|
On April 02 2012 18:58 zalz wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2012 18:22 Ectrid wrote:
And that's why capitalistic systems like this work so good. You don't need any physical pressure like a whip, all you need to do is install a system were people have to life in fear and out of fear they work their asses off.
I call that slavery. There are people living in literal slavery, right this very moment. You might want to hold off on the hyperbole by claiming that working as a doctor and earning a six-digit salery is the same as being sold off into debt slavery from the age of 13 to work in some Pakistani mine, the only release being running or snuffing up the coal that you have to mine with equipment that would make it seem barbaric in the 1820's. Or maybe some Indian house-maid, working on Saudi-Arabia, where she can't leave because they take her passport and if she happens to die, regardless of the cause, it is deemed a suicide. It isn't slavery, it isn't nearly as bad as slavery. Slavery has a meaning, and despite what people like to believe, is still a very real problem in this day and age. You make light of the suffering of others when you pretend that the fate of slaves and office workers are so identical that they deserve the same name.
Great post. Absolutely destroyed him.
|
Ahh, so this was a study limited to only 32 OECD countries. Still, it's not very surprising. Making the move from manufacturing to tech industries takes its toll on the less educated, especially in a culture so obsessed with working your ass off all the time. Find yourself without a job and without qualifications in the new, hyper-competitive job market and with no welfare or savings to fall back on during your unemployment and your happiness will sink to suicide bomber levels. I guess it's hard for those who set policies and own companies to fully relate to the troubles of the working class. It's all about short-term profits in this new global economy, or era of entitlement, where every investor expects some kind of instant gratification like at the casino.
|
On April 02 2012 18:41 Plexa wrote:
Im glad Baezzi isn't around anymore ...
Lol!! Dat Drama
|
On April 03 2012 01:13 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:Show nested quote +On April 03 2012 00:28 Azarkon wrote:
For those looking for Asian culture reasons to the suicide rate - mind explaining why Lithuania has a higher suicide rate than South Korea?
Once upon a time, the Soviet Union collapsed, leading into heavy economic depression, chaos, and societal problems in the former Soviet states. Lithuania, to say the least, has many, many issues. It comes as no surprise there would be a high suicide rate. There's of course many reasons for the high suicide rate in Korea. I'll add a minor possible reason, in that the kpop culture sorta influences guys to be pretty... effeminate. Not that it's necessarily a bad thing, but having thin skin like that for a guy can make you not as able to bear stressful things.
Lithuania doing great compared to former soviet republics. That is absolutely the opposite of what you wrote. I would also like you to list "many issues" that Lithuania has derived directly from the downfall of USSR. Real curious here!
I called you out on posting bs previously, you also need to stop being a racist fuck and taking stabs at asians, or "orientals" as you call them. This is not the first time for you, you're always kind of slimy and elusive by not being direct but it is still pretty obvious.
|
If anyone is still delusional about Finland (I am kind of laughing at this point): http://www.imo-official.org/results_country.aspx
Croatia (population ~4.5mil), Belarus (~9.5mil), Bulgaria (7.5 mil), these are only off the top of that list that absolutely CRUSH Finland in terms of results with twice as little participations. IT IS NOT EVEN CLOSE. What's close is Armenia (population 3 mil)
Thank you.
They might be kings of general education and common sense. They spend less time studying more time rationalizing. But this will never result in being exceptional. That's when you have to put the time and effort in. I'm sorry but there is no magical way around that.
|
On April 02 2012 21:51 RelZo wrote:Show nested quote +According to a recent World Values Survey, Koreans are the second unhappiest people (after Hungary)... Meh, why am I not suprised.
On a sidenote, could a Hungarian elaborate on this? I spent a week in Budapest and the city seemed alright, the country isn't a whole lotta different from other Eastern European countries, and you have some of the hottest women I've ever seen. Apart from your government trying to push you back to the stone age, why are Hungarians so unhappy?
|
On April 03 2012 03:11 ecstatica wrote:If anyone is still delusional about Finland (I am kind of laughing at this point): http://www.imo-official.org/results_country.aspxCroatia (population ~4.5mil), Belarus (~9.5mil), Bulgaria (7.5 mil), these are only off the top of that list that absolutely CRUSH Finland in terms of results with twice as little participations. IT IS NOT EVEN CLOSE. What's close is Armenia (population 3 mil) Thank you. They might be kings of general education and common sense. They spend less time studying more time rationalizing. But this will never result in being exceptional. That's when you have to put the time and effort in. I'm sorry but there is no magical way around that.
i always found the finland hype bs, where does it come from?
|
On April 03 2012 03:11 ecstatica wrote:If anyone is still delusional about Finland (I am kind of laughing at this point): http://www.imo-official.org/results_country.aspxCroatia (population ~4.5mil), Belarus (~9.5mil), Bulgaria (7.5 mil), these are only off the top of that list that absolutely CRUSH Finland in terms of results with twice as little participations. IT IS NOT EVEN CLOSE. What's close is Armenia (population 3 mil) Thank you. They might be kings of general education and common sense. They spend less time studying more time rationalizing. But this will never result in being exceptional. That's when you have to put the time and effort in. I'm sorry but there is no magical way around that.
