters. — BC

I Googled, "Does TV influence teenagers" and AI gave a strong "yes, it does". I think we were much wiser in the past when we had censorship. I hope you look for more information. Maybe you can find a cite that supports your statement and share it.

I bring this up because for these poor children, remediation of language deficits is very difficult, and by 3rd grade, the child has often fallen far behind--which becomes yet another barrier. — BC

That I believe that is true. By age 8, our brains are literally changed and we do not absorb information as we do before age 8. But in some ways, our brains are better prepared for cognitive work.

Praising the child is important. What the child needs to hear a lot less of is the negative language one sometimes hears on a bus, from parent to child. It can be very harsh. — BC

That is something I did not understand. The harsh language was just wrong, but criticizing was showing I care. :worry: Like many in my cohort, parents meant well, but did a lot of harm because we were raised with a lot of criticism. I think the Great Depression influenced our parents, who meant well. I think the parents' sense of security influences how the parent understands life. Insecurity is very damaging.

And I want to say, my mother, like many mothers, was a single mother, and I was raised in a day care center, where I withdrew and stayed to myself. To me, the rest of the children were like animals and I didn't want to fight for a toy. Day Care may not be a good thing for all children.

Can parents be taught? Yes, provided there are funds to launch the kind of intensive outreach that is needed, and to maintain the instructional programs for years on end. — BC

My granddaughter took advantage of the Birth to Three program that was available in the city. I wish I had had such a supportive program when I was a young mother. My X kept the family isolated, and I feel for all the pioneer women who were isolated when we moved west and filled the wilderness with civilization. They should have at least had the Internet. That would have made life so much better!

No. But you have to admit that as an adult absorbing all kinds of learning from your environment, that the childhood teachings we learned have been modified. And this is what I meant. It could happen that the values you learned as a child have been beneficial to you as an adult and so that's what you follow. — L'éléphant

When my teenage daughter got in trouble with the law, she had to go into counseling and the counselor told her she learned better. She most certainly did. But the teen years are a form insanity. :lol: Back in the day, there was not the flood of books for the teen years that we have today.

One of the many things I don't much about are the theories (good and bad) about teaching reading. I have seen several studies that emphasize the importance of hearing A LOT of language in the first 4 or 5 years of life -- not babble from a television, but spoken by care-givers in a positive manner. The more complex, the better. By first grade (5 or 6 years) a child needs to have heard around 30,000,000 words. Being reared in a diminished and negative language environment can make acquisition of reading (and other school-taught skills) very difficult-to-impossible. — BC

Thank you so much for saying something interesting about education and learning. What you said justifies the Head Start program. I watched a cognitively-challenged mother raise her children, and she herself did not have the vocabulary nor the wit to talk to her children. I encouraged her to do so, but she could not understand the importance. We have a housing project for low-income families with Head Start and child care on the grounds. These challenged people need that for so many reasons. They love their children, but their judgment is lacking and the State may take their children. We need more housing that supports these parents and prepares children for learning.

I recently found math books for children that are stories that can be read to a child at bedtime. These books are awesome as they do more to help children understand math concepts. Far back in the day, some school textbooks also taught math by telling stories, and values like being considerate and cooperative were also in the stories. It is quite obvious to me, children learn language but fail to learn math because we ignore math but talk all day, every day.

I had the most fun with a great-grandson who was in my care because he was a very active child, and I introduced math when walking. His whole body was learning math. One of my math books suggested the need to actively learn math.

Oh my, I am so moved and passionate about this. When people say education is about preparing children for industry, I have to argue that many teachers teach because they love the children and teaching. What can be more rewarding than opening a child's mind to the marvels of learning? We need to give back the teacher's authority over his/her classroom.

But aside from that, most people here are very charitable and understanding as far as their time and intellect goes into explaining things if you simply ask with polite inquisitiveness or curiosity. — Outlander

This forum is much, much better than most. And like you, I am often overwhelmed by better-informed people. Curious, how people intent on thinking can also be the nicest people. Now we just need an education system that encourages this. I think some places are developing a better understanding of what the young need to learn. I have hope we will no more let AI rule over us than we would allow a pope or king to rule over us. What we do depends on how we are educated.

Athena, I think you are misunderstanding how AI works. When you ask AI to respond to an argument, it is expressing its own opinion. Not your opinion. The forum wants discussion between humans, not between AI. Using AI to refine your posts, or correct spelling is fine, as it is still your opinion being expressed. But if AI writes the response, you aren't expressing your opinion; you are expressing the AI's opinion. AI is known to be very overconfident, making up information when it cannot find any on a subject. By posting an AI response, you are posting the opinion of an unempathetic, brainless, untrustworthy robot. The forum does not want this. — Wolfy48

Oh please, AI does not have its own opinion because it does not have a personality. AI is a lot of information, and the machine can organize that information. It has a much broader source of information than any person can have. Therefore, it is more useful than asking your friends for information.

