Jingoism

   Dust storms that struck Phoenix recently were so severe that weather reporters began using the term for similar storms that occur regularly in the Sahara. But some folks were upset about the use of an Arabic word -- haboob -- claiming it was an insult to the American military serving in the Middle East and to the victims of 9/11.
   One response, however, is that if we stop using that word because it is Arabic, we should also stop using other words borrowed from Arabic, including such terms as algebra, zero, and alcohol. In addition, there is the issue of numerals: How would we do arithmetic, add up our grocery prices, reprogram all the cash registers, and, for that matter, how would we refer to the year? Are we now in the year MMXI? And is it an insult to the victims of the World Trade Center disaster to use the Arabic numerals 9/11? Or must we use the Roman version -- IX/XI?

Profitable schooling

   If education leads to greater productivity, then insufficient or inefficient education leads to a decline in productivity.
   In a nutshell, this sets up the problem of grade inflation, the granting to students of higher marks than are deserved. However, as with so many issues, there is the corollary issue of whether or not grade inflation exists.
   Critics claim that higher grades are given to students who have not rightfully earned them, and this means a decline in education, just as an inflated currency indicates a drop in the value of a dollar. And just as a dollar no longer buys a full cup of coffee, an inflated or unearned A grade no longer shows the full value of an education. Therefore, the person with the inflated Grade Point Average (GPA) is not as well educated and consequently not as productive as other graduates who enter the workforce.

   Grade inflation is a form of cheating; higher grades that do not adequately reflect performance diminish the value of the grade. If new hires are paid the same as or more than earlier workers, the firm gets a lower return on its investment in the worker (wages paid) because of a drop in productivity.

Competitive talking

Too many health care professionals seem to believe that anyone over the age of 60 is either deaf, senile, stupid or all of the above. Couple that attitude with a habit of interrupting and/or not listening, and you brew poor interaction with the patient, at best, or a medical disaster, at worst. A lack of empathy, patience and understanding is counterproductive.

   There may be hope, however. Recent letters to the New York Times from medical students with undergraduate work in literature, as well as from more experienced health care professionals, show that there are at least some in the field who know of the importance of listening to the patient.

   If only others in the health care field will listen to their colleagues, we might have a better health care system.

   In fact, a general increase in listening and a decrease in interrupting would be a good thing. It's time to rid society of competitive talking.

Reality check

Martin Feldstein is one of of the most influential economists of the 20th Century, and his ideas are still enormously popular among Conservatives. But while some of these ideas may sound good in the abstract, and in theory, they don't always track well when applied to the real world. For example, he writes in Capitalism and Freedom that "voluntary cooperation" of the private sector can ensure freedom and serve as a brake on government expansion and abuse.

Feldstein was an idealist. It may well be true that the private sector can prevent abuse by government, but what of constraints on abuse of consumers by corporations? Does Feldstein really believe that consumers are always free to take their business elsewhere? In fully competive capitalism, perhaps yes, but it is in the nature of capitalist firms to eliminate competition where they can, and seek a monopoly. In the real world, consumers are not always free to take their business elsewhere. Regulation by government is sometimes necessary to prevent gouging of consumers who have no realistic choice of product or service providers. Examples include so-called "natural monopolies" such as electricity or rail transportation. In the interest of efficiency, government sanctions single-provider operations.

Government regulation is supposed to prevent collusion in the private sector to the detriment of consumers. Again, however, reality intrudes and there sometimes arises collusion between government and corporations. Who regulates the regulators? Voters, that's who.

Altruism is a wonderful thing, but it can be a rarity in the real world.

Justice thinking

Why is everyone so wound up about Casey Anthony and whether she "should" have been found guilty? The jury said the prosecution failed to prove its case. She may indeed have done the deed, but the burden of proof is on the state, beyond a reasonable doubt. The defense planted a reasonable doubt (cause of death not definitive) so the jury acquitted. Granted, Casey Anthony did some stupid things, but there is no law against stupidity. If there were, we would all be locked up. But then, who would hold the key?

School goals

The purpose of education, beyond that of passing on knowledge of basic principles -- the Three R's -- is to teach how to think, not to teach what to think.
   The latter -- mandating what to think -- is medieval, but such attitudes are still found among fundamentalist groups, religious and otherwise, worldwide.
   Fundamentalists are a danger, no matter their origin or beliefs.
Otherwise, education becomes indoctrination.

Peer Review

Peer review and peer critique are useful methods of teaching only if those in the group have at least a modicum of knowledge or skill in the topic or technique. Using peer review sessions in a Fourth Grade writing class. for example, or even for some high school and college freshman classes, is silly, since many, if not most, students in such groups have only minimal skills in writing. Moreover, they are reluctant to say anything negative about the work of others. In a larger sense, how are they to know what good writing is if they have no standard by which to judge it?
   Society seems to feel it is harmful to a child's psyche if he or she is told that his work is ever less than praiseworthy or "excellent." The term "Good job!" is used so often, and with so much emphasis and enthusiasm as to make it meaningless. Children know false praise when they hear it.
   As adults (and this includes college students), people are reluctant to say anything negative about others during these so-called "peer review" sessions. Consequently, nothing productive is ever said.