Warrior General Games

Are you actually calling me a genius?

Originally posted by Catullus16
no cuiving out. we have a strict 'no cuiving out' policy.

My bar is higher than yours?

Originally posted by Catullus16

let me explain--
(1) if the courses at your college were "boring and lacked any challenge", then maybe you went to a crappy school
(2) or if you went to the best school, then maybe "someday they'll invent a university up to your standards"


didn't he say 'introductory courses'?
I've seen very few intro courses that had any real challenge. to give up on a subject because the 100 level courses didn't get your motor running is kind of ridiculous. I never really discovered a passion for my subject til I got to 300 level and beyond

Originally posted by Venkman
didn't he say 'introductory courses'?
I've seen very few intro courses that had any real challenge. to give up on a subject because the 100 level courses didn't get your motor running is kind of ridiculous. I never really discovered a passion for my subject til I got to 300 level and beyond

There were two qualifiers, the first being that it was boring, and the second that it didn't provide a challenge.
Law and philosophy are two examples of fields that didn't pertain to my major yet were much more interesting as electives.
I don't consider it giving up, as that would imply that the goal is to study all fields equally. Obviously you have to make a decision.

Originally posted by Venkman
didn't he say 'introductory courses'?
I've seen very few intro courses that had any real challenge. to give up on a subject because the 100 level courses didn't get your motor running is kind of ridiculous. I never really discovered a passion for my subject til I got to 300 level and beyond

to be clear, he said didn't study political science because "it's boring" even though he has "independent interest" in it. not sure how to square that one.

also not sure how to square his assessment that the introductory courses "lacked any challenge" if he didn't actually take them, but maybe he's prescient with syllabi or had geniuses for friends.

to your point, everyone has taken easy classes (otherwise there wouldn't be any hard ones) and lower-level courses tend to be easier for obvious reasons. passion not required, but if you have an independent interest then presumably you don't have to rediscover it and aren't expecting a course to provide it. also, it depends on what you mean by an 'intro' course. in the sciences, especially at better schools, intro courses are at the same pace as the rest of their series. in the arts, intro courses are typically survey courses focusing on breadth instead of depth. for someone new to that field, they don't have a frame of reference for all the new information so it might seem like mindless memorization (aka not a "challenge") but for someone armed with an independent interest and possibly intending to make the field their career, it's often the opposite experience. i think your conflation of passion with challenge is both the crux of the issue and misses it completely.

but yes, fully agreed that it's ridiculous for someone to dismiss an entire field they're interested in just because they weren't able to test out of a course they didn't like.

Originally posted by Djinnt
There were two qualifiers, the first being that it was boring, and the second that it didn't provide a challenge.
Law and philosophy are two examples of fields that didn't pertain to my major yet were much more interesting as electives.
I don't consider it giving up, as that would imply that the goal is to study all fields equally. Obviously you have to make a decision.

to be clear, you said political science itself was boring. the only thing you said about the introductory courses was that they weren't a challenge (even though you apparently never actually took them).

law was an undergraduate elective? i'm guessing it was 'law and society' or some other humanities course offered by a department not called 'law'

and whatever. your bragnotbrag notwithstanding, my point is that if you're going to dabble with these concepts and say things like "progressivism is ridiculous" (or whatever it was you said), then it would be nice if you actually knew what progressivism was. here's the problem -- you don't sound like sooner. you sound like you know what you're talking about. with someone like sooner, you realize instantly he's just tossing around terms with little care and even less knowledge. but with you, it's obvious that you've done at least some reading on the topic. but often, it seems only enough to sound good and then you're on to the next term to drop.

so that is why i mentioned your lack of formal education in political science and why i encourage you to pursue it, even if it means taking an easy course or two to get there. remember, you can always challenge yourself.

Originally posted by Djinnt
Are you actually calling me a genius?

a rarified one, yes

i see you've settled on your interpretation

Originally posted by Djinnt
My bar is higher than yours?

for cuiving out? it's a p low bar, not sure why you're proud to limbo it.

if you can, try not to spam yourself out of frustration. it's unseemly. let's make P&R classy again!

