On Apr 25, 8:24=A0am, Frank Bures <f...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> I am forwarding an interesting article that appeared in the latest issue
o=
f
> HPCwire.
>
> Here it is:
>
> FROM THE EDITOR
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> [ ] M2306529 ) High-Tech in an Anti-Intellectual
> Culture....................8.1K
>
> =A0 =A0"Over 75 percent of Americans don't know they're alive." I half
exp=
ect
> =A0 =A0to see such a headline someday as yet another example of how
poorly=
> =A0 =A0educated the U.S. citizenry has become. It's not quite that bad
yet=
,
> =A0 =A0but research has consistently shown us how uneducated students
and
> =A0 =A0working adults are in this country. The data reflects not just a
la=
ck
> =A0 =A0of education, but a lack of commitment to intellectual pursuits.
>
> =A0 =A0Therein lies a problem for the U.S. high-tech industry. Although
th=
e
> =A0 =A0nation remains the leader in information technology, it has
become
> =A0 =A0increasingly dependent upon the scientists and engineers in other
> =A0 =A0countries to feed its high-tech habit. Recent studies released by
t=
he
> =A0 =A0Council on Competitiveness (which I cover in this issue)
concludes =
one
> =A0 =A0of the three major barriers to greater use of high performance
> =A0 =A0computing is lack of human talent and expertise in the U.S. A
numbe=
r
> =A0 =A0of other re****ts, including the landmark Educational Testing
Servic=
e
> =A0 =A0study, "America's Perfect Storm," also point to the disconnect
betw=
een
> =A0 =A0our tech-dependent economy and the lack of math and science
educati=
on.
>
> =A0 =A0Why should this be so? The hard truth is that, in the U.S.,
there's=
a
> =A0 =A0cultural contempt for education that underlies our seemingly
modern=
> =A0 =A0society. Its origins can be traced back to the birth of the
nation
> =A0 =A0when we broke away from our "elite" European forbearers. The
modern=
> =A0 =A0version of this contempt is apparent in our political and
religious=
> =A0 =A0institutions, many of which have become not just anti-science,
but
> =A0 =A0also, more generally, anti-intellectual.
>
> =A0 =A0Exhibit number one is the Bush regime, with its antipathy towards
> =A0 =A0science and its embrace of religious fundamentalism. The federal
"N=
o
> =A0 =A0Child Left Behind" educational policy is based on rote learning,
no=
t
> =A0 =A0critical thinking. This approach has been promoted on the right
sid=
e
> =A0 =A0of the political spectrum for a while. Intellectuals are derided
as=
> =A0 =A0"liberals" or "elitists" -- which are synonymous in
> =A0 =A0conservative-speak. Essentially, it's the sin of knowledge, where
a=
> =A0 =A0certain level of education or even a progressive attitude towards
> =A0 =A0learning is disdained.
>
> =A0 =A0In a Wall Street Journal blog post
> =A0 =A0<http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120873309012529689.html>
this
week=
,
> =A0 =A0Thomas Frank, author of "What's the Matter with Kansas,"
explains:
>
> =A0 =A0"It is a stereotype you have heard many times before: Besotted
with=
> =A0 =A0latte-fueled arrogance, the liberal looks down on average people,
> =A0 =A0confident that he is a superior being. He scoffs at religion
becaus=
e
> =A0 =A0he finds it to be a form of false consciousness. He believes in
> =A0 =A0regulation because he thinks he knows better than the
> =A0 =A0market...."Elitism" is thus a crime not of society's actual
elite, =
but
> =A0 =A0of its intellectuals."
>
> =A0 =A0Fifty-plus years ago, Adlai Stevenson was the prototypical
Democrat=
ic
> =A0 =A0"egghead" who was relentlessly punished for his intellect by his
> =A0 =A0political adversaries. During one of his presidential campaigns,
a
> =A0 =A0sup****ter assured Stevenson that he was certain to "get the vote
of=
> =A0 =A0every thinking man." Stevenson allegedly replied: "Thank you, but
I=
> =A0 =A0need a majority to win." He lost both his presidential bids, the
fi=
rst
> =A0 =A0in 1952, and then in 1956.
>
> =A0 =A0Ironically, it is often Ivy League-educated conservatives who
promo=
te
> =A0 =A0this elitism meme. More disconcerting though, is that the left is
> =A0 =A0beginning to play into this intellectual bigotry. The recent
> =A0 =A0Democratic battle for the President is turning into a kind of
reali=
ty
> =A0 =A0show popularity contest for relating to the common folk, where
> =A0 =A0drinking whiskey and bowling have become essential campaign
> =A0 =A0activities. The conventional wisdom for pols: hide your intellect
f=
rom
> =A0 =A0the citizenry, lest you make them feel inferior.
>
> =A0 =A0That might help explain why the 2008 Science Debate was replaced
wi=
th
> =A0 =A0the Compassion Forum right before the Pennsylvania Democratic
prima=
ry.
