<p>Oppurtunity, diversity, prestige? There are a lot of things a big uni can offer which a CC could never. Its just not neccesarily education.</p>
<p>Ok, maybe you have more competition in highschool, maybe you don't, but I don't suppose organic chemistry is easier than AP chem, now does it?</p>
<p>"stanford wouldnt let in 20 students from the same hs or 20 from the same cc."</p>
<p>you have a graduating class of 500 or so in a large sized public school, 100 or so in private school, but total enrollment of 20000+ in a typical CC. which competition is more cutting throat? Also note transfer into stanford is more diffcult than getting in as a freshman.</p>
<p>"All ccs students are not trying to get the 4.0 and I dont see why the few that need it to transfer cant all be in the top of their class."</p>
<p>I thought I've made it clear in my post, that some of the upper classes are exclusive to those who want to transfer (and thus need a good GPA), because those classes are NOT useful to those who are not in pursue of transfer, and they don't take them.</p>
<p>Personally I am transfering because CC does not offer BS, MA, and PHD degrees, which I intend to pursue all the way.</p>
<p>arent those 3 things the result of a better education</p>
<p>is diversity a result of education also?</p>
<p>
[quote]
nspeds: i can presuppose that the compton cc professor used to teach at harvard, etc.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>That begs the question; provide evidence and I will buy your argument.</p>
<p>
[quote]
you proved my point when you said "in your eyes". your eyes are not mine nor anyone elses.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I evoked that phrase in order to signify that I, as a person who is intimately acquainted with Kantian metaphysics, am qualified to render evaluations of a professor's lecture on Kantian idealism. Thus, by my standard, which is supported by numerous professors in academia - afterall, I have read "The Critique of Pure Reason," as well as other texts by Kant, and have written several research papers on such texts - some professors are good and others are bad in interpreting Kant. There is no relativism here, there are good and bad interpretations. By your reasoning, one could argue that Hamlet is Shakespearian Star Wars and that person would be correct.</p>
<p>
[quote]
your thoughts are not mine as mine are not some other person's thoughts. as long as that is the case, there will be different interpretations. no matter how wrong you think they may be.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You violate the law of contradiction, research your logic; also, I reduced your claim to absurdity using the reductio ad absurdum rule.</p>
<p>
[quote]
if that is not a sweeping generalization of cc students, what is?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>For starters:
1)
[quote]
Well most of the people
[/quote]
That disqualifies it outright.
2) There is evidence available for this claim. It is a widely accepted belief that higher-ranked schools are less remedial in focus and more research and intellectually oriented. Brian Leiter of UT - Law School actually wrote a paper on this, which can be found on his website.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Just a question nspeds, have you ever been to Compton community college and listen to its professor's lecture about Kant?</p>
<p>You can't possibly suppose a professor is bad unless you listened to him first hand.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I am not arguing that they are bad. I am arguing that they are not as good as the individuals I cited.</p>
<p>that is why colleges have it, you learn different things from peers from different backgrounds. It fosters the discourse nessary for education</p>
<p>"I am not arguing that they are bad. I am arguing that they are not as good as the individuals I cited."</p>
<p>You cannot make the claim that they are not as good unless you have listened to their lecture. You seemed to suggest that some of them even teach the wrong stuff. Basically, you are accusing a teacher misleading his/her students without evidence.</p>
<p>_42, to MY understanding, diversity is when you take students from different background, such as Compton Community College, rather than take everyone from some private ivy feeder school.</p>
<p>Now how are we gonna define education. Further simplification just makes it harder to decide/</p>
<p>
[quote]
You cannot make the claim that they are not as good unless you have listened to their lecture. You seemed to suggest that some of them even teach the wrong stuff. Basically, you are accusing a teacher misleading his/her students without evidence.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yes I can. Unless you can provide evidence otherwise, those professors from Harvard/Rice are/were better than any professor you could ever cite from Compton Community College. The burden of proof is on you, as I have the prominence and near-universal acceptance of their prominence working in my favor.</p>
<p>More like you got a preconcieved notion and are facilitating justifications to prove them so.</p>
<p>"Yes I can. Unless you can provide evidence otherwise, those professors from Harvard/Rice are/were better than any professor you could ever cite from Compton Community College. The burden of proof is on you, as I have the prominence and near-universal acceptance of their prominence working in my favor."</p>
<p>Ok, sure, so it's an universally known fact that professors in Compton Community College cannot intepret Kant correctly? Or is it just seems like it?</p>