I took two political science courses - one for general political science and the other for American government.
The American government one in particular was boring as all hell, and yes, incredibly easy. Like, buying the book is just a waste of money easy. Call it a brag all you want, I just realized I actually don't care.

Going back to school for the purpose of you thinking I know what I'm talking about sounds like a horrible proposition cost/benefit wise (not just in dollars.)
My interest is in the philosophy side of politics, not so much in the machinations, and I can independently study that to my heart's content.

Originally posted by Catullus16
a rarified one, yes

i see you've settled on your interpretation

Good enough.

Originally posted by Djinnt
I took two political science courses - one for general political science and the other for American government.
The American government one in particular was boring as all hell, and yes, incredibly easy. Like, buying the book is just a waste of money easy.
oh, i thought you said you never studied. so you took a survey course and what, a comparative government course? there's value there, even if your average student could get most of the way there with a weekend of wikipedia. (although it's worth saying, most students have a hilariously grand opinion of their skills at autodidactism).

it's a pity you didn't push on to political theory and political philosophy, since that's where it seems your interests lie.


Originally posted by Djinnt
Call it a brag all you want, I just realized I actually don't care.
it certainly wasn't not a brag, which is precisely why you felt the need for the apophasis disclaimer.


Originally posted by Djinnt
Going back to school for the purpose of you thinking I know what I'm talking about sounds like a horrible proposition cost/benefit wise (not just in dollars.)
that was never my suggestion, although i did offer to point you to materials that were both formal and free. so there goes your cost/benefit argument. also, i don't care if you ever know what you're talking about, it's just as fun this way. i'm just saying that if you get sick of me nitpicking your term-dropping, there's an easy fix and it starts with less wikipedia.


Originally posted by Djinnt
My interest is in the philosophy side of politics, not so much in the machinations, and I can independently study that to my heart's content.
kind of. this isn't the 1400s where independent study is a truly viable alternative and often a superior one. there is simply too much in print nowadays for any student to just follow their nose and think they haven't read themselves into a corner. you can even try to adopt a rigorous methodology, but how did you fashion it? there's a reason why most graduate programs for the arts begin with methodology and research courses -- and there's a reason why they happen at the graduate level instead of during undergrad.

to put a point on it, i doubt anyone does as much self-learning as gnosis. that dude has read a ton. very well-versed. a wealth of information and sources. that's the path you're on. risky at best.

Originally posted by Djinnt
Good enough.

and revealing, too!

Originally posted by Catullus16
that was never my suggestion, although i did offer to point you to materials that were both formal and free. so there goes your cost/benefit argument. also, i don't care if you ever know what you're talking about, it's just as fun this way. i'm just saying that if you get sick of me nitpicking your term-dropping, there's an easy fix and it starts with less wikipedia.

I don't see you doing it that often, but sure. I'll check out your materials.

Originally posted by Catullus16

kind of. this isn't the 1400s where independent study is a truly viable alternative and often a superior one. there is simply too much in print nowadays for any student to just follow their nose and think they haven't read themselves into a corner. you can even try to adopt a rigorous methodology, but how did you fashion it? there's a reason why most graduate programs for the arts begin with methodology and research courses -- and there's a reason why they happen at the graduate level instead of during undergrad.

to put a point on it, i doubt anyone does as much self-learning as gnosis. that dude has read a ton. very well-versed. a wealth of information and sources. that's the path you're on. risky at best.


I think I'm doing a little better than gnosis.

Originally posted by Djinnt
I don't see you doing it that often, but sure.
foreshadowing. you're my P&R spirit animal for 2017

Originally posted by Djinnt
I'll check out your materials.
well without even trying, how about we start the bidding with https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/political-science/

Originally posted by Djinnt
I think I'm doing a little better than gnosis.
and he thinks he's doing better than you.

Originally posted by Catullus16
well without even trying

don't brag, guy