Math Olympiad is not a good indicator for education quality, at all. It is not even a good indicator for a country's ability to produce exceptional individuals. It isn't a good indicator for anything but the importance of pointless academic contests. I is truly beyond me why you think that it is.
As a sidenote: Why are you such a massive condescending prick?
|
On April 03 2012 03:30 zomgE wrote:Show nested quote +On April 03 2012 03:11 ecstatica wrote:If anyone is still delusional about Finland (I am kind of laughing at this point): http://www.imo-official.org/results_country.aspxCroatia (population ~4.5mil), Belarus (~9.5mil), Bulgaria (7.5 mil), these are only off the top of that list that absolutely CRUSH Finland in terms of results with twice as little participations. IT IS NOT EVEN CLOSE. What's close is Armenia (population 3 mil) Thank you. They might be kings of general education and common sense. They spend less time studying more time rationalizing. But this will never result in being exceptional. That's when you have to put the time and effort in. I'm sorry but there is no magical way around that. i always found the finland hype bs, where does it come from?
Finland scores extremely high in comparative studies of educational systems. The studies that are actually scientific and peer-reviewed, unlike the math olympiad results, which are indicative of absolutely nothing at all.
|
You know what math olympiad results actually show? A capability of certain education systems to produce top level talent in math field over the course of participation period. Which is over 30 years in some cases. Now this is what I call evidence. What you call evidence is a study of a mean average of a certain age group across all countries.
Basically if someone scores at the mean he is absolutely useless, he defines "average". That study doesn't show if the system can produce exceptional students or if it only takes care of severely undereducated ones, while top prospects are bottlenecked. It's basically in the same field of usefulness as trying to define top writing potential basing it on country's literacy rate.
Think of NBA draft. It's peer-reviewed to death. Then think of actual NBA. That's where peer-reviewed meets reality. Math olympiad is the NBA of mathematics. You either produce or you're trash. If you don't understand this I don't know how to explain.
|
On April 03 2012 03:28 PraefektMotus wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2012 21:51 RelZo wrote:According to a recent World Values Survey, Koreans are the second unhappiest people (after Hungary)... Meh, why am I not suprised. On a sidenote, could a Hungarian elaborate on this? I spent a week in Budapest and the city seemed alright, the country isn't a whole lotta different from other Eastern European countries, and you have some of the hottest women I've ever seen. Apart from your government trying to push you back to the stone age, why are Hungarians so unhappy?
It's not really unhappy, but rather tired and disappointed, since nothing really changes. People are living their lives but things aren't getting better, if not worse. News is all about rising prices, dumb politicians and traffic accidents (there have been a suprisingly high amount of suicides in the last few months) with a little bit a "xy noname celebrity bought a new dog"-type news.
But everyone's hoping things will get better. Hungarians have never been known for giving up that easily 
Offtopic-ish:
Am I looking the numbers wrong, or is Hungary top-notch at this Math Olympiad thing?
|
Hungary is amazing at math, always was 
|
On April 03 2012 04:09 ecstatica wrote:
You know what math olympiad results actually show? A capability of certain education systems to produce top level talent in math field over the course of participation period. Which is over 30 years in some cases. Now this is what I call evidence. What you call evidence is a study of a mean average of a certain age group across all countries.
Basically if someone scores at the mean he is absolutely useless, he defines "average". That study doesn't show if the system can produce exceptional students or if it only takes care of severely undereducated ones, while top prospects are bottlenecked. It's basically in the same field of usefulness as trying to define top writing potential basing it on country's literacy rate.
Think of NBA draft. It's peer-reviewed to death. Then think of actual NBA. That's where peer-reviewed meets reality. Math olympiad is the NBA of mathematics. You either produce or you're trash. If you don't understand this I don't know how to explain.
I think judging education systems on the basis of how the absolute top students perform is bad. China seems to be crushing this and i doubt it's their education system but rather the huge population and the higher % of geniuses. There are a few countries that you might not expect to perform as well as they do but i'd be looking at other factos aswell. Amazing private schools and personal teachers, sheer luck in the sense that they've had a few math geeks born in their country, they are actually trying to do well in this competition and try to train their students and maybe they're at constant search of talented students etc.
|
On April 03 2012 04:09 ecstatica wrote:
You know what math olympiad results actually show? A capability of certain education systems to produce top level talent in math field over the course of participation period. Which is over 30 years in some cases. Now this is what I call evidence. What you call evidence is a study of a mean average of a certain age group across all countries.
