U2Bama
Rock n' Roll Doggie
I would KEEP Babe Ruth.
Who would you bump off?
- Thread starter MonaVox
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
deep
Blue Crack Addict
U2Bama said:
OK
Then who of the other candidates would you select to have never been born?
U2Bama
Rock n' Roll Doggie
The original question is which 3 of the 8 would I have killed. My answer is none of them.
~U2Alabama
~U2Alabama
deep
Blue Crack Addict
The question was poorly worded and did not make much sense.
Gandhi, MLK Jr and Abraham Lincoln were all killed.
I thought the exercised was devised to make the students evaluate the contributions these people made. That is why I answered it with the criteria: Who would you select not to have been born?
Gandhi, MLK Jr and Abraham Lincoln were all killed.
I thought the exercised was devised to make the students evaluate the contributions these people made. That is why I answered it with the criteria: Who would you select not to have been born?
U2Bama
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Adolf Hitler, Saddam Hussein, and Osama bin Laden.
deep
Blue Crack Addict
Stalin got a pass?
In response to those people that were defending Shakespeare I'd just like to make it clear that William could write. He could write very beautifully, but I felt that his words didn't propel humanity in ANY direction. They were medieval sitcoms and dramas....
...and no I don't think that ALL Shakespeare admirers are pretentious....just the bigger lot of them
. I like the comment someone made about how intelligence and a love and understanding of his work are not synonymous with each other. That's a great point.
...and no I don't think that ALL Shakespeare admirers are pretentious....just the bigger lot of them
. I like the comment someone made about how intelligence and a love and understanding of his work are not synonymous with each other. That's a great point.
U2Bama
Rock n' Roll Doggie
deep said:
Without Hitler's existence, perhaps Stalin could have been kept in check. But his non-existence would have been equally pleasing.
~U2Alabama
hippy
ONE<br>love, blood, life
MonaVox said:We couldn't name one of Picasso's works
You're kidding me!That needs to be solved... but I'll refrain for now
foray
Rock n' Roll Doggie
definitely PICASSO. Damn womaniser, and his paintings are incredibly bo-RING.
fkzvjy
fkzvjy
hiphop
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
deep said:
U2Bama: without Hitler perhaps Stalin could have been kept in check... interesting point... perhaps is the right word though.
With only three persons its surely difficult to decide... if I had the free pick, I?d go Hitler, Saddam, Ochoa. I?d trade Monzer Al Kassar against Jack Ruby and Reagan against Kennedy. Oh, I forgot Maggie Thatcher, Haider, Berlusconi and Osama... you?ll get them if you send back MLK, Lennon, Lumumba and Allende.
Last edited:
brettig
New Yorker
You know what? I don't really see the point of this discussion. In all honesty its the type of school discussion that gives education a bad name, ivory tower, good qualifications for hob knobbing in the welfare queue and all that. Why the hell are we being forced to pigeonhole three of eight people who made an undoubted contribution to humanity and say 'oh they didn't really do anything significant'. Pisses me off quite frankly.
pinkfloyd
War Child
u try to kill people who were Jokers during thier time , u can't reach them now , they won , stop barking under the table ...Shine On ......
ironically, i think some people are reading too much into this. as it's been said, perhaps the question was written poorly. it does not seem like it's like this: you've got a gun in your hand, these eight men are in front of you, shoot three and watch them die!!! it's to pick which three would you say never should have been born. to pick three men (*ahem*) who weren't even on this list is not only jumping on some bandwagon to eliminate today's dictators.
the purpose, i think, was to pick eight men who POSITIVELY contributed to society, and wonder, what would life had been like if (for example) abraham lincoln had never been born. who would've been president then? would we have had a civil war? would the states still have left the union? if so, would they have ever come back? choosing who you think should've (although that sounds bad, like you want it this way, i can't think of a better word to use) never have been born, not who you'd kill.
