Reply #11: that does not fit my idea of illiteracy [View All]

[hfojvt]

an illiterate person is unable to read. Seeing these strange shapes on a screen, what we see as words would be incomprehensible to such a person. That's different than being able to distinguish when something is false or true. Having a source that tells you that there is a such a thing as a tree octupus, how are you supposed to prove that the first source is making things up? Given the number of strange creatures on this planet, why couldn't there be a tree octupus? Maybe some branch of octopi evolved to live, not only on land, but also in trees. Maybe it's a tree-living species that resembles an octupus and thus has that name even though it is a completely different species. How are you supposed to find an article or a site that says "there really is no such thing"?

Plus, isn't that the general mode of learning? You read something, or are told something, and you memorize it and repeat it on a test. Typically you are not taught about any controversies except those that have been settled. Once there was controversy about the shape of the earth. Once there was controversy about the place of the earth in the sky. Even when there is controversy a student is not generally expected to take a side or come to their own conclusion. Instead, they are expected to, again, memorize the arguments of other people. Laplace says this. Fourier says this. Kant says this. Marx says this. Keynes says this.

Nobody cares what I say. I am not one of the giants whose opinion matters. My job is to be able to repeat what others think or have thought. Not to try to think anything new myself. Putting your own thoughts on a test is just asking for a red marker to come out.