Basically if someone scores at the mean he is absolutely useless, he defines "average". That study doesn't show if the system can produce exceptional students or if it only takes care of severely undereducated ones, while top prospects are bottlenecked. It's basically in the same field of usefulness as trying to define top writing potential basing it on country's literacy rate.
Think of NBA draft. It's peer-reviewed to death. Then think of actual NBA. That's where peer-reviewed meets reality. Math olympiad is the NBA of mathematics. You either produce or you're trash. If you don't understand this I don't know how to explain.
No, what I call a study is a well-thought out theoretical framework leading to a variety of clear, theoretically inspired, criteria, leading to indicators, leading to an overall comparison. The study then gets peer-reviewed, and if it proves to be good and useful it can be used as evidence. What you call evidence is taking a random statistic of a small and in some convaluted way extend it to the entire population. There's a reason that's generally frowned upon in the scientific community.
I can do the exact same you're doing in under a minute. Following math olympiad results, North Korea has a better educational system then belgium, finland, luxembourg, the netherlands, new zealand, sweden, switzerland. Countries named also get beaten by thailand and vietnam. You can't compare educational systems based on a single, randomly chosen, indicator. I don't think you understand the scientific method, or the concept of scientific peer-review, and the NBA draft comparison makes absolutely no sense.
|
well, you have the high school, millitary service, work times, north korea., what do you think?
|
On April 03 2012 04:50 Derez wrote:Show nested quote +On April 03 2012 04:09 ecstatica wrote:
You know what math olympiad results actually show? A capability of certain education systems to produce top level talent in math field over the course of participation period. Which is over 30 years in some cases. Now this is what I call evidence. What you call evidence is a study of a mean average of a certain age group across all countries.
Basically if someone scores at the mean he is absolutely useless, he defines "average". That study doesn't show if the system can produce exceptional students or if it only takes care of severely undereducated ones, while top prospects are bottlenecked. It's basically in the same field of usefulness as trying to define top writing potential basing it on country's literacy rate.
Think of NBA draft. It's peer-reviewed to death. Then think of actual NBA. That's where peer-reviewed meets reality. Math olympiad is the NBA of mathematics. You either produce or you're trash. If you don't understand this I don't know how to explain. No, what I call a study is a well-thought out theoretical framework leading to a variety of clear, theoretically inspired, criteria, leading to indicators, leading to an overall comparison. The study then gets peer-reviewed, and if it proves to be good and useful it can be used as evidence. What you call evidence is taking a random statistic of a small and in some convaluted way extent it to the entire population. There's a reason that's generally frowned upon in the scientific community. I can do the exact same you're doing in under a minute. Following math olympiad results, North Korea has a better educational system then belgium, finland, luxembourg, the netherlands, new zealand, sweden, switzerland. Countries named also get beaten by thailand and vietnam. You can't compare educational systems based on a single, randomly chosen, indicator. I don't think you understand the scientific method, or the concept of scientific peer-review, and the NBA draft comparison makes absolutely no sense.
Not to mention that the results are going to be greatly distorted by the popularity of academic competitions in general. Which I know are not popular at all in the Netherlands (I've never heard of a Dutch 'spelling-bee') while they are in for example the US.
If we want to compare the number of exceptionally gifted individuals produced, we could also choose number of nobel laureates, or published articles in scientific journals. Which obviously are also terrible indicators of educational quality on their own and will greatly favor the west.
|
On April 03 2012 04:50 Derez wrote:Show nested quote +On April 03 2012 04:09 ecstatica wrote:
You know what math olympiad results actually show? A capability of certain education systems to produce top level talent in math field over the course of participation period. Which is over 30 years in some cases. Now this is what I call evidence. What you call evidence is a study of a mean average of a certain age group across all countries.
Basically if someone scores at the mean he is absolutely useless, he defines "average". That study doesn't show if the system can produce exceptional students or if it only takes care of severely undereducated ones, while top prospects are bottlenecked. It's basically in the same field of usefulness as trying to define top writing potential basing it on country's literacy rate.
Think of NBA draft. It's peer-reviewed to death. Then think of actual NBA. That's where peer-reviewed meets reality. Math olympiad is the NBA of mathematics. You either produce or you're trash. If you don't understand this I don't know how to explain. No, what I call a study is a well-thought out theoretical framework leading to a variety of clear, theoretically inspired, criteria, leading to indicators, leading to an overall comparison. The study then gets peer-reviewed, and if it proves to be good and useful it can be used as evidence. What you call evidence is taking a random statistic of a small and in some convaluted way extend it to the entire population. There's a reason that's generally frowned upon in the scientific community. I can do the exact same you're doing in under a minute. Following math olympiad results, North Korea has a better educational system then belgium, finland, luxembourg, the netherlands, new zealand, sweden, switzerland. Countries named also get beaten by thailand and vietnam. You can't compare educational systems based on a single, randomly chosen, indicator. I don't think you understand the scientific method, or the concept of scientific peer-review, and the NBA draft comparison makes absolutely no sense.
