I don't really want to get into a slanging match with you ewm, but I must say that academic achievement has positively
nothing to do with retaining information or with memory.
Take two examples. The undergraduate organic chemistry book in the UK is massive, and no-one can possibly memorize the information inside it. However, by learning the principles of organic chemistry (particularly reaction mechanisms and curly arrows) you develop the ability to work it out. Second example, a professional physicist typically only remembers a small handful of simple equations, but knows how to expertly
derive the rest. Nobody can rely on memory which is why no professional tries to do so.
Is this yet another example of the constant, ill thought out
nonesense that you spew forth in every single post that you make? Take the following:
But if you make some one or some thing wrong or right "morality" there can not be a logical solution you where in the ballpark.
This statement is barely coherent, even though the spelling is faultless. My best interpretation of this sentence is this:
"If one labels a (right or wrong) action as morality, then logic breaks down. Even here I am not entirely sure if you meant this. If in fact you did, then - what the hell? Thought becomes unstructured ("illogical") if ideas become vague and lose their meaning. However, this is precisely what you are advocating!!! We order our reality and our thoughts by assigning each action some indicator of how right or wrong it is. We call this framework,
by definition, morality. A universe in which stabbing someone in the chest was given the same number as giving someone a bunch of flowers (all because of the so-called superior status of "subjectivity") would be a sorry universe indeed.
Forum 