What are things that frequently get taught in high school that are actually incorrect/pseudoscience/have conflicting...

>muh multiple intelligences
Yeah, that was a fraudalent theory

Wrong thread?

I remember that as being a more History teacher type thing.

My German teacher used to always defend the NDP in German class. She is probably an enthusiastic AFD voter now.

Have you read Shakespeare; do you know the level of greatness we are talking about here?

Do you think that Gauss would be able to write like him?

I bet anything he would not even come close.

Those are both very right wing parties btw

That doesn't prove anything. The theory of multiple intelligence has no basis an it is just pseudoscience.

Shakespeare was a homosexual

It is gay af to write poems; only girls should do stuff like that

>NDP
You a canada fag?

Fuccin this

My science teacher in highschool was a conspiracy theorist that believed in aliens and thought that 9/11 was a inside job, no joke

On early release days he would play 9/11 docs and try to show us how it was faked or gamble with the students

Yes, I agree with you on that. I also think that if you have greater general intelligence you will likely perform better in a greater variety of topics.

But I don’t understand why some people say that mathematics is the greatest area of knowledge in the world and great music, literature, painting, sculpture, etc., are not.

Then they say: “Yeah, but is much harder for one to make the realizations of Gauss than to write a great play”, and is here that the problem lies. If it is so much easier to write something like Henry IV, A Midsummer Night Dream and Macbeth, why nobody can do it? Why achievements like that are so rare?

And if writing great poetry is much easier, then why don’t Dirac, Gauss and Newton do it? Why Terence Tao couldn’t handle well creative writing even in school-level?

Again, wrong thread. OPs picture is just talking about multiple intelligence theory.

As to why some people say mathematics is the greatest area of knowledge is because many people understands the depth, complexity and beauty of mathematics. That doesn't mean that other areas aren't worth, just that math is better overall. It's called an opinion lad.

>Again, wrong thread. OPs picture is just talking about multiple intelligence theory.

Ok. Well, about multiple intelligence theory I must agree that is something of a feel-good all-inclusive fiction.

About math, I am not that well versed on it, but I have great admiration for the subject. I wish I had the natural gift for this science.

The NDP is Nazi revivalism in Germany essentially

Real numbers.

One gene, one protein.

>It is gay af to write poems; only girls should do stuff like that
not the fag you replied to, but that's just plain retarded your melanin is showing.

Shakespeare was black though

Greatness is subjective, I think Shakespeare is a bad writer.

manmade climate change

This. He could've been a lot more to the point. Instead of going on about comparing his lover to a summer's day, he could've said he wants to put his penis in his ass.

Fucking faggots with their gay af poems.

2/10

psychology

Light gets oversimplified.

See that glass on the table next to you that sunlight is passing through?

Light that was generated by the sun, travelled at c in empty space to reach Earth at which point the light slowed down upon reaching the atmosphere, then changed its velocity again going through the windows, once again going through the glass and then again when it went through the fluid in your eye.

The speed of light is constant in any given medium. From a system standpoint, light is constantly changing speeds.

Bro that's Katt Williams

Shakespeare is nowhere near deserving of the kind of praise you heap on him desu

hamfisted metaphors and awkwardly shoehorning dialogue into arbitrary meter is neither special nor impressive

O
It's a left wing party in Canada
...got that one pretty wrong

Why dont you try to write better poetry?

Also, metaphors are the greatest thing in poetry, and that even in the opinion of people like Aristotle.

Shakespeare could writer better than any great scientist. In his field he is supreme.

And if you think there is no merit on it, if you think it is easy, just try to write a speech about a simple topic like love, or freedom, or nature. If you are bolder, try to put the speech in metric.

>s neither special nor impressive

What do you think it is impressive and special?

Yeah, let me go ahead and put forth the effort to do that just so that you can invariably yell that it's trash without reading it because you're butthurt

Fucking pic related. A 5-yo can debunk it by poutting sugar on the middle of his tongue.

I'm a little disappointed, I admit, but I have honesty and integrity enough to admit that you have talent or that you did something well, even if I am mad with you.

But you do not even have to show me your essay or poem, just try and write for yourself and then compare it with the great Shakespearean passages on the subject in question. His poetry it is another level; I'm always looking for the same pleasure and the same sense of marvel in other poets and writers, but unfortunately only a few times I feel the same touch of exuberance.

