Technocrats Vs Humanities

At least techies/specialists accordingly be never due to a natural predisposition (assuming it is).

School - a very repressive institution, which suppressed any desire for anything to teach. Be encourage those children who by any chance has shown in the initial stage of good results or motivated parents to teach appropriate. Other children, not just adapted or having less motivated, do not have time for companions, seeing the advantage of classmates go out of the competition and the result is to cultivate a hatred of numbers and formalized records. Meanwhile, the natural language from the language of the same mathematics or logic is in fact no different (in terms of perception) - but people have an a priori antipathy to the relevant activities.

Looking at students of different good Matusow, it is easy to find that mathematics is mostly (not all) people go weak socialservices, then - decided to assert themselves on the field in which they have not reached the degree of despair (in the last succeed, therefore, less adrotate peers).

The existence of such people is frankly bad enough that they fall into the corresponding region is not quite at will, and fiercely fiercely spoil the image of science as such, organize closed professional enclaves, create a hierarchy of elitism.

AxCx
Well, here it is necessary to divide the techies in the Humanities, -- former or not students who received a diploma in a particular specialty and is now working with menegerie(both) from the techies in the Humanities. I was not bullied in school, because I'm in a volume of peysatel for literature in school, put a book, then pop-level physics al. particles and read Xie's okay, I didn't score, although profits in the form of your motivations from anyone not received.

ahsh
The existence of such people is frankly bad enough that they fall into the corresponding region is not quite at will, and fiercely fiercely spoil the image of science as such, organize closed professional enclaves, create a hierarchy of elitism.man,you're really cool if I could formulate the thoughts I'd gotten this far,I hope it's not copy-paste,because this is a closed professional enclaves very sensible idea,I've been here to drink not once,but in a more clumsy form,and is always on me for this here was offended...especially wheeze:))))
Hey matrix,there were coniferous,he also had a penchant for such systematic analysis,but your conclusions is something, and in any subject.

Hameln, I wasn't offended, I was just saying that from the point of view of all science in General, they do not have such strong values as you describe. If you want a confession here and now. And so, publish, if review. Write your cultists scathing article, one reference will not. If were right, then remember... there is van der Waals forces through 100let remembered like). You have a goal that is weird. Profit is not in the process of cognition and recognition(even spit on the truth of your umazaki.)

PS: made a Mistake, van der Waals to his Nobel prize still received in 1910(looked). But there was a story that his dissertations, he wrote in the early., it there raskritikoval. Then someone with an already known and confirm. new data on MKT wool article and found it. Well, you know Dutch, something like...

And so, publish, if review. Write your cultists scathing article, one reference will not. If were right, then... remember-th for the rut rattle? I asked the Professor,he said he nafig is not necessary, Peter,lacking the Polish and Ukrainian publications,it's checking for lice wheeze,you failed that test:)))
R. S. peer review is a mere formality,which you unfortunately did not know,the editorial Board simply cannot verify the results of the research,I think that writing sound ... it's like Fleming with penicillin to prevent published,because someone has neprofessional,brad friend,though incompetent,no offense and outrage,the post erase...

I was not bullied in school, because I'm in a volume of peysatel for literature in school, put a book, then pop-level physics al. particles and read Xie's okay, I didn't score, although profits in the form of your motivations from anyone not received.

Yes, I to you Wheeze, do not have any complaints. Can be happy that you are so lucky in life: do what brings pleasure. But other people (like me) less fortunate. Now we have to edit the mistakes of the past.

About the volume of the literature - I agree, I always put out this subject. :)) The idea originally, it was signed a good, but in practice it turns out the machine for the production of philological dev.

In any case, the average geek/mathematician, certainly better than the average in the Humanities, despite all the disadvantages. In addition, in the communication Lord of the numbers is probably one of the ugliest traits I have encountered.


alarich, thank you.

a formality, but a necessary condition. No, don't check(what, is the essence of peer review?). Can leave

what, is the essence of peer review?-listen rattle...I'll post instead professors reviews for abstracts of dissertations(vidguk so we have),they are usually too lazy to do it,a couple of dozen General propositions,without any meaning,but the potatoes are not fried never! As thesis reviewers is generally one of laughter...it came to this,that protection when reading reviews of the work(mandatory ritual),the same reviewer managed to give exactly the same feedback about several diploma works...and you're right a necessary,but not for articles.

