are most british people still undereducated?

Scroll to see replies

I have degrees from Kings and UCL and I believe that the Nazis used alien technology and that Khloe Kardashian is OJ's daughter.

Reply 21

username2763536

Original post by scrotgrot

Well there are more important things than science. It doesn't really matter if she doesn't know the sun is a star, it's not going to impact on her life or decisions in any way at all, and the same applies en masse if the British people don't know the sun is a star.

But you're right, I certainly believe if we want the right to live in a democracy we have to take on the responsibility of making rational, evidence-based voting decisions rather than lizard-brained ones.

Maybe it wont impact on peoples lives if they dont know that the sun is a star.But its a pretty basic piece of knowledge.And I think it shows a lack of curiosity about the world if people dont know that.It all kind of feeds into this culture we have at the moment of people being obsessed with celebrities and reality tv.Somehow a woman like kim kardashian is famous.And what exactly is she famous for? What accomplishments does she have? Its a sad society we live in when she is idolised more than someone like neil armstrong.

Reply 22

dan.lunnux

Original post by Aniki_

You're making an assumption based on your life experiences, not facts. If you were to present education statistics your statement would have much stronger ground.
Not to mention, how you're making a link between being uneducated and having out of date views, which as many comments here have said already, is ridiculous.

no, it's since there are many chavs and the like who don't care to educate themselves. poor countries have the excuse of a lack of schooling or decent education.

Reply 23

immigrant #963

Original post by Robby2312

I dont think being older is really an excuse for homophobia.It shows an unwillingness to examine deeply held views and a lack of critical thinking ability.Take for example richard dawkins he was raised in a religous household and hes of the generation where homosexuality was criminalised.Now hes an atheist and very much against homophobia.I find that hes old is quite a poor excuse.Just because you were raised in a society with certain views doesnt mean you have to hold those views yourself.Its called being able to think for yourself.

nurture trumps over nature.

You
Exact
What
You
Are
Taught

I'm not defending the behaviour of bigots/homophobes but if you grow up constantly hearing the sames thing over and over you start to believe it really is true.

From then, only self realisation can change the person's mind. It could come out as your kid being gay or converting. Only then do people start to change their ideologies once challenged with compelling experiences.

idek what you're trying to say here to me. Never once did I say being old was an excuse. I was saying being raised in a certain way you were is the REASON for ending up as said bigot/homophobe etc not an EXCUSE.

Reply 24

Bang Outta Order

"boys like blue/girls like pink" stuff

What kinda conversations are you having then because something of this topic I wouldn't expect to hear anything intellectual.

Reply 25

Dheorl

I'm what by most measures would be considered an educated person. I have a STEM masters degree, an IQ high enough to sleep my way in to Mensa and normally do respectably at trivia quizzes etc.

I'm curious about one of the points you pick up on of gays and paedophiles being one and the same. In a sense I'd say they are, I mean I feel they're both groups with non-standard sexual preferences. Obviously the practise of one of these preferences is much more acceptable, and rightfully so. There's probably other less than standard things I believe tbh, but hey ho.

Reply 26

looloo21

Original post by dan.lunnux

no, it's since there are many chavs and the like who don't care to educate themselves. poor countries have the excuse of a lack of schooling or decent education.

what arrogant from a so call education I one of people you would call a 'chav'. I also bisexual lady who lives with her girlfriend in council flat in middle of a working class area. I never had any problem about my sexuality with the people you called chavs. However, we have need called names by people from other cultures.

Reply 27

999tigger

Original post by dan.lunnux

i find there are a lot of British people who despite having access to better education still believe in outdated/disproven stuff.

like gender differences, there are some who still believe in the "boys like blue/girls like pink" stuff, or that gays and paedophiles are one in the same.

should there be mandatory classes for them?

Are you British? If not what nationality are you?
Whats the source of you information?
Have you gone round taking opinions and surveys?
How many people have you spoken to?

Reply 28

looloo21

Original post by looloo21

Education does not teach you morals or respect for yourself or other people. Ever watched any programmes about Eugenics (e.g. Britain in 1960s doctors were still testing drugs on children with Down syndrome or Roma women still be forcefully sterilisation by the government in some Eastern European countries).

Reply 29

username2763536

Original post by Dheorl

The difference between straight people and gay people is analogous to the difference between writing with your right hand and your left hand.Paedophilia on the other hand is like trying to write with your feet.It just doesnt work.Also paedophilia is not a sexuality being gay is.

Reply 30

Dheorl

Original post by Robby2312

I disagree with you. I don't think people want to be a paedophile any more than someone wants to be gay, it's just something they are. Paedophiles clearly often have other problems, but I draw a large distinction between someone who would rape a baby, and someone who gets aroused by a 12 yr old. The later is a paedophile, the former is ****ed up in more ways than I'd want to try and classify. Obviously it doesn't work in modern society, as sex with children is unacceptable and illegal, and rightfully so, but I don't think the base is any different.

Reply 31

username2763536

Original post by Dheorl

Paedophilia is generally accepted not to be a sexuality.And technically there is actually a different name for paedophiles who are attracted to teenagers and those attracted to pre pubescent children.I cant be bothered to look it up but google is your friend.I'm not inclined to think that paedophiles are just born that way.Take for instance the catholic church.Why are so many priests abusers? I'm gonna guess and say it has to do with being celibate their whole lives.If they were not celibate then they would probably just be normal people with normal marriages.Its normal to be attracted to the same/opposite sex its not normal to be attracted to children.

Reply 32

Dheorl

Original post by Robby2312

As mentioned in my previous post, in my opinion there's a vast difference between those who get pleasure out of the abuse of a child, and simply those who are sexually attracted to/aroused by them.

There are people who are attracted purely to children, not gaining any sexual arousal from fellow adults. To me, these people are paedophiles. There are then those who are attracted to adults, but choose to sexually abuse children. To me they have a whole different set of problems, sort of comparable to a male prisoner who rapes a fellow inmate. They're not gay, but they sexually abuse men for pleasure. Of course, as with anything, there will inevitably be overlaps.

Reply 33

BefuddledPenguin

I'm currently doing a teaching course and was told by one of our lecturers that only 22% of UK citizens have a C-grade Maths GCSE or equivalent. I'm still stunned by this.