It is important to keep things in perspective. It is a tool and it must remain a tool. BUT WE CAN MAKE IT A TERRIBLE POWER OVER US. I believe education for technology has humans in a very dangerous position right now.

What is the rule about talking politics? :nerd: I know, I need to check with the ancient philosophers and see what they have to say bout making ourselves subservient to a machine. Oh, maybe that won't work. According to a professor I absolutely hate, information older than 10 years is useless, and so are the people who believe that crap.

Unfortunately, it's almost inevitable now that Al will become in the near future THE general authority. So, thinking will no longer be a practical necessity. We could even draw a logical line from human laziness to a situation where people simply plug their "personality" into a mobile AI, stick it on themselves, and allow it to do all their conversing for them. — Baden

This is why I argue against education for technology. I think the world you want requires a liberal education. I have been alone with this argument for many years. I could die in peace if I were not the only one fighting for liberal education.

It cannot think. It is just a tool.

An idiot using a hammer is still an idiot using a hammer. Destructive rather than constructive. Authority? Nope, none. — I like sushi

An idiot using a medical book is no better than an idiot using a hammer, but we aren't going to ban medical books, are we?

Something very frightening is happening today. People want more and more control, and this destroys not only our liberty but our ability to manage our liberty as well. I harp and harp about education, because it is essential to our safety and liberty. Ignoring the importance of education and trying to protect everyone by taking away their liberty is a dark cloud over us right now. I think we are experiencing how Dark Ages happen.

Well, noone ever said you cannot discuss with AI and collect your thoughts and feelings. I think they mostly don't want you to ask a question and then just copy and paste direct from the AI. But, do be aware AI make mistakes too and could mislead you down a path of AI hallucinations.

In otherwords, you probably souldn't use it as an authority, but instead use it as a personal assistant. — DifferentiatingEgg

Sometimes it is impossible for me to be good and do the right thing, because there is another right thing that trumps the first right thing. This morning, in a thread about education, I used AI. But darn it! I feel passionately that we need to know some things if humanity is going to make the right decisions. The AI I used may not be 100% correct, and I said I disagree with one of the points. Nothing is going to be 100% perfect.

However, we can share social agreements such as the right to bear arms, but then we have to work on agreements about our behavior. Is there a right way to use AI? Can I prove I have social agreement when I am explaining a problem or solution? Because what I believe is the most important information is from very old books, my point of view is different from all others. Because what I say is different, it is assumed I am wrong and do not know what I am talking about. I feel pretty alone with this burden, and that makes AI useful in making my point.

AI isn't worse than any other piece of information. If you want to see really bad, bad information, go for a religious explanation. AI is not a false god. It is a useful tool. How we use it might matter but it will never trump religion for being problematic.

And even if I were speaking to God himself, I would have my own opinion, and I would tell him I think he did a few things wrong.

The only real threat I am concerned about is AGI, but I am not entirely sure that can/will happen anytime soon. Hard to say. If it does that has far more potential to ruin our lives as well as improve it dramatically. — I like sushi

What is AGI?

About drastic change. We live on a finite planet, and we act as though there is an infinite supply of everything we need. But some folks know better so we have very expensive military power and wars. I would have more hope if people were more conscious of reality.

When I was microfilming old newspapers for a library, I read a warning in a 1920s newspaper. "Given our known oil supply and rate of consumption, we are headed for economic disaster and possibly war." All Industrial economies collapsed, and the world went to war. I have a very low opinion of human intelligence.

Teaching by example; putting them in a difficult situation earlier than usual, such as by to operate a small town where they work fields, and run shops--- and other things you'd expect to see in a town, under the guidance of trained teachers.

Being civil and training them manners and to take pride in their chores(not just doing it for the parents), all by the trained teachers or parents doing this themselves, and asking them to pay attention. — Barkon

I believe you are speaking of social bonds. I am quite sure mass murderers do not have good social bonds. How many people are in your town? Does your town have enough farm land and water to be self-sufficient? How does your town resolve problems?

Very well. Sketch your best guess about how we evolved and then insist we stay true to that course else be punished by Mother Nature. — Hanover

Do you prefer evolution to Creationism? The evidence I have seen on TV or read in books, and the college lectures I have learned from, say, the ape-like creatures that became humans succeeded because of the better social organization.

Bonobos have a different social structure than chimpanzees. They are female-dominated and more sexual, and more cooperative. Many of us have Neanderthal genes, but modern man won, possibly because of better social organization. Athenians held that you can not have too many people in a democracy because when we become strangers to each other, our social bonds break down. Our morality depends on our social bonds.

Exactly what was the point you were trying to make?

I love your post. :heart: I have a very old eugenics book, along with very old books about family values. The author of the eugenics book said people should learn about birth control so women would have sex with their husbands instead of sending them to a brothel because they didn't want to get pregnant. He was very excited by what technology would do for us, and he would not have stood in the way of abortion, especially if the baby would be deformed. This is the thinking that Hitler adopted. Developing technology most certainly changed our moral perspective.