I did somewhere fighting for the purity of the conduct of these rituals. Where? Just write that for publication it is necessary. Truncated

you wrote me in a PM,and here I again reminded:))))
all just
1.sent article
2.you turned on Dopovidi (report) to the conference scientific topics article.
3.made.
4.a few weeks later I received by mail a collection of articles.
5.and of course it is advisable to act on behalf of a closed and safeguarded professional enclave,tobish scientific school...and no reviews,it's usually feast before and after the conference,you can gain.that's not even to get into the process of scientific flight of thought,but nothing in the main part,but the article is still out.

Hameln, I'm still not as cool as you)

you're tougher than rattle,I Sainz nedoros:)))

AxCx

Can. Moreover, it is engineer - able. About specialist in trushna Matane, Matysik - also can, but will have to sweat a lot more.

Engineer or a technical writer - you can, probably if you try. Among engineering specialties is quite easy to understand, not more difficult profession mechanic. Another thing is to carry out research and invent new technical solutions; here the scholar is powerless. About trudnogo Mat is you are completely bent. This is one of those things the understanding of which is only given to the most outstanding personalities.

Matan, you can teach anyone. Do not confuse the unwillingness to learn with the inability to learn. Science is not magic and don't esoteric, selected there does not exist a chain of logical implications to knock his head off can anyone who is smarter than down.

If everyone smarter than down, learn calculus, I'd have a cottage on Mars. But statistics is that everyone is different - someone smarter, someone more stupid, and it's not unwillingness to learn. Even among techies there are those for whom understanding comes easily, and those who can't understand no matter how much he tries.

Hammer to the head logical chain can each, but there will not be if you don't understand how one link of this chain from the other. Most just're trying to do is to remember the conclusion of theorems and formulas to learn, instead of turn the brain to understand.

Hrip

Train, level-diploma and summary can be.

Would agree with that. To pass the exam, do not know the subject. Not even the worst technical universities.

Another thing is to carry out research and invent new technical solutions; here the scholar is powerless. About trudnogo Mat is you are completely bent. This is one of those things the understanding of which is only given to the most outstanding personalities.

Not bent. Everything is exactly as I wrote. Mathematics can understand any, just with a different absorption speed, unless. And then, the last often just depends on training and care, and other characteristics that have no direct relationship to the purely analytical abilities.

But statistics is that everyone is different - someone smarter, someone more stupid, and it's not unwillingness to learn.

There are no statistics, which would correctly reflect the cognitive abilities of individuals in a particular area of activity. How do you imagine the inability to learn math? Withdraw the investigation from the premises of any person in his right mind.

everyone can, but to sense from it will not, if you don't understand how one link of this chain from the other. Most just're trying to do is to remember the conclusion of theorems and formulas to learn, instead of turn the brain to understand.

I had in mind. To understand the sequence of insights anyone can. Then you can refer to the banal reluctance, by the way.

If everyone smarter than down, learn calculus, I'd have a cottage on Mars.

Do not promise. The lack of a precedent does not mean its impossibility.

Withdraw the investigation from the premises of any person in his right mind.
To a certain level. And then.. the individual characteristics of the psyche in the way, apparently.

In principle of course, anything is possible, and the car could accidentally through the wall quantum modelirovanie.

To a certain level. And then.. the individual characteristics of the psyche in the way, apparently.

How do you imagine it? My last associated with bugs in critical thinking due to excessive emotionality, to be honest.

Something like tries, tries, but fails :)

Of course, if a very good teacher, progress can be more decisive.

incidentally, but more about it plz. Like emotional well critical thinking is abhorrent?

Something like tries, tries, but fails :)

I can imagine it in the process of problem solving is that, for example. Although in my experience people usually the problems there arise from the fact that they are trying to batter in the same gate, instead of to try to bring some of the easy Lemma of the other axioms/theorems.

Ie still is similar to feil you can identify and intentionally fix.

incidentally, but more about it plz. Like emotional well critical thinking is abhorrent?

Fag™ the same.

Ie still is similar to feil you can identify and intentionally fix.
That is, good teachers, who sees student and can direct him to where you want.