i think deep got it right when he said its purpose was to evalutate these mens' contributions to society. we had a similar question in a tutor training seminar i went to. instead of specific people, we had random people. there were about eight people we had to choose from, like an HIV+ woman, a war vet who was paralyzed completely, a schizophrenic basketball star, etc. and we had to choose which five we wanted to live with us (like big brother).
we had to carefully analyze it, since we'd be stuck with those people for four months with no outside contact. for example, some chose against the war vet, as they didn't want to be responsible for having to totally take care of him, as there wouldn't be an aide for him. some didn't want a schizophrenic there, in case he had a serious episode. some didn't want the HIV+ woman there, because if she hurt herself (like a cut), people would be reluctant to help her. maybe that's why i interpreted the question as something similar to what i mentioned. maybe i'm wrong. i dunno.
the purpose, i think, was to pick eight men who POSITIVELY contributed to society, and wonder, what would life had been like if (for example) abraham lincoln had never been born. who would've been president then? would we have had a civil war? would the states still have left the union? if so, would they have ever come back? choosing who you think should've (although that sounds bad, like you want it this way, i can't think of a better word to use) never have been born, not who you'd kill.
i think deep got it right when he said its purpose was to evalutate these mens' contributions to society. we had a similar question in a tutor training seminar i went to. instead of specific people, we had random people. there were about eight people we had to choose from, like an HIV+ woman, a war vet who was paralyzed completely, a schizophrenic basketball star, etc. and we had to choose which five we wanted to live with us (like big brother).
we had to carefully analyze it, since we'd be stuck with those people for four months with no outside contact. for example, some chose against the war vet, as they didn't want to be responsible for having to totally take care of him, as there wouldn't be an aide for him. some didn't want a schizophrenic there, in case he had a serious episode. some didn't want the HIV+ woman there, because if she hurt herself (like a cut), people would be reluctant to help her. maybe that's why i interpreted the question as something similar to what i mentioned. maybe i'm wrong. i dunno.
oliveu2cm
Rock n' Roll Doggie FOB
I agree with Khanda. I think this exercise was a way to have students prioritize the different influences that make up this world. It's putting philosophy against literature, science against sports, art against religion. Sometimes things that seem dismissive (sports, literature) are actually more important than other things like science.
Of course if there were three people would could wish never having been born we would all answer instantly Hitler, Osama, Pinochet, and the likes. Yet that is obvious. This exercise obviously has a different intention. Perhaps it would have been better phrased: Whose influence would you remove from this world? (take away their talent rather than their life.)
I am a Shakespeare snob, I love his writings very very very much and don't know where I would be without them. I will always remember my first reading of a Shakespeare play:
..
My answer:
Einstein. Babe Ruth. Picasso.
Gandhi, MLK irreplaceable.
Plato I keep, but he barely is safe (Picasso took his place- ask me to remove Van Gogh and it may have been a different story). Lincoln also could be placed on the list, but I like the concept of the United States so i'll keep his influence.
Mona- I hope you post more of your assignments (in this vein) on the board so we can participate. I miss college!
Of course if there were three people would could wish never having been born we would all answer instantly Hitler, Osama, Pinochet, and the likes. Yet that is obvious. This exercise obviously has a different intention. Perhaps it would have been better phrased: Whose influence would you remove from this world? (take away their talent rather than their life.)
I am a Shakespeare snob, I love his writings very very very much and don't know where I would be without them. I will always remember my first reading of a Shakespeare play:
.. My answer:
Einstein. Babe Ruth. Picasso.
Gandhi, MLK irreplaceable.
Plato I keep, but he barely is safe (Picasso took his place- ask me to remove Van Gogh and it may have been a different story). Lincoln also could be placed on the list, but I like the concept of the United States so i'll keep his influence.
Mona- I hope you post more of your assignments (in this vein) on the board so we can participate. I miss college!
Babe Ruth
Abraham Lincoln
Picasso
Einstein's Special Theory is something that is deeply understood by perhaps a handful of extremely gifted physicists. Any honest Physics Prof would tell you as much. I'd keep him.