> =A0 =A0The Forum was basically a discussion about the religious views of
t=
he
> =A0 =A0candidates. While I'm up for a good conversation about morals and
> =A0 =A0spiritual beliefs as much as the next guy, it was unfortunate
that =
one
> =A0 =A0of the moderators felt compelled to ask Senator Obama if he
"believ=
ed
> =A0 =A0the Earth was created in six days." What good is that little
nugget=
of
> =A0 =A0information for qualifying the next leader of the Free World?
It's
> =A0 =A0depressing enough that we aren't allowed to have a presidential
> =A0 =A0candidate who doesn't profess his or her belief in a supernatural
> =A0 =A0being, but why do we feel the need to embarrass them with
unanswera=
ble
> =A0 =A0theological questions?
>
> =A0 =A0It would be great if the aforementioned Science Debate was
> =A0 =A0rescheduled. (There is talk of it being moved to Oregon for its
> =A0 =A0upcoming primary in May.) I'd be interested to hear the
candidates'=
> =A0 =A0views on where science and technology fit into their world view.
I'=
d
> =A0 =A0love for some candidate to make a case for putting science and
> =A0 =A0education at the front of the discretionary federal budget rather
t=
han
> =A0 =A0at the rear. It also might be a good venue to suggest to the
> =A0 =A0electorate that the pursuit of knowledge is more patriotic than
> =A0 =A0wearing a flag pin and more fulfilling than watching America's
Next=
> =A0 =A0Top Model.
>
> =A0 =A0In an op-ed piece
> =A0 =A0<http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/22/opinion/22herbert.html?hp>
this
> =A0 =A0week, Bob Herbert of the New York Times wonders why there is not
an=
> =A0 =A0education discussion in the presidential campaign. At a time when
> =A0 =A0globalization is bringing increased competition and U.S.
educationa=
l
> =A0 =A0performance is nose-diving, Herbert laments that "no one seems to
h=
ave
> =A0 =A0the will to engage any of the most serious challenges facing the
U.=
S."
> =A0 =A0Summing up, he concludes:
>
> =A0 =A0"While we're effectively standing in place, other nations are
catch=
ing
> =A0 =A0up and passing us when it comes to educational achievement. You
hav=
e
> =A0 =A0to be pretty dopey not to see the implications of that."
>
> =A0 =A0So far, we've managed to delay the worst effects on our economy
by
> =A0 =A0im****ting technological talent at a record clip. If you look at
the=
> =A0 =A0personnel roster of any U.S.-based technology firm, you'll
quickly
> =A0 =A0grasp how thoroughly internationalized these companies have
become.=
> =A0 =A0But if the majority of the natives fail to keep up educationally
an=
d
> =A0 =A0economically, the whole model will likely collapse.
>
> =A0 =A0Without a fundamental change in the culture, the U.S. science and
> =A0 =A0technology community will be relegated to pursuing its agenda as
a
> =A0 =A0special-interest lobbyist, against the backdrop of a
disinterested
> =A0 =A0citizenry. This is pretty much the case today. Broad sup****t for
a
> =A0 =A0technology society, as is the case in much of Eastern Asia, India
a=
nd
> =A0 =A0Europe, will require us to change our attitudes. Political
leaders =
can
> =A0 =A0help, but we can't rely on them alone to reshape values. If we
expe=
ct
> =A0 =A0to have our plasma TVs, iPods and cancer drugs, but are not
willing=
to
> =A0 =A0participate in their development, we'll end living in the
second-cl=
ass
> =A0 =A0nation we deserve.
> --
>
> <f...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Let me offer a condensed form of the article:
=93Although the nation remains the leader in information
technology=94 =85 =93Contempt for education (spurred) by re-
ligious fundamentalism and the Bush regime=94=85 =93Cultu-
ral elitism=94=85 (which really is the way) =93the liberal
looks down on ordinary people=94=85 (but) =93it is the ivy-
league conservatives, who promote this elitism=94=85(and)
=93intellectual bigotry=94=85=93Science debate was replaced
with the compassion forum=94=85=94a discussion about the
religious views of the candidates=94=85 =93Without a funda-
mental change in our culture the U.S. science and
technology will be relegated to pursuing its agenda
(what agenda, may I ask???) as a special interest
lobbyist=94=85=94If we expect to have out pasma TVs, iPods,
(do these things really represent cutting edge techno-
logies?) and cancer drugs (last time I checked 80% of
all pharmaceutical research still happens in this
country, and is, BTW, financed primarily by the U.S.
health care consumer), we need to participate in their
development=94=85
I=92m surprised you find this oped piece interesting,
since I=92m sure (I hope) you realize where this guy
is coming from. I know, perhaps better than anyone
else here, what it means for a high tech enterprise
to depend almost exclusively on foreign educated
human resources, but I also understand the flip
side of this relation****p, which significantly dam-
pens any feelings of alarmism concerning America=92s
future in global technological competition. Abso-
lutely no difference between this kind of political
scaremongering, and the current populist debate
among the Democrats to include revamping
NAFTA as part of their presidential platform.
When I see educated Asians dumping properties
around me, and leaving in droves for their native
lands, then, I suppose, I will have reasons to be
worried about this coutry=92s technological and
economic future. Until then, the best thing for
me to do is to try and keep up with them ;-)
And that, I think is very good, not only for me
personally, but also for the U.S. economy as
a whole.
|
