University Challenge

[Beef Oven!]

But of course another thing "they" do well is things like music education... having had in recent years the opportunity to compare from the inside higher education in music in the UK and in the Netherlands, I can say that there's a refreshing lack in the latter of "vocational" and "student-as-consumer" emphasis.

Whereas the Ukips' policy on higher education appears to be to scrap tuition fees for STEM subjects but keep them for arts and humanities. "Pretty simple really" - indeed. Philistinism at its purest.

Well 'Philistinism' is taking the criticism too far, particularly since my 'simple ' comment related to vocational training ,not fees. The abolition of fees is the right discussion, but it needs to be extended beyond just what 'industry' or 'the economy' needs (whatever that is).

[Richard Barrett]

Well 'Philistinism' is taking the criticism too far

Which not-so-far word would you use to describe a policy of charging people to study arts and humanities but not science, technology, engineering and maths?

[Beef Oven!]

Sorry, BO, but that's unacceptable. I for one am not anecdotally rambling. Some of what I said was indeed anecdotal (as opposed to empirical) but it was based on many years experience of dealing with exactly the group we were discussing. During 30 years I have read many reports and received much formal training (and, incidentally, trained large numbers of staff myself) in exactly this area. Quite apart from working, day in, day out, with such prisoners.

As to "rambling" - I find that simply rude,whoever it was aimed at.

We are rambling. Count yourself out, by all means. Many of us spent long years working in our chosen professions and our anecdotes are, well anecdotes. I never said there's anything wrong with that. I still don't think think we're saying much.

[Beef Oven!]

Which not-so-far word would you use to describe a policy of charging people to study arts and humanities but not science, technology, engineering and maths?

Insufficient.

[Richard Barrett]

Insufficient.

[Richard Barrett]

[jean]

I see the discussion has moved on by several pages, ad this should probably be in the Pedantorium anyway, but may I just add:

Which just demonstrates that a pedantic reliance on the rules of grammar doesn't neccessarily ensure clarity.

There's nothing pedantic about 'relying on grammar' - we all do, all the time. Grammar (descriptive not prescriptive, of course) consists of the conventions that make language work for its users.

You found my sentence unclear, but when I asked you to show me how it would work if analysed to expose its second, unintended meaning, neither you nor anyone else did that.

Here is the sentence again:

The extract is often cited as proof of the uselessness of Latin, but it isn't, really.

The nearest we got to such an analysis was

This might be a better example, and the reason why Wolf Hall is written the way it is.

Cromwell kept looking at the king, but he didn't reply.

Who is he?

But this is not analogous with what I wrote; it really is ambiguous, since both Cromwell kept looking at the king, but Cromwell didn't reply and Cromwell kept looking at the king, but the king didn't reply are equally grammatical sentences.

If you do that with my sentence, you get The extract is often cited as proof of the uselessness of Latin, but Latin isn't uselessness, really. Which is English nonsense, without any reference at all to Latin grammar.

And I don't think there's anything wrong with the way I've used cite.

Don't you cite something a) in support of an argument or b) as an example of something, rather than as proof?

You do of course, but you can also cite something as proof - the OED has an example with as refutation, which is very similar.


.

[Richard Barrett]

You are sick and need urgent help

He's only trying to wind you up. I hope.

[ahinton]

Mine too. Lifers are ordinary people who have committed extraordinary crimes and people who are not lifers are ordinary people who haven't. Not saying much, are we? Good job it's just anecdotal rambling.

In his post #251, Pabmusic provided not only information based upon the benefit of his own long term direct experience but also two links on the subject; I don't know if you read either of those but, if you did, would you lump either or both of them in with what you perceive to be merely "anecdotal rambling" and, if so, on what specific grounds?

[Beef Oven!]

He's only trying to wind you up. I hope.

Nope. I miss her.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

This is my fault. I mentioned the National Curriculum and we started talking about politics.

Please can we return to the non-political aspects of University Challenge.

[ahinton]

Caning. Possibly. It certainly helped keep us lot in check.

I don't know who "us lot" were (nor do I need to), but I would ask, as you have done several times of late, for evidence that it did no one any harm. I cannot imagine it doing the person adminstering the cane any good (and why a cane in particular in any case?), let alone anyone on the receiving end; its use strikes me as a tacit and implicit admission of defeat on the part of its wielder.

[ahinton]

I was caned a few times

I'm very sorry to hear it.

didn't think it was abuse

I'm equally sorry to hear that, but then, as you rightly point out,

It was a different time

- one in which abuse of minors, be it physical, sexual, emotional or whatever else, was way less in general public focus than it has mercifully become more recently.

Lots of things that were alright then, but perhaps not now

You mean lots of things were perceived, or argued, to be "alright then" and, whilst times have indeed changed, as you imply, performing such acts on minors was what it was then and that has not changed today - only attitudes towards it have changed.

In Scotland when I was a child certain teachers used to have recourse to the strap, not the cane; it was used on an outstretched hand. I was only ever called up to be strapped once and, when it hit my palm, I grabbed it and instinctively did the same to the teacher; I did it with no more or less aggression than had been used on me. I was asked what kind of example such behaviour set to others in the class; I replied that it would be the same as that which she had herself set by using said strap. I was never strapped again. Did it do either of us, or anyone else in the class, any good? No.

That kind of behaviour, especially when carried out upon minors by those in positions of authority who ought instead to command respect, is unacceptable now and was unacceptable then. Canes are useful in the garden but not in the classroom. Straps presumably also have their uses, though again not in the classroom.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

There is a thread for discussing football: The Round Ball Game.

This one is for discussing University Challenge.

[Beef Oven!]

Yeah right (i'll have the Crass albums )

Btw, I sold all my Crass LPs