If I had to choose between Gandhi and MLK, I'd easily go with the former.
It was a tossup between Picasso and Shakespeare, but I chose the former because the latter has had incredible staying power. That being said, I don't particularly enjoy Shakespeare nor do I think reading his works is an enlightening exercise.
Abraham Lincoln
Picasso
Einstein's Special Theory is something that is deeply understood by perhaps a handful of extremely gifted physicists. Any honest Physics Prof would tell you as much. I'd keep him.
If I had to choose between Gandhi and MLK, I'd easily go with the former.
It was a tossup between Picasso and Shakespeare, but I chose the former because the latter has had incredible staying power. That being said, I don't particularly enjoy Shakespeare nor do I think reading his works is an enlightening exercise.
hiphop
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
Re: Re: Who would you bump off?
What - this was a question in college???
I thought it was aimed at 16 year old schoolboys and -girls.
But I see your point of view. Since they maybe neither know who Einstein or Picasso were, so it would be useless to ask this question.
To pose a question like this at the university I am studying at would be regarded as unscientific - to the least. Students would laugh their asses off. Sorry to be that harsh, but it is really strange to see... excuse me.
oliveu2cm said:
What - this was a question in college???
I thought it was aimed at 16 year old schoolboys and -girls.
But I see your point of view. Since they maybe neither know who Einstein or Picasso were, so it would be useless to ask this question.
To pose a question like this at the university I am studying at would be regarded as unscientific - to the least. Students would laugh their asses off. Sorry to be that harsh, but it is really strange to see... excuse me.
Re: Re: Re: Who would you bump off?
It's those dang teachers again Hip Hop!!!!!!
whenhiphopdrovethebigcars said:
What - this was a question in college???
I thought it was aimed at 16 year old schoolboys and -girls.
But I see your point of view. Since they maybe neither know who Einstein or Picasso were, so it would be useless to ask this question.
To pose a question like this at the university I am studying at would be regarded as unscientific - to the least. Students would laugh their asses off. Sorry to be that harsh, but it is really strange to see... excuse me.
It's those dang teachers again Hip Hop!!!!!!
U2Bama
Rock n' Roll Doggie
KhanadaRhodes said:
At last, the finger pointing begins (bandwagon).
To sum it up, for once, I agree with whenhiphopdrovethebigcars on the fact that this question illustrates some of the stupid ideas spewed forth by today's collegiate elitists.
brettig also summed it up perfectly:
The question, or project or show & tell or whatever we shall call it, is the equivalent of a prank that radio shock jocks would pull. Instead of the traditional (and admittedly cliche) "What famous people, living or dead, would you invite to a dinner party?" project, some narrow-minded, pencil-necked, bow-tied college professors with horn-rimmed glasses decided "Oh, let's trun that around!!! Who would they KILL??? Let's SHOCK 'em!!!! Like a SHOCK JOCK!!! Then we will prepare them for a better future and the world will be full of our ideals!!!" So they concoct this mess in the Ivory Tower that brettig mentioned and send the kids parents a big fat tuition bill for it.
I firmly believe that professors/educators who pose this question have their idea of the "established" correct answer: Lincoln, Ruth and Einstein. Lincoln, because they have "historically revised" much of his life and policy; Ruth, because he is a "dumb jock" who lived by the competitive spirit; and Einstein due to his contributions to weapons of mass destruction. I would venture to guess that Gandhi, MLK and Shakespeare would be the absolute "WRONG!" answer by the faculty and likely get a student banned from writing for the campus newspaper.
Tell me this: how is a person's passion for sports any less significant than another person's passion for art or literature? Yes, I said I would keep Babe Ruth; everyone of you who listed 3 persons to kill listed Babe Ruth. Talk about a "bandwagon" for sure. To the sports fan, Babe Ruth's contribution to history may be more than that of Shakespeare or even Gandhi.
Do you want to know what my response would be today if I were in college and faced with this "situation study"?
