Liberal math

[Chap]

Newton was a lunatic.

I think that is a little anachronistic. Granted that Newton was an admitted obsessive - he once answered someone who asked how he came to make his great discoveries by saying "By continually thinking on them". Granted too, his interests were by no means those of an ordinary everyday Englishman of the late 17th and early 18th centuries, and he was a little behind the times in devoting so much of his attention to subjects such as biblical prophecy and alchemy. But an interest in such matters would not at the time have qualified him to be considered insane. People had enough confidence in his ability to make him President of the Royal Society and Master of the Mint - in which post he was very successful as a crime-buster, breaking up many forgery syndicates.

So maybe you might go with 'eccentric', or perhaps 'a bit on the spectrum' might be better?

[Gadianton]

So maybe you might go with 'eccentric', or perhaps 'a bit on the spectrum' might be better?

Absolutely.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

What are some of Newton's crazier theories or perspectives that we didn't know about?

- Doc

[ajax18]

Newton was a lunatic.

Yeah, I guess he didn't understand that 2+2 can equal 5 as well. He must have been a very narrow minded white supremacist to think 2+2 can only = 4 and not 5, 6, 8, 27 or whatever Andrew Cuomo needs it to equal when pushing a COVID narrative.

These crazy leftist cannot do math because they're not reasonable people. No wonder American kids perform so poorly on standardized tests compared to the rest of the world. Instead of learning the 2+2=4 they're playing race card from 6 years of age to declare that 2+2 is whatever they say it is. Let's see what kind of planes and spacecraft these young woke engineers build us.

[Icarus]

These crazy leftist cannot do math because they're not reasonable people. No wonder American kids perform so poorly on standardized tests compared to the rest of the world.

And yet they perform much worse in Red States. How do you explain that as a "leftist" thing?

You're a damned moron.

[Gadianton]

Cam,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_New ... lt_studies

Ajax,

The one thing you've got going for you, is that unlike subs and Leeuniverse, you can write comprehensible sentences when you want to.

Seriously: "He must have been a very narrow minded white supremacist to think 2+2 can only = 4 and not 5, 6, 8, 27 or whatever Andrew Cuomo needs it to equal when pushing a COVID narrative."

Let's work on organizing your thoughts prior to expressing them. I'd like to hear what you have to say, Ajax, and so I'm going to ask you to try some breathing exercises or to look into a sedative to take before you post. How about it?

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Cam,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_New ... lt_studies

Holy crap, that’s fascinating.

- Doc

[canpakes]

Newton was a lunatic.

Yeah, I guess he didn't understand that 2+2 can equal 5 as well. He must have been a very narrow minded white supremacist to think 2+2 can only = 4 and not 5, 6, 8, 27 or whatever Andrew Cuomo needs it to equal when pushing a COVID narrative.

These crazy leftist cannot do math because they're not reasonable people. No wonder American kids perform so poorly on standardized tests compared to the rest of the world. Instead of learning the 2+2=4 they're playing race card from 6 years of age to declare that 2+2 is whatever they say it is. Let's see what kind of planes and spacecraft these young woke engineers build us.

Seriously, ajax, stop. Each time that you repeat this foolishness about the criteria in question supposedly pushing that 2+2 can equal 5, you’re demonstrating that you have spent absolutely no time at all reading through the 82-page-or-so source document, and that you have no interest in knowing what the truth of the matter is.

In my own opinion, the titling of the document is unnecessarily provocative and the authors have done themselves no favors in choosing this option, as is plainly evidenced by the fact that this is now the conservosphere’s focus of rage-for-the-moment ... but if you were to actually read the contents and suggestions within this document, you’d find some very solid ideas that would benefit potentially everyone.

I personally can relate to use of the non-traditional problem exploration example given on doc page 33, and the reality that I experienced in school with the scenario on page 44 (matrices). Nothing about either example would be detrimental to children of the Master Race while it may help everyone to digest mathematics concepts with greater success. Perhaps you can tell me what the issue would be with that, after navigating the self-inflicted injury to your sensitivities from choosing to be offended by the name of the curriculum.

[Meadowchik]

This is par for the course in conservative thoughtfulness. Big government is bad, federalism has gone amuck, and liberals want to transform America with PC culture.

The complaints seem valid superficially and are vague enough to be pretty much applicable to any possible political initiative. All the dear reader needs to know is which side the complaint comes from, the right, and that it is lobbed at the left.

There is no nation of substance remaining in the conservative dream. It is a mythical island that floats beyond reach, it is nostalgia for the fictionalised version of the past, it does not exist.

And that is why America is so polarised and furthermore it is why American politics is so stupid. The right has no moral or intelligent foundation but it has an identity, and it is more than happy to pay Rush, Mark, Ben, Candace, etc...to tell it what it thinks.

If I sound bitter, I am. I spent forty years believing right wing talking points, and it was a second faith crisis when I understood the fanatical racist context for Ezra Taft Benson's political deepities which had undergirded the connection between Mormonism which comprehended the truth of all things, and conservatism.

[Chap]

In my own opinion, the titling of the document is unnecessarily provocative and the authors have done themselves no favors in choosing this option, as is plainly evidenced by the fact that this is now the conservosphere’s focus of rage-for-the-moment ... but if you were to actually read the contents and suggestions within this document, you’d find some very solid ideas that would benefit potentially everyone.

I've also looked at the original document(s), and I agree with you on the question of titling.

Why did they have to tie that can to their own tail? Well we can speculate on questions of how funding priorities are set, but I don't know enough about the context to say anything useful there. But I will say that this seems to be a minor parallel to the disastrous way in which a set of observations and initiatives that amounted to saying:

1. Too often, the police are the only organisation available to deal with a whole range of problems for which a different (and perhaps less costly) kind of intervention would be more appropriate. If, for instance, there was a team of mental health professionals on call to deal with a clearly deranged person wandering down the street, the person would be dealt with more effectively (and often more safely) than if the police had been called, and the police could concentrate on dealing with the crime-related incidents for which they are trained and equipped. Moving some police funding to provide resources of this kind would in fact free up the police to do their real job more effectively.

Were summed up in the slogan:

2. "Defund the police"

If I had been a US voter and thought that slogan really represented Democrat public order policy, that would have materially diminished my inclination to vote Democrat. And of course is was a wonderful gift to all those conservative chat-show hosts ...