|
Post by elisa on Jul 14, 2012 13:37:01 GMT -5
I wonder how I could make the structure being imposed on my thesis this easy to internalize.
|
|
|
Post by varmintreaper on Jul 14, 2012 22:13:12 GMT -5
show me the structure
|
|
|
Post by Walkabout on Jul 15, 2012 0:32:02 GMT -5
I'm really glad you two had this conversation. I was lurking and after the third explanation I got it. I think a key is finding the concept/ principle/ philosophy/ history/ motivation that bridges all four of those gaps. The what, why, who, and how.
I may be coming at this from the wrong angle, but if any three of those four values are systematically related to the principle that you are acting for you've technically achieved a memetic structure.
An example of this being used negatively is racism. The what/ why/ and who are systemic to the principle. So the who becomes arbitrary, it's just matter of pointing the "gun" so to speak a whomever fits the "bill" which can be tailored by the person aiming.
The model can be applied in another directions as well, racism was just the first that came to mind.
Unless I've missed the point entirely, at which point, back to lurking.
|
|
|
Post by varmintreaper on Jul 15, 2012 9:02:46 GMT -5
I'm really glad you two had this conversation. I was lurking and after the third explanation I got it. I think a key is finding the concept/ principle/ philosophy/ history/ motivation that bridges all four of those gaps. The what, why, who, and how. I may be coming at this from the wrong angle, but if any three of those four values are systematically related to the principle that you are acting for you've technically achieved a memetic structure. You r winrar of 9001 internets. Yes. In the example below, the person aiming is directed by the person who calls the shots. The who can be the actor or the victim depending on which one informs the context best. I'm glad you we got through this too because it allowed me to write this up: antishock.tumblr.com/post/27251055096/antishock-manual-mechanics-structure-of-models-3Fitting in and racism #OpRadar - the what - Bob NEEDS to GAIN STAUS in a neighborhood school or gets ostracized #OpShield - the who - BOB chooses MOST VULNERABLE students who don't make a lot of noise #OpPulse - the why - Bob must satisfy the POPULAR students #OpShadow - the how - Bob always abuses the students WHENEVER the POPULAR students can SEE I was thinking about it more and found some more descriptive terms: #OpRadar - the what is a push motivator - general idea #OpShield - the who carries the load - maintains the flow #OpPulse - the why is a pull motivator - specific requirements to be met #OpShadow - the how applies the load - filters the flow through the requirements Another one: Bitcoins #OpRadar - the what - a general need to protect the transaction record #OpShield - the who - generation rate increases make longer chains possible #OpPulse - the why - the longest chain is the correct record #OpShadow - the how - difficulty of generation increases forces more generation to maintain same constant earnings
|
|
|
Post by elisa on Jul 15, 2012 12:07:07 GMT -5
The structure is the problem. This is why I have put this off for such a long time. When I first started the program, we could do any kind of research we wanted, but now it has to be "action research" :-(*) Okay, it's not that bad. It just didn't fit in with my initial lit review, so I had to choose a new topic & have to write a new lit review. Basically, there's an introduction, a lit review, and a research proposal. Maybe, as you said, it needs to be four sections. I decided to take a qualitative participatory approach to the action research. In a broad sense I'm looking at the difference between the role mass education served during the transition from agrarian to industrial & how it can change to better serve the needs of its students (& society) in a post-industrial age. In doing so, I am looking at an emerging class of learners referred to as the intrinsically motivated trend setters, finding examples of these, taking their learning/working/research strategies & applying them to a classroom setting. So, as you can see, the research proposal is the easy part. The lit review ... I have a lot of ground to cover. I have to review intrinsically motivated trend setter literature, show examples irl, isolate strategies.. I mean, what part of the paper does that even fit into? Am I creating some sort of research tool? Fortunately, I have done a ton of research. Too bad I couldn't have done my initial project on bilingual ed. I'd even interviewed a coyote.. LOL. Silly administration.
|
|
|
Post by varmintreaper on Jul 15, 2012 19:41:55 GMT -5
Those GASBAGS expect ACTION RESEARCH? LMAO. What a bunch of arrogant twunts!
Maybe the missing part is that there isn't a foundation system to support a post-industrial world. NO WAI TAH POWER TEH EnTARPraiz GOIN INTA WARP!