"Well, Professor Sassafrass, I am going to challenge authority on this one and I will not pick from the list of 8 people you have given me. You ask what 3 people would I knock off?" Simple - YOU, the Department Head who is over your department, and the President of the college since he/she hired you. Long live college athletics. What is my next feel-good small group project?"
~U2Alabama
yeesh. as i said before, it seems some are reading too much into it. AS IT HAS BEEN SAID, it's not a matter of killing these people. it's mainly to think of, well, i'll relate this to to U2.
think of the song "a day without me." what's it about? bono ponders what the world would be like without him, if people would miss him, stuff like that. this is the same or a very similar thing. it's not the person themselves we're saying to do without, but their talent. pablo picasso would've been alive, but he wouldn't have been a painter. babe ruth would've never been picked for a baseball league. abraham lincoln didn't run for president.
you can call what i said finger pointing if you wish, but it's true. to name a bunch of evil dictators is a cop out. of course i'm sure we all wish bin laden dead. but that's not even the point of this discussion question. it's to pick good people (as in they contributed positively to society. mlk helped pave the way for civil rights, whereas hitler massacred millions.) and think, "what if they didn't exist?" or more specifically, "what if they didn't stand up and decide to do what lead them to the path to become the great person they became?"
it's humourous and sad that so many people are finding this discussion almost disgusting. it seems that no matter how many times we explain it's being read wrong, it's just a misunderstanding or misconception, the posts seem to be completely ignored and the tirade as to how we're soooo evil for thinking of death continues. for example, bama quoted the first part of my previous post and commented, but COMPLETELY ignored the rest. i guess all there is to say is this: to put it harshly, if you don't want to contribute to the discussion, butt out, or at least read the entire post people make and don't pick and choose sentences that cater to your angle.
think of the song "a day without me." what's it about? bono ponders what the world would be like without him, if people would miss him, stuff like that. this is the same or a very similar thing. it's not the person themselves we're saying to do without, but their talent. pablo picasso would've been alive, but he wouldn't have been a painter. babe ruth would've never been picked for a baseball league. abraham lincoln didn't run for president.
you can call what i said finger pointing if you wish, but it's true. to name a bunch of evil dictators is a cop out. of course i'm sure we all wish bin laden dead. but that's not even the point of this discussion question. it's to pick good people (as in they contributed positively to society. mlk helped pave the way for civil rights, whereas hitler massacred millions.) and think, "what if they didn't exist?" or more specifically, "what if they didn't stand up and decide to do what lead them to the path to become the great person they became?"
it's humourous and sad that so many people are finding this discussion almost disgusting. it seems that no matter how many times we explain it's being read wrong, it's just a misunderstanding or misconception, the posts seem to be completely ignored and the tirade as to how we're soooo evil for thinking of death continues. for example, bama quoted the first part of my previous post and commented, but COMPLETELY ignored the rest. i guess all there is to say is this: to put it harshly, if you don't want to contribute to the discussion, butt out, or at least read the entire post people make and don't pick and choose sentences that cater to your angle.
Lilly
Rock n' Roll Doggie FOB
well, i'm going to have to agree with bama on this, with a contingency.
contingency is, i think it's a good high school exercize, rather than killing them, ponder it in the "a day without me" sense. it makes kids think in a cause -> effect sort of way.
i do NOT think that this should have been seriously done in college. in fact, i think that bama and brettig hit it right on, our higher education systems are going to hell. i went from high school to college and i don't feel any different. i am in the same level classes -- nay lower level -- than before. but, as far as i'm concerned, wherever you are, you need to make your own education. so i study on my own and learn independently. but i'm sick of making education fit the lowest intelligence level rather than challenging people to think for themselves.
contingency is, i think it's a good high school exercize, rather than killing them, ponder it in the "a day without me" sense. it makes kids think in a cause -> effect sort of way.
i do NOT think that this should have been seriously done in college. in fact, i think that bama and brettig hit it right on, our higher education systems are going to hell. i went from high school to college and i don't feel any different. i am in the same level classes -- nay lower level -- than before. but, as far as i'm concerned, wherever you are, you need to make your own education. so i study on my own and learn independently. but i'm sick of making education fit the lowest intelligence level rather than challenging people to think for themselves.
