I’ll take “poorly educated” over “educated and unwilling to learn or grow.”
this post was submitted on 25 Jun 2023
13 points (100.0% liked)
Asklemmy
49358 readers
718 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
That's the same thing to me. Parents and teachers failed to educate them in how to be curious.
Cigarettes
Nah, addiction plagues the well and the poorly educated. I was acquainted with a couple of Nobel prize winners who smoked like chimneys.
Addiction is everywhere, but cigarettes are unique. It’s no secret that cigarette companies deliberately get people addicted, and then let them die, simply because it’s profitable.
You KNOW you’re being used. Voluntarily paying to make it happen is stupid.
I’m sympathetic towards older folks who got hooked when the companies were still lying to the public, but anyone who started smoking in the last few decades is a moron.
When someone says "I seen".
No, you saw. Or you have seen.
It's like nails on a chalkboard to me.
Ya that's not a sign uneducated imo. Infact, formal education has very little to do with how "educated" one is ime.
I didn't go to college. And most of my "peers" didn't either. But I wouldn't consider myself uneducated in the least.
Many of my peers use this term, and while "uneducated", many are far from dumb.
I'd consider it more of a dialect atp.
But I guess your right in that there is a higher chance they are kind of uneducated, but i think how you portray it comes off as pearl clutching, and sort of mean.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Using "I" as the object instead of the subject, like saying "The waiter brought drinks to my friend and I."
Not listening to other people's opinions and ideas
shut up
Almost downvoted you as an instinct
rofl
Insisting things like tax returns or household maintenance should be taught in school.
The goal of Education is not to train you to fit into the system you happen to grow up in, but should provide the foundation (litaracy, STEM, art …) and awaken the curiosity in yourself to become lifelong learner. That will develop society, and not a bunch of drones doing their tax returns and changing tires every season.
load more comments
(2 replies)
I see this in a lot of places I do work:
Toolboxes covered in union stickers, AND Trump stickers...
Coming to absolutes and never admitting your faults
They think opinions are facts.
Believing that capitalism lifts people out of poverty.
oh but it does
why would you expose yourself like that
Thinking about different languages in the terms of "useful" or "useless" according to the number of speakers they have.
Edit: What I mean specifically is not for someone to want or not to personally learn a language, but if the existance in itself of a language is more or less valuable according to how many people speak it (per example and as I explained below, believing that Occitan's existance is useless because there's already French to talk to Occitan people with, who already understand it). Yes, this happens.
Why does this show lack of education over lack of interest in linguistics? I’ve studied linguistics, and I don’t categorize languages that way, but I could see how a pragmatist wouldn’t see value in learning Esperanto or Papiamento.
I think you misunderstand what I am referring to. I am not talking about a wish to learn a language, but to consider languages as useful or useless in regards to their entire existence.
This is unfortunately not very uncommon in people of European countries who look down upon regional languages, stating that their existence or that learning them is useless (not for them only, but for anyone) just because you can already do the task of communicating with others through the national language (per example, considering the existance of the Occitan language useless because the people of everywhere where it is spoken can already understand French). This is done by people who not understand (or even worse, who don't care about) the value that exists in language from a cultural perspective.
So interesting. Thank you for the perspective.
Thank you.
I know this all sounds like Mandarin to most of the userbase of this place (which I suppose to be mainly from the US and alien to the politics of places where big regional languages exist in the same space than even larger national languages), but it's not only the attitude of some regular people but also of some major political forces. Just a few months ago, a far-right party in Spain vowed to shut down the Academy of Valencian Language if they ever reached power (something I suppose a linguist like you would never approve), under the excuse of its existence being "a threat to national unity".
Nationalism: not even once.