<h1>posted, currently editing:</h1>
<p>While you have finally brought up your interesting background, blairt, I haven't seen you even address any of my rebuttals. I have raised questions to your proposals as well, and I have backed them up with searches. Moreover, can you point out where I have actually made a personal attack? I have only criticized your arguments - perhaps the criticisms were rather caustic ones - but they were nonetheless all attacks on the arguments, not upon any characters of yours that I presumed. Your concerns were cliched ones. You assume that NO teenager can understand the material of a subject at an adequate level without formalized instruction. An assumption that is inherently fallacious, given that people can learn the material of a subject without formalized instruction. </p>
<p>Does that mean that he cannot comment on the material? That he cannot give out his own audacious interpretations of the material? No. He should be free to blog about whatever he wants. It is necessary to make mistakes in order to improve one's understanding of the subject.</p>
<p>Did I say that his blog should be regarded with any authority? No, I did not. All I said is that his blog can express his knowledge and interest. It may have its mistakes, but it's an excellent idea with few costs (other than the inherent cost of time). A blog is a convenient place for one to keep one's thoughts on a subject.</p>
<p>You make so many assumptions, assumptions that are inherently fallacious. Can you sincerely say that Intel Semifinalists are not capable of understanding their own research? Have you personally met any?</p>
<p>Your error - lies in your underestimation of the abilities of teenagers.</p>
<p>Us teenagers are cognizant of our weaknesses. I may appear as if I have some authority on what I argue on - but that is just because my posts are long. I never have specifically said that I should be regarded as possessing more authority than anyone else. This is the Internet, after all, where all people, regardless of rank or status, can have their posts evaluated solely on the basis of their content. I have never made any references to what my background is, with the exception of a few isolated threads that I didn't argue in. </p>
<p>Have I made some assumptions and generalizations? Yes, I have. But you are guilty of the same sin as well. </p>
<p>And so is science. Assumptions and generalizations are hypotheses. They must be tested. But before they are tested, they must be assumed from a previous model.</p>
<p>Moreover, I like to give out my own interpretations of findings. Some interpretations are audacious ones that may be proven wrong. I have never said that my interpretations are better than any one else's interpretations, for that matter. I have never said that my interpretations were right, or that they should be regarded with any authority. Perhaps it would be better just to write a disclaimer before such interpretations, but people should be rightfully skeptical of any interpretation posted online.</p>
<p>
[quote]
When I raise issues such as social reclusiveness and lack of experience
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I did counter the first issue adequately enough. Blogs are not mutually exclusive with having a social life. Of course many activities are inherently individual ones - that does not mean that one would be a social recluse in order to peruse them.</p>
<p>With respect to lack of experience, I did not say that the person should have any authority on the subject. I was merely saying that the person can actually demonstrate his interest and understanding of the material by reading the material from different fields. The fact is - you don't learn the nuances of a field by taking courses. You learn them by doing research.</p>
<p>And the fallacy that "you can only learn from a course" has been countered by numerous people who self-study APs AND numerous Intel Semifinalists/Rickoids who DO understand their research. Apparently, such research is trustable enough to get published. </p>
<p>
[quote]
The two examples you posted aren't pertinent to your case. The first was a college student doing research -- not a high school student who reads journals in his spare time. The second was a high school student doing math problems (albeit challenging ones) -- not unlike the homework for a challenging math course at a top prep school.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>While I made a generalization, it was not an overly audacious one. First of all - high school students can do research - as exemplified in the numerous high school students who do Siemens/Intel level projects. Secondly, they can understand the research that they discuss. Do you sincerely think that high school students are incapable of blogging when they waste so much time in public schools?</p>
<p>Such blogs are not extremely different from ones that high school students can make. </p>
<p>The closest thing that I said to a personal attack was "lack of imagination". Which certainly does apply in your case - as you did not seem to envision a high school student who acquired a sophisticated understanding of research-level material. </p>
<p>*One of the most common cognitive biases that have come out of the public educational system is that you need formalized instruction to learn a subject. Even though ALL information can be learned through online discussion. There is no information that cannot be transmitted online through the Internet - this is why journals are widely distributed throughout the Internet. *</p>
<p>Sincerely, most of what one learns comes from one's own self-initiative.</p>