I agree, Lilly...I can't believe such a thing would be discussed in school, even if it is at the college-level.
Sometimes, I am very sad that I switched majors and will not be a teacher anymore because I really wanted to help make a difference.
I remember during my freshman year of high school, our English teacher made us write our own obituaries. He also had us read several obituaries in the paper. To this day, I still don't know why.
Sometimes, I am very sad that I switched majors and will not be a teacher anymore because I really wanted to help make a difference.
I remember during my freshman year of high school, our English teacher made us write our own obituaries. He also had us read several obituaries in the paper. To this day, I still don't know why.
OP
OP
MonaVox
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Re: Re: Who would you bump off?
right
it's about preventing the contributions
Thanks, I didn't know how to explain
Sorry if I said WHO WOULD YOU KILL..... that's not what the exercise was at all even.... it's not about dragging Einstein into a parking lot and shooting him
it was just about nullifying their contributions
I'm surprised my thread got so much attention Sorry about the confusion and..turmoil.
I'll go back to Greenbough, Alabama now.
deep said:
rightit's about preventing the contributions
Thanks, I didn't know how to explain
Sorry if I said WHO WOULD YOU KILL..... that's not what the exercise was at all even.... it's not about dragging Einstein into a parking lot and shooting him
it was just about nullifying their contributions
I'm surprised my thread got so much attention
Sorry about the confusion and..turmoil.I'll go back to Greenbough, Alabama now.
OP
OP
MonaVox
Rock n' Roll Doggie
The class is called Honors 100....it's basically about exploring the purposes of a liberal education. It's hardt o explain... there are a lot of activities and discussions.
Honors 100 Course Description
I honestly didn't think my school would get torn apart here... I'm surprised people even READ this thread.
I'm not a communist or anything....
sorry about all the misunderstandings...I should have been keeping tabs on this thread
Yes...I'm in college now. Sorry that's hard to believe.
Honors 100 Course Description
I honestly didn't think my school would get torn apart here... I'm surprised people even READ this thread.
I'm not a communist or anything....
sorry about all the misunderstandings...I should have been keeping tabs on this threadYes...I'm in college now. Sorry that's hard to believe.
Lilly
Rock n' Roll Doggie FOB
come back soon
mona!
don't be sorry or regretful about posting it. it sparked a debate as anything posted here in fym should.
good post!!
mona!
don't be sorry or regretful about posting it. it sparked a debate as anything posted here in fym should.
good post!!
OP
OP
MonaVox
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Re: come back soon
thank you
Lilly said:
thank you
hiphop
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
U2Bama said:
Go, Bama, Go!!!
OP
OP
MonaVox
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Bama..... that is not what was intended at all. 
hiphop
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
KhanadaRhodes said:
All we ask of the college professor is to define his or her questions properly. Its not only about misunderstanding or misreading or putting sth. into it, it is about being scientific to a certain extent or not. The college pupils learn about those things there for life. And if the prof said "Who cares how this quest is asked", the students will not care to express themselves properly in their lives.
No one will know what they mean if they say "errr, hand me that sheet" "which sheet?" "nah that sheet there you know what I mean" "no, I don?t know" "goddamfuckit the sheet with the analysis of the last three years of development of oil resources in Texas!" "ah why didn?t you say that before" "you could have understood it, idiot, why you don?t know which sheet I mean".....
see?
I surely don?t want to attack any teacher, let alone teachers in general, as I know very many teachers who have played a great part in spreading humanity, and who teach great things and are extremely intelligent.
But I am sure that f.e. a Berkeley professor who I know would define this question as not having been posed in a clear way. A professor has to know what he/ she says. And he/ she has to express his/ her educational goals more precisely. Thats their job in college.