Shakespeare is not original in his thinking; many of his philosophical passages are not deep (nothing in his whole body of work is indeed really complicated), but his language is the most sublime that has been ever knitted. If angels and gods exist they would speak like Shakespeare's characters.

I think people exaggerate when they call him the greatest master of the human character and mind (even though he had created several different characters from all social classes, of all ages, of several diferent enviroments), and are wrong to celebrate this "knowledge of the human spirit" as his main realization. His greatest achievement is the poetic brocade of his works.

you're acting as both judge and advocate here

I shouldn't have to explain why that is a bad thing

What does umami mean?

Savory

think of the characteristic taste of meat or mushrooms, that's umami

Just read this book:

amazon.com/Shakespeares-Imagery-What-Tells-Us/dp/0521092582/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1467325152&sr=1-1&keywords=caroline spurgeon

Dont worry about the author's conclusions, but enjoy the selection of several Shakespearean metaphors and similes. I think you will change your mind about him.

I also recomend this book about metaphor:

amazon.com/Other-Secret-Metaphor-Shapes-World/dp/0061710296/ref=sr_1_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1467325423&sr=1-3&keywords=metaphor

It shows the importance of this figure of speech in many areas, and above all in the construction of language

Well, just because this irks me, that whole specific learning type thing in your pic is the bane of teachers everywhere. We are capable of doing all of those styles. Just because one is easier than the other doesn't mean you can't do the others.

>I didn't do well because I'm a kinesthetic learner and we need to do all kinesthetic learning or I won't learn anything

Tough shit, kiddo, you did shit on your test because you didn't study like you should have

Growth Mindset

What's wrong with it? It's used in order when simplifying and used in "reverse order" when trying to solve an equation. If you're so scared of misusing it and accidentally not giving D/M or A/S the same prority, you can always rewrite division as [math]a \frac{1}{b}[/math] and subtraction as [math]a + (-b)[/math]

That's great advice, user.

I wish they did teach that. Would have less lazy but smart memes.

Shakespeare dies at birth
-the world is the same

Gauss dies at birth
-the world is grossly different

I'm sure that Gauss' discoveries would have eventually been discovered by others, but he did a lot to advance math and science in his lifetime.

Shakespeare was a great writer, but who cares? People would be slightly less entertained by other people's plays. It doesn't affect the.course of history.

>english teachers substitute their own opinions for literary fact
>basically all of history is taught wrong or in a misleading way
>economics
>Freud/meme-level psychology (example: order of birth determines personality)

And the worst of all the misunderstandings of scientific theory from people who just barely got their B.A. in the field. You'll mostly see it in biology class. Physics and chemistry classes don't ever get far enough to cover something difficult enough to be misinterpreted. But in 9th grade I was taking a biology class where they tried to teach us about evolution and natural selection and how the chemistry of the cell works to produce energy.
>this is before taking chemistry or physics.

Check'd

The mitochondria is the powerhouse of the cell.

How did the moon get there?
Cant explain that

This is wrong because...?

>If it aint STEM, it dont matter

Brainlet.

A planetary body struck a much younger earth. Debris from the collision orbited the planet and eventually clumped together into a satellite

chekm8theists

He's not wrong

The arts are a fun diversion from the crushing realities of daily life but they are not necessary in any sort of way

>the arts ... are not necessary in any way

Tell that to the women who won't fuck you because the only skill you have is being an unapproachable sperglord who solves math problems at the bar.

I'm married, so I don't need to try and impress whores at the bar. And even if I wanted to, talking about Shakespeare is that fastest way to dry up a girls vagina. It's far easier to spend a few hours a week in the gym. As a bonus guys will also take me seriously and both think of m a weird little faggot obsessed with poetry.

Lol so much ass pain

Keep pretending you'll get a handjob for playing three cowboy chords on a cheap acoustic

nothing in life is truly necessary.

>Kinesthetic
How the fuck are you supposed to learn anything by moving around?

Is this just a case of educators giving up, and letting the dumb-fucks that enroll untrained kids into schools run the show, or do people actually think letting a bunch of kids jump around counts as studying?