Maybe post-industrial is the American Fantasy we were sold through all the deregulation and speculative bubbles. The idea is that the country is still industrial (it's not) and therefore you can retire well (personal post-industrial). But there is no retirement and if we don't launch a neo-industrial networked revolution, the poverty alone will kill millions.
Post-Industrial means they built their war machine and they are turning the lights out on everything else. And they got the masses to accept it.
Welcome to Cold War II. 100% more derp.
|
|
|
Post by elisa on Jul 15, 2012 21:39:35 GMT -5
Right, the industrial period ended a long time ago. I think what we're seeing are the various stages of grief. Mostly, denial & mostly from the people who gained the most from industry. This is how I've perceived it. Sometimes people find my ideas a little "out there" so please tell me if it isn't generally accepted that we're moving on from industrialism.
Anyway, the so-called soul-sucking mass education system we see today was modeled on other institutions of social control (prison/asylum). -I can provide a reference for that, btw. It worked to get people into those manufacturing jobs. They knew how to speak English, stand in line, follow instructions, etc.
Now people kind of need the opposite. They need to be more adaptable, independent, re-trainable. Things are changing quickly. In fact, they seem to be speeding up.
It is almost as if the school aged population knows this at birth. Kids are harder to "control". There is more violence in the schools. There is less respect for teachers and admin & in many cases, rightfully so. In a very short amount of time attention spans have decreased dramatically. There are various kinds of attention deficits becoming increasingly prevalent. We'd rather drug the kids to keep them in their seats, than change the structure of the school. This has little to do w/my thesis, btw.
Something else that might work is Pekka Himanen sp? critique of Max Weber's Protestant Ethic & the Spirit of Capitalism. His is called the The Hacker Ethic & the Spirit of the Information Age.. I think, not sure about the last part. Anyway, the Protestant ethic made us rich during industrialism, but now we have to change the way we think. So maybe that could form some sort of a basis at least as far as my thesis.
Too hard to explain to these professors, though. They aren't always on top of this stuff.
|
|
|
Post by varmintreaper on Jul 16, 2012 9:04:36 GMT -5
Right, the industrial period ended a long time ago. I think what we're seeing are the various stages of grief. Mostly, denial & mostly from the people who gained the most from industry. This is how I've perceived it. Sometimes people find my ideas a little "out there" so please tell me if it isn't generally accepted that we're moving on from industrialism. Put that into an antishock frame: What is ending? Who is ending it? Why is it ending? How is it ending? Remember, the only thing that actually exists is reality. Man's contribution is just a series of innovations to avoid reality. There's an opportunity to make a huge leap. We're on the verge of a mass disaster. Or a new industrial age based on consciously acting on success rather than trying to keep it to ourselves which makes it pointless. Money has value because people trade it. We're talking about two kinds of industrialism: Work and labor. Work is getting off your ass. Labor is working for someone else where your labor is sliced, diced, and sold in blocks and you get the scraps necessary to exist. The old industrialism is ending, but the only ones panicking are the clueless upper middle class who are the house slaves on the plantation. They are infuriatingly optimistic of the system and insanely skeptical of the individual, yet they call themselves capitalists. The lower top to the upper top have absolutely no risk whatsoever. They are simply disconnecting the system they no longer need. They have enough for themselves. In no shape or form are we going back to agrarian systems. At least not ones where people trade with others and teach each other. The work industrialism is a threat to them which is why they are attacking various local food movements. Work means you are provided by the land and the sun and not chained to their world. They want a post-industrial world where you work harder to keep them comfortable. But one where you don't produce anything. They know that real industry is not dependent on their machines and politics. They know if you even talk to your neighbor you are not dependent on them. Yeah, I know that story. Post-industrialism is engineered like industrialism was. The factories obliterated the power of the farmer. Self motivated geeks took back the power and now they're freaking out. Post-industrialism is an engineered shutdown of the power of the people. That's the additives and aspartame. Their brains are bombarded to keep them from being focused and learning and you know taking over the bankster run world. And they will. Hard to find a thesis that makes you feel like you contributed something useful and satisfy your professors who await the arrival of a new stone age. Hope you can sneak that in. Industrialism was a conversion from farm industry to factory industry. Just like the Enlightenment was an elitist imitation of the public Renaissance intended to kill people power.
|
|