Tuesday, February 13, 2018
Truth using the internet
Finding facts on controversial subjects over the internet is hard work, especially since most younger people rely on social media, YouTube, and comedy shows to get their facts. The problem with this is that all of these platforms are pumped with emotion and are genuinely designed to feed you content you already like. This makes getting properly informed about things like politics, feminism and religion almost impossible. Websites like wolframalpha are an ideal counter to this, because they just present emotionless facts - however, the website isn't advanced enough to handle complicated queries. In the meantime we'll just have to put up with people getting less informed and more opinionated about already controversial problems.
Sunday, February 4, 2018
Equality 1/2
Wahoo! Exams are finished! Now I have the time to focus on a few things of interest; teaching myself how to code an app and making more blog posts. Anything but the gym..
When I was in highschool I noticed that my Physics syllabus was quite bizarre. Firstly, there were many "discuss", "argue" and "elaborate" questions that required students to write small essays about the history of physics (eg Westinghouse vs Edison). Secondly, we studied a topic called "Quanta to Quarks" which is an infamously difficult (both conceptually and mathematically) subject to learn. There was some mathematics of course, but because such an ambitious subject needed to be dumbed down to suit highschoolers, the formulas used (like de Broglie wavelength) were arbitrary and simple to apply. I remember being tremendously uninterested in Physics (despite being extremely interested in Mathematics) because I had the impression Physics was a type of humanitarian subject which was more about writing essays & sounding persuasive than about problem solving. It was this impression which funneled me towards studying Engineering instead of Physics at University - I decision I still regret to this day. It's only after my first year or University that I realized how different Physics really was from what I was taught. Physics has nothing to do with memorization of formulas and writing essays - instead it's a brilliant application of mathematics and logic which compliments analytical thinking skills. Why had the syllabus gone so wrong in accurately capturing what Physics really was? I later found out. And the answer is... (drum roll) ... women! Let me explain.
Historically, women have been intellectually oppressed. And I don't just mean direct oppression in the form of not being allowed to matriculate, I mean in the much more subtle form of living in an anti intellectual culture. It's an uncontroversial fact that all people consciously or unconsciously aim to live up to stereotypes. And it's also an uncontroversial fact that women in every culture have been culturally pressured to peruse "people oriented" professions / lifestyles like childcare and cooking. How is this related to physics? Glad you asked! In the last 20 years especially there's been a pretty large push-back against gender inequality. I have it on good authority (seriously, I do. I talked to teachers n' shit) that the Physics syllabus was changed from a once math dominated subject to a wordy subject primarily for the sake of interesting women into Physics and Engineering classes at Uni. To compliment this movement, there have also been huge rise in female only scholarships and 'women in engineering' support groups. Recently I found myself tutoring Physics in New Zealand, I was amazed to find out that this widely spread British syllabus has not changed.
But is this move towards 50/50 representation in Engineering a good one? I've been tossing and turning on this subject for a while now. On one hand, I really like the idea of empowering women to persue traditionally male dominated fields of work. On the other hand it seems discriminatory against men. So what's the answer? Stay tuned for my answer on my next blog post!
When I was in highschool I noticed that my Physics syllabus was quite bizarre. Firstly, there were many "discuss", "argue" and "elaborate" questions that required students to write small essays about the history of physics (eg Westinghouse vs Edison). Secondly, we studied a topic called "Quanta to Quarks" which is an infamously difficult (both conceptually and mathematically) subject to learn. There was some mathematics of course, but because such an ambitious subject needed to be dumbed down to suit highschoolers, the formulas used (like de Broglie wavelength) were arbitrary and simple to apply. I remember being tremendously uninterested in Physics (despite being extremely interested in Mathematics) because I had the impression Physics was a type of humanitarian subject which was more about writing essays & sounding persuasive than about problem solving. It was this impression which funneled me towards studying Engineering instead of Physics at University - I decision I still regret to this day. It's only after my first year or University that I realized how different Physics really was from what I was taught. Physics has nothing to do with memorization of formulas and writing essays - instead it's a brilliant application of mathematics and logic which compliments analytical thinking skills. Why had the syllabus gone so wrong in accurately capturing what Physics really was? I later found out. And the answer is... (drum roll) ... women! Let me explain.
Historically, women have been intellectually oppressed. And I don't just mean direct oppression in the form of not being allowed to matriculate, I mean in the much more subtle form of living in an anti intellectual culture. It's an uncontroversial fact that all people consciously or unconsciously aim to live up to stereotypes. And it's also an uncontroversial fact that women in every culture have been culturally pressured to peruse "people oriented" professions / lifestyles like childcare and cooking. How is this related to physics? Glad you asked! In the last 20 years especially there's been a pretty large push-back against gender inequality. I have it on good authority (seriously, I do. I talked to teachers n' shit) that the Physics syllabus was changed from a once math dominated subject to a wordy subject primarily for the sake of interesting women into Physics and Engineering classes at Uni. To compliment this movement, there have also been huge rise in female only scholarships and 'women in engineering' support groups. Recently I found myself tutoring Physics in New Zealand, I was amazed to find out that this widely spread British syllabus has not changed.
But is this move towards 50/50 representation in Engineering a good one? I've been tossing and turning on this subject for a while now. On one hand, I really like the idea of empowering women to persue traditionally male dominated fields of work. On the other hand it seems discriminatory against men. So what's the answer? Stay tuned for my answer on my next blog post!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)