*and not think of me as a weird little faggot
fuggin phone

And what is the value of new technologies? What is the value of knowing the truths about the universe? In the end everything will be dissolved, all our achievements and certainties, and then what was the use of having cars and airplanes?

Technologies facilitate our lives;
Scientific discoveries make us know more aspects of the truth;
Great art gives us pleasure and makes human beings have a small spark of divinity (to generate small worlds)

But at the end of the day it will all disappear, then what's the value of anything?

And if scientific discoveries would be made anyway (even if the first names never have been born) is it not even more serious the loss of a Shakespeare or a Bach, human beings that seem to take us to the limits of our creative ability?

Learning by doing. Hands on learning. It's a thing.

Triple integrals

He is not me, the Shakespeare-user.

I dont like personal offenses.

I remember when I was 13 and thought nihilism was cool

>small spark of divinity
the fuck are you on about m8

>is it not even more serious the loss of a Shakespeare or a Bach, human beings that seem to take us to the limits of our creative ability?
no, because such limits would have been found by some other artist anyway. maybe not in the exact same way, but with such a nebulous concept as "the limits of our creative ability" there is no need for the same artistic achievements

A great play will entertain you for a couple hours. Refrigeration will prevent millions of people from dying of starvation.

The arts aren't unimportant, but they have little effect on human history. STEM has a direct and lasting effect on pretty much everyone. Shakespeare mostly serves to bore 8th graders and turn them off from reading.

Well, ok. But remember that technological advances are much more of a collective effort than works of a single mind.

>nihilism

lol you are the edgy teenager here m8. artistic expression is a part of the human psyche, we aren't designed to be meat robots. it is entirely necessary for societal well being. to claim differently means that none of things that science and technology brings us is necessary either because the purpose of technology is to improve the quality of life of our fellow man.

I never said artistic expression isn't part of the human psyche or whatever point you're pretending I said so you can knock it over.

All I said was that the arts have no vital importance, which is true

you literally said
>they are not necessary in any sort of way
which is untrue. artistic expression is entirely necessary to create a well adjusted society.

100% false. you're either retarded or you wasted your time and money on a fine arts degree if you legitimately think that

>100% false
uh-huh. all those societies that actively suppressed artistic expression had pretty great runs in history, right?

Global warming/man made climate change

Smoking being bad for you

The entire "drugs are bad" narrative adopted by public schooling

yeah literally the only thing wrong with those societies was they didn't have plays or art museums and there were no other reasons whatsoever that they caved in on themselves, sure

He is wrong. He inspired John Wilkes Booth, he inspired Freud, he contributed new words to the english language, he explored social situations and sexuality in his plays that no one had ever publically and successfully done before.

low quality b8

lower quality b8

>b8

Heres your (you), Brainlet

don't be mad that nobody took your b8

just post better b8

I get the impression that you think you are a good writer.

You aren't.

This.
All of my science teachers in elementary through high school had no idea what they were talking about and tried to shill creationism on us. You shouldn't be able to teach science if you only have a degree in teaching.

like you could do any better (protip: you can't)

A degree in teaching requires several science classes

People lose their knowledge when they teach nothing but grade school level subjects for decades. Its not like breaking bad where a dude can teach nothing but high school chem for 15 years and still be a prodigal chemist.

why would they lose their knowledge of what they're supposed to teach when they teach it for decades?

you're not making much sense, user

>be pretentious writer fag
>fail this hard a reading comprehension

Because shakespeare created the entire English language and literary tradition all by himself

They only teach the basics, they wont retain nearly as much of the higher division knowledge if all they do not put this knowledge to practice.

I felt like my English teachers are pretty balanced.
History was extremely centered around my teacher's politics.

If they're teaching the basics why do they need to know more than the basics?

Do you have a point? Because it doesn't seem like you have a point

Drugs are bad is kinda true

Few drugs are actually any worse than alcohol

Ahem

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Democratic_Party_of_Germany_(East_Germany)
>defunct East German political party for ex-Nazis
Yes it no longer exists, but it could be what user was thinking of

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Democratic_Party_of_Germany
Current-day German "far-right ultranationalist" political party, frequently labeled as a neo-Nazi organization.

This is still an assumption, not an explaination.