<p>Again, the burden of proof is on you. I do not accept your argument, don't ask me to try to find support for it.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Ok, sure, so it's an universally known fact that professors in Compton Community College cannot intepret Kant correctly? Or is it just seems like it?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You need to learn how to read:</p>
<p>
[quote]
The burden of proof is on you, as I have the prominence and near-universal acceptance of their prominence working in my favor.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The only reason it is not universal is because of imbeciles like you maintaining the claim that such professors can, indeed, interpret and analyze Kant better.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I do not accept your argument, don't ask me to try to find support for it.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Why should I care about an individual who cannot even propound a coherent argument?</p>
<p>
[quote]
More like you got a preconcieved notion and are facilitating justifications to prove them so.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>What is wrong in doing so? Preconceived notions are not necessarily wrong unless they are unjustified. If I can provide justification for my arguments/notions, then they are perfectly fine, preconceived or otherwise.</p>
<p>By the way, it is "I" before "E" except after "C"; so preconceived is spelled as such.</p>
<p>I never said they HAD to be wrong.</p>
<p>Justifications on preconcieved notions need not be correct, because a justification is not neccessarily a proof nor a truth, just like Kant and his faculty for morality.</p>
<p>And, nitpicking at spelling errors doesn't seem to serve a purpose unless its for me to not make an error again, for which I thank you.</p>
<p>So, when I don't understand Kant, you begin to personally attack me. Somehow when I don't understand some elusive concept, it turns me into an imbecile.</p>
<p>maybe I need to actually start reading whatever you've said, controling my urge to throw up or to beat up the monitor for your atr0ci0us arguments, and actually try to counter whatever non-sense you just posted.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Justifications on preconcieved notions need not be correct, because a justification is not neccessarily a proof nor a truth
[/quote]
</p>
<p>What are you talking about? Justifications are legitimate propositions that purport to validate the truthness of a given statement.</p>
<p>
[quote]
just like Kant and his faculty for morality.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Again, what are you talking about? There is no faculty for morality in Kantianism.</p>
<p>
[quote]
So, when I don't understand Kant, you begin to personally attack me. Somehow when I don't understand some elusive concept, it turns me into an imbecile.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Read my statement again. If you cannot correctly follow this discussion, then do not participate.</p>
<p>
[quote]
maybe I need to actually start reading whatever you've said, controling my urge to throw up or to beat up the monitor for your atr0ci0us arguments, and actually try to counter whatever non-sense you just posted.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Are you feeling cathartic? How cute.</p>
<p>be serious. you know i never claimed the compton professor was real. there is no need to provide proof for the hypothetical professor.</p>
<p>you are not the only person in existance who has studied kant. or are you trying to say that everyone who has studied kant has views identical to yours? it's not a question of good or bad, right or wrong. my general claim is that there is different interpretations. regardless of how i explained it. is that such an absurd statement?</p>
<p>the evidence you claim is about higher-ranked schools, not about cc's. hnbui's was generalizing about cc's. without reading the evidence, i'm gonna assume it's corrrect. because higher ranked schools are less remedial and more intellectually oriented; lesser ranked schools must be the opposite?</p>
<p>Are you serious nspeds? Just search for the definition of the word, "justification", its used not as a fact but as an explanation.</p>
<p>Also, I'm a student of Nietzsche and not Kant. Thus, so far as my knowledge of Nietzsche goes and his criticism of Kant goes, </p>
<p>"People even got really excited about this new faculty, and the rejoicing reached its height when Kant discovered yet another additional facultya moral facultyin human beings, for then the Germans were still moral and not yet at all "political realists.""</p>
<p>
[quote]
be serious. you know i never claimed the compton professor was real. there is no need to provide proof for the hypothetical professor.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Then your argument fails on correspondance.</p>
<p>
[quote]
you are not the only person in existance who has studied kant. or are you trying to say that everyone who has studied kant has views identical to yours? it's not a question of good or bad, right or wrong. my general claim is that there is different interpretations. regardless of how i explained it. is that such an absurd statement?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>We can both agree that there are different interpretations, but you claim that all such interpretations are good. My argument is that, via reductio ad absurdum, one could argue that Hamlet is the Shakespearian Star Wars, by his interpretation, and be correct. In other words, we can admit there are interpretations that are blatantly incorrect. I have heard professors of four-year colleges deliver lectures containing such interpretations.</p>
<p>
[quote]
lesser ranked schools must be the opposite?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Fallacy of the false dilemma;the level of intellectualism/research is proportional to rank.</p>