No theoretical framework compares to real results and real numbers. Period. That's why you didn't get the NBA draft example.
What you've noticed is not necessarily indicative of NK being superior to listed countries in terms of "education" (even though I believe this could very much be the case), it simply proves that their math program is superior - if they do, in fact, post better results on yearly basis. I'm not sure why that shocks you? We have a lot of students from Vietnam in US and they do great. Do you somehow suggest that Belgian students are better? I'm sorry but I don't think so.
Also don't forget we are talking highschool.
|
On April 03 2012 04:09 ecstatica wrote:
You know what math olympiad results actually show? A capability of certain education systems to produce top level talent in math field over the course of participation period. Which is over 30 years in some cases. Now this is what I call evidence. What you call evidence is a study of a mean average of a certain age group across all countries.
Basically if someone scores at the mean he is absolutely useless, he defines "average". That study doesn't show if the system can produce exceptional students or if it only takes care of severely undereducated ones, while top prospects are bottlenecked. It's basically in the same field of usefulness as trying to define top writing potential basing it on country's literacy rate.
Think of NBA draft. It's peer-reviewed to death. Then think of actual NBA. That's where peer-reviewed meets reality. Math olympiad is the NBA of mathematics. You either produce or you're trash. If you don't understand this I don't know how to explain.
Please don't make any kind of scientific research ever if you are really this bad at taking confounders into account... There are a ton of variables you didn't account for, one of the more important being that in most western european countries people don't care about the olympiads/academic contests and they aren't promoted. For example, I had to explain my own teachers what Georg Mohr and the Biology Olympiad was back in the Gymnasium before I could get to participate.
If you don't understand that who does well in a competition is in the first placed influenced by who enters it, I don't even know how to explain why your example is so absolutely trash....
If you want to compare education somewhat objectively, look at the PISA-test, which is also shitty measure, yet still a better measure of educational level than "# of winners of XXXX academical contest".
EDIT: Seeing how glad you are for sports metaphores, ask yourself why the US isn't posting any results worth mentioning in Badminton but a small country like Denmark is tearing it up with several WC and is the only country outside of Asia which is worth mentioning? Or why China (and the US until recently) suck at soccer?
|
I'm sure you've taken everything into account citing Finland as top 3 country in terms of math education. The very fact that math olympiad is a government sponsored event and no one ever refuses to participate if he's good enough since it's a privilege - I don't even know wtf you mean by saying that people don't care. If you weren't asked to participate chances are you weren't good. Trust me, top math students do take part in math contests, I'm afraid you simply lack the information. I moved to the US from Europe and it was very much alike.
I like the accusations of not being very scientific while the only arguments against it is some useless rhetoric. I've even offered a probable theory to explain why Finland scored high on average! What did you offer? "This is not a proper framework, our framework has a lot of peer reviews and super scientific and.. and... we probably dont even care for that stuff!"
What the f? I am willing to believe you, really. Just offer something that I can swallow.
To your sports metaphor - obviously badminton is not very popular. Therefore little ppl that play it cant learn from the best or receive great coaching. OK lets break it down - math is something that everyone studies and teachers do matter as much as the program. How did this help your argument? Dont tell me youre assuming ppl initially bust ass studying math to compete at the olympiad which has no prizepool afaik... L O L
|
On April 02 2012 18:54 Supamang wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2012 18:41 Taf the Ghost wrote:
2 words: North Korea.
6 more words: Dictator with massive amounts of Artillery.
Any societal analysis of South Korea, without taking this into account, renders it completely mute.
Oh, and that regime just happened to recently acquire Nuclear Weapons. That's a true "fear factor".
The hours studied, per student, just means that Korean children are 1/2 as efficient as Finnish children at studying. That strikes me as a failure completely apart from economic.
The opening paragraph just happens to forgets Korean history from 1900 to 1960. Hard to build an economy when you aren't actually a country. Especially when compared to a former British Protectorate and a major world shipping hub (at the time).
Yeah, it's a pointless article that means nothing. But it fits well with the Guardian's political leanings. (I.e. if you think the reason this piece ran is really about South Korea, you're kidding yourself) Eh...what would North Korea and their military have anything to do with unhappy citizens and high suicide rates? "Oh snap, those North Koreans are gonna kill us! Better kill myself before they do!"
The same thing that the bad economy and sense of impending economic doom does to the suicide rate: it creates anxiety. Perceiving a guillotine over your head is pretty stressful, I heard. Even more so if you (not saying South Koreans in general do this, but a lot of humans in general do tend to do this) don't agree with your government's method of handling the situation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
