Educação segundo a Matrix/DNA

Para lutar pelo planeta ajardinado e automatizado como moradia de descanso para a mente livre que se aventura no Cosmos, a Matrix/DNA tem que lidar com a tecnica ou método da educação do ser humano.
O Interessante artigo abaixo fica registrado para maior estudo e lembrando que ao artigo se seguem comentários de leitores que sào mais informativos que o artigo e devem ser relidos.

Para iniciar, alguns tópicos que me vieram à mente ao ler o artigo e alguns comentários;

1) Desde o ginásio, todo mundo está sabendo que mexer com finanças, fazer negócios, comercializar algo, está deixando as pessoas ricas enquanto trabalhar duro com ciências, engenharia, mostra muitos penando na vida com problemas financeiros.

2) Os cursos de ciências e engenharia estão sendo abandonados na metade. Como dizem, pode-se conhecer e memorizar os principios teóricos mas aprender a captar a natureza e seus sistemas naturais intuitivamente, poucos conseguem. na minha opinião isto está acontecendo porque as disciplinas da Física e da matemática dominaram as ciências, se intrometeram em tôdas as disciplinas, mesmo onde elas nada tinham a fazer como em Biologia. Fisica e Matematica são áreas frias e lineares, quando a natureza humana é emotiva e flexível. Mais ainda. A fisica se aplica a um nivel de organização da matéria que é o alicerce, as fundações subalternas, os substratos, de tudo o que a evolução construiu como edificios. Estes foram construidos com a organização da matéria pela quimica, a biologia, com a identidade emergente dos sistemas e mais ultimamente com as propriedades da mentalização. O ser humano quer lidar no e com o edificio e não com os alicerces, os porões. A Matemática é muito restrita na natureza real porque sendo linear e a evolução sendo curva, ela apenas se aplica ao pequeno trecho semi-linear que dá inicio a todo novo ciclo evolutivo. A capacidade de previsão da matematica, comprovada em varios casos tecnológicos é devida que os ciclos mais evoluidos tambem tem seu pequeno trecho inicial capturado pela matematica, mas todo o restante do ciclo, que é o que mais importa, escapa dela.

3) Deve estar havendo uma mudança na maneira como os cérebros humanos sào hard-wireds, uma mutação nas novas gerações em relação às velhas gerações. A mente das novas gerações quer lidar com a conjuntura, a alta-abrangencia dos febnnomenos do mundo. Ela é motivada pelo pensamento sist6emico, mesmo que cientifico, mas naturalista. No entanto, o trabalho dos diplomados está dominado pelas corporações que impõem a divisão estanque do trabalho, a qual exige a continuidade do método cientifico reducionista rotineiro e inibidor de aventuras, de individuais expansões. os cursos acad6emicos voltados para preencherem as necessidades das corporações são um choque para estes novos frescos tipos de cérebros.

Artigo:
THE NEW YORK TIMES

EDUCATION LIFE

2011/11/06/

Why Science Majors Change Their Minds (It’s Just So Darn Hard)

Comentários Destacados:

7#comment7 – BTH

November 4th, 2011

Even when students do stick with science degrees, what are their career opportunities? I have a PhD in biology, I’m working on my third post-doc, and i have multiple publications in high profile journals. I’m currently on the job market for tenure-track professor positions, and the situation is bleak! This is a horrible job market, and it is made worse by the compression of leftover PhD’s who couldn’t find jobs during their last 1-4 years of searching. At this rate, the US is going to lose a large chunk of an entire generation of scientists. And I’m not talking about undergrads, I’m talking about highly trained scientists with PhD’s! For the most part, our training has been paid for by US tax dollars, which are going to waste when these scientists drop out of science and choose other careers. When state governments slash education funding in response to the current economic climate, this has a huge ripple effect throughout academia. In addition, NSF funding has been stagnate for years, which further reduces levels of science hiring at Universities. While I agree with the goals/aims of STEM, these programs are diverting NSF money away from research, which only makes the problem worse. I think that the biggest issue isn’t a lack of students ‘sticking with’ science degrees, but the lousy job prospects available when they graduate.

xxxx

Tom

Chicago

November 4th, 2011

For the past decade we have glorified high finance and entertainment as the most lucrative paths for success in this country. Maybe that has something to do with it.

xxxx

43#comment43

The issues addressed in this article resonated with me. When I enrolled in college, I was interested in someday becoming an astrophysicist but I wasn’t sure. I took an introductory astronomy class – and it was the most boring, tedious thing I ever endured. I thought we would be observing the heavens through telescopes, not slogging through obscure information about celestial spheres and such. I decided that while science is a fun hobby, I didn’t want to do something this boring for a living, so I switched to studio art. If I can’t make some sort of positive impact on society, if I’m just slogging away for years on tedious tasks, then why waste my time doing it?

xxxx

57#comment57

It is very rewarding if you stick with it and master the basics and learn to apply the principles, but getting to an intuitive understanding of nature and physical systems takes years of hard work, too. It seems many just won’t make the effort.

xxxx

87

Instead of blaming the students and the teachers perhaps we should a realize that many times the hard work necessary to gain the science degree is not commensurate with a high paying job. In the biological sciences post-docs can slave away for years (in San Francisco, many times barely above the poverty line) before getting a faculty position. If they choose to go into industry, many times scientists will find themselves more poorly paid than the much younger post-MBA sitting across the table from them.

Wanting our best and brightest to go into the sciences and not a much more lucrative careers in areas such as finance is simply unrealistic.

xxxx

124.

Liyah

Columbia, MD

November 4th, 2011

12:03 pm

I grew up in a country where doing science at A’level was so prestigious. Parents were proud and showed off when their kids were doing sciences. Infact it was what all the really smart kids took up. You are the pride of the community when you boast about the A’s you got in sciences. So you often have many kids who move to the west like I did to further study science incl as pharmacists, engineers, doctors, bio chemist. I think part of the problem here in the US is the glorification of entertainment, politics and financial industry professionals that has led to the death of the scientist. When you are a scientist you are a nerd and socially awkward person and there is this unpopular thing attached to you so most kids that could actually do well in science have a negative perception. The get rich quick skeem often shown on tv makes kids and people in general avoid science related profession. They find it unattractive since a lot of work is required and a lot of study is required for these professions.

Tags: