Just throwing these words around, as carelessly as they do, shows they can't be trusted to unpick the processes that would cause them to cut deeply on these subjects .
Some may argue that they are appealing to the ignorant, or some bottom line in the audience understanding of issues . Q&;A format doesn't help; just like it doesn't answer questions (but speculates on motivation )but allows Jones to dumb down any deep issue. Judith Sloan at least got a few words in edgeways (explaining them) .
I say , don't do it too often or you'll only reinforce the view amongst thinking Australians that this tribe of wannabes don't think ; by treating us as dummies - becoming dummies yourself
Everyone must unpick the word or kill the spirit of the idea:
Otherwise the idea that they don't know what they are talking about will dominate: as it does amongst children trying to watch Q&A
Nothing in recent days proves the dumbing down than the silly and simple consensus that a piece of paper and a particular word ( W1, W2 or W3) should identify the scapegoats for the OLD floods (Blame is never allowed to be a poly) - the flood managers of Wivenhoe dam. (I know the media think W1 is a process but that's still the sort of stupid limits we put on ideas these days .
Let the pedants rule and we spend our last dollar fighting each other in the courts
Scientists shouldn't be judged on compliance with guidelines they draft , but on decisions they make. Q&A and pollies are not credible when they speak for scientists but don't LET them speak for themselves.
An all party problem - that's how deep the dumbing down is going
An all party problem - that's how deep the dumbing down is going
No comments:
Post a Comment