On the other hand, these old books tell me sex is okay, but a woman should never expect a man to help with the children! She must take care of everything so he is free to focus on his career. I sure would have liked a wife like that when my X walked out and I had to support the children. It would have been wonderful to have a full-time homemaker like many women were before women's lib. When I needed a wife like that, my opinion of worth as a homemaker went sky high. :lol:

On to textbooks, Dick and Jane textbooks were for the "see and say" method, which is highly dependent on memory and resulted in a large number of students failing. I am so grateful for my teacher grandmother because I could not learn to read and was put in the group for dumbies. She taught me phonics and used the Jerry and Alice textbooks. Those books were for learning phonics AND they brought in different values. A main character in the Jerry and Alice books was a single woman.

Back to war and education. In the US, the divorce rate went sky high following WWII. During the war years, the government, textbook makers, and media had strong relationships to maintain patriotism. After the war, there was a shift to strengthen family values. The Democracy Series of grade school texts and later Dick and Jane are good examples of this.

I want to stress the importance of this focus on values because of the herd of which you speak.

Enough did that the "herd standard" worked pretty well. And we lacked diversity; we were all pretty much culturally the same. — BC

That was very much the result of intentional government, bookmaker, and education goals. Now darnit and I am so sorry but I am going to break the ban on AI because this is a perfect time to use it and the health of our nation needs this information.

Contrary to popular belief, iconic family sitcoms after WWII like Leave It to Beaver and Father Knows Best were not funded by the government. They were commercial products of a flourishing post-war television industry, though they did reflect and promote the cultural ideals of the time.
The post-war context
Following World War II, a climate of renewed consumerism and Cold War anxiety contributed to a deep cultural emphasis on a secure and traditional family life. TV shows that presented idealized, traditional family models found a receptive audience.

I have to modify that by saying the public broadcasting channels were government-funded and focused on values. :lol: Some people don't like the left-leaning programming, and perhaps "Jerry and Alice" were also left-leaning? I asked AI and found another disagreement with AI. :cry: I am losing faith in AI. But I am thrilled to find an explanation of our consciousness at the time.

That was when Billy Graham talked to Eisenhower about putting "God" into our Pledge of Allegiance and focusing on communist people, not being Christian people. AI saying the government wasn't involved with political media agendas may not be the whole truth. The Communists liberated women long before the US. At first, the USSR economy improved when women entered the workforce. However, divorce and abortion rates increased, and then increasing numbers of women and children fell below the poverty level. We can add to that, increasing women and children being more involved in crime and violence, both as victims and perpetrators.

I was horrified when a teacher expressed great enthusiasm for a new computer learning program that told the story of the new bully on the block, being a girl. This was topped by the popularity of Captain Underpants, and our local school library preferring socially inappropriate books to the classics because the children would read them. We have come a long way from our reading books, teaching our young good values, and creating a herd with moral values.

You remind me of the history forum where everyone thinks the object is to prove the OP and following statements wrong. That could often be a very unpleasant experience that could never become an interesting discussion. I think the quality of the people in a forum makes a big difference.

This is so weird, I have enjoyed using AI so much and never realized a problem. For me, it is like checking with Mike. The guy who seems to know something about everything. It has not been a life-threatening experience for me, but a lot of fun.

I can totally relate to the term, lazy brain. I have experienced my brain being lazy, and if I try harder, it gets worse. Stress will totally crash my thinking system. I have lived with that problem for many years. Sometimes, to cope with difficult moments, I tell people "I live in the now" and everyone laughs.. It is hard to know when normal senior moments are no longer normal.

I like to think of AI as a medical device; like a brace or a crutch that takes the burden off the musculoskeletal frame. Over time this unburdening is detrimental to the muscles that normally carry the weight, causing a certain amount of atrophy. Similarly AI is like a crutch but for your own thoughts if you use it to do your thinking for you. — DifferentiatingEgg

Thanks, that is how I see AI, but I think my brain is becoming dysfunctional and never using AI is not going to make things better. But like using a walker, it could extend my ability to do what I want to do.

You can "use" AI to learn material, particularly if you verify it elsewhere. — Moliere

That is a good idea, and if I could do that, I would not argue in favor of using AI. Hopefully, none of you will know I am talking about. This link explains the increased difficulty with learning, and I go to the gym several days a week, hoping that will slow the decline. https://www.nia.nih.gov/health/brain-health/how-aging-brain-affects-thinking

I appreciate your down-to-earth explanation of potential problems. Now I am thinking this argument is like the gun argument. If someone gets shot it is not the gun's fault but the misuse of the gun.

I think starting a thread with an interesting AI and asking people to say what they think of what AI said, could be a lot of fun. I can not imagine what the problem would be. I just do not have the experience to know what can go wrong.