| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
KimchiNinja
Joined: 01 May 2012
Location: Gangnam
|
 Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2012 6:14 pm Post subject: Re: US Prof a Big Hit in Korea |
 |
|
"Kim Seung-wan, a university student who attended Mr. Sandel's big lecture on Friday, said, "People often think money is most important, but we need to think about other values."
At least 1 kid in the 15,000 had a sense of perspective.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
liveinkorea316
Joined: 20 Aug 2010
Location: South Korea
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2012 6:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I have seen his lectures on tv here because they were televised late at night a year ago as a series. They were nice to listen to. Not exactly ground-breaking ideas.
As a first year uni student or a high school student maybe I might have learned something but not as a 30 year old.
I do think he is useful to his target audience which is young adults - 18-22 year olds who are just starting to think independently.
Most of us are past that stage. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dave Chance
Joined: 30 May 2011
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2012 9:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fact that he asks the Korean audience at Yonsei to question the paramount importance of economic efficiency is pretty revolutionary for this country. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dave Chance
Joined: 30 May 2011
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 13, 2012 9:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| liveinkorea316 wrote: |
I have seen his lectures on tv here because they were televised late at night a year ago as a series. They were nice to listen to. Not exactly ground-breaking ideas.
As a first year uni student or a high school student maybe I might have learned something but not as a 30 year old.
I do think he is useful to his target audience which is young adults - 18-22 year olds who are just starting to think independently.
Most of us are past that stage. |
He adjusts his level according to the audience he is addressing.
Here he is challenged by a panel of Brits (including a former student of his currently working as a very proud anchorwoman at the BBC)-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jPmvf7M3xbo |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Eedoryeong
Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Location: Jeju
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 13, 2012 9:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
| Yeah, I think some of this is just sour grapes people have to the Ivys. They aren't everything, but come on, they're the Ivy League for a reason |
I'd respectfully contest some of this. They're the Ivies because there used to be a reason, but as the general education has improved and thus the quality of candidates for assistant/associate/adjunct positions improved with each generation, there has been a lateralization at least in the field I studied that has made Harvard and Princeton quite invisible, actually. The top schools in the US for the two fields of study I went into are schools that are invisible nationally for anything else they offer. My point is not about my subject but that this is a phenomenon that is happening in other fields.
My advising professor has an undergrad text that is used in a handful of state universities and a few private ones and has been translated into Korean, but the major contribution from his would-be Harvard peer also happens to be one of the most heavily criticized texts in our market, and is sometimes raised in pedagogy classes of how not to put together a course. It's not our dad's world anymore. I'm not saying you're totally wrong, I'm just saying I'd keep a grain of salt handy for more discourse about the Ivies and what they really stand for in 2012.
Although in your defense, they are rich enough to be the only universities actively propagating that free online education should be universally available from them (without credit, though - you still have to cough up to get the paper).
No contest on the rest of what you wrote. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ThingsComeAround
Joined: 07 Nov 2008
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dave Chance
Joined: 30 May 2011
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 13, 2012 10:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
One reason may be because his book is officially banned by the Korean gov't for all military personnel for being 'anti-capitalistic' |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
liveinkorea316
Joined: 20 Aug 2010
Location: South Korea
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 13, 2012 11:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Dave Chance wrote: |
| liveinkorea316 wrote: |
I have seen his lectures on tv here because they were televised late at night a year ago as a series. They were nice to listen to. Not exactly ground-breaking ideas.
As a first year uni student or a high school student maybe I might have learned something but not as a 30 year old.
I do think he is useful to his target audience which is young adults - 18-22 year olds who are just starting to think independently.
Most of us are past that stage. |
He adjusts his level according to the audience he is addressing.
Here he is challenged by a panel of Brits (including a former student of his currently working as a very proud anchorwoman at the BBC)-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jPmvf7M3xbo |
listened to it. Sorry the message he continues to give is the same and quiate frankly I got it within the first 20 minutes of the first lecture. It is something I learned when I was young so he is teaching people who have never actually been educated.
People know about these limits of the markets that is why what he talks about is not new. If people do not know about these limits of markets they never learned much when they were young or in school. Sorry. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
isitts
Joined: 25 Dec 2008
Location: Korea
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 14, 2012 4:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| slothrop wrote: |
if you haven't seen sandel lecture do yourself a favor and watch a video.
he uses the socratic method to point out how we don't know what we think we know, taking his audience through a hypothetical scenario while making minute changes along the way to try and pin down the thing that makes us think something is right or wrong. in the end, if understood, you should come away from the lecture not knowing anything, hence, smarter than anyone who thinks they know, because they really don't.HAHAHa.
for example...
1. you are driving a bus and realize the brakes don't work and are heading straight into a group of kids on their way to school... the only way to avoid running them all down is to turn the wheel sharply left to where a fat man is standing... do you turn the wheel and save all the kids, but by doing so kill the fat man? everyone in the audience says yes, no question about it.
2. what if you are not the bus driver but standing on a bridge with the fat man and see the bus heading straight for the same group of kids. lets say from a police scanner you know for a fact that the bus can't stop and the kids have no way to get out of the way. lets also say that the fat man is soooo fat that if you pushed him off the bridge in front of the bus it would create enough of an obstacle to eventually stop it before it hit the kids... would you do it? everyone in the audience says no. that would be murder. whats the dif? example one is just turning a wheel, it doesn't seem like you are intentionaly murdering the fat man, but by pushing him off the bridge it seems somehow wrong.
3. sowhat if you don't have to push him? lets say he is standing over a trap door and by turning a wheel you could open the trap door and send him plumeting down to the street directly where the bus is headed? how is turning one wheel different than another?
and so on... |
Ugh...tedious and irritating.  Hypothetical scenarios (especially like the ones above) are pretty useless because you can control all the elements/variables. Real situations where people are actually faced with a sadistic choice and have little to no control of the situation are much more interesting (because they're real) and people generally don't have a good answer for the "problem"....just an answer that's "right" in principle...which doesn't help any of us living in the real world.
Still, as others have said, his lectures are probably good for students. But students aren't immersed in real life situations anyway (until they get the bill for their university loans) so why not discuss purely hypothetical predicaments?
Last edited by isitts on Thu Jun 14, 2012 8:08 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
isitts
Joined: 25 Dec 2008
Location: Korea
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 14, 2012 4:33 am Post subject: Re: US Prof a Big Hit in Korea |
|
|
| KimchiNinja wrote: |
"Kim Seung-wan, a university student who attended Mr. Sandel's big lecture on Friday, said, "People often think money is most important, but we need to think about other values."
At least 1 kid in the 15,000 had a sense of perspective. |
Leslie Benedict: Money isn't everything, Jett.
Jett Rink: Heh! Not when you've got it.
- Giant |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KimchiNinja
Joined: 01 May 2012
Location: Gangnam
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 14, 2012 10:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| People always say that: "people with money say money doesn't matter because they have it". But it's more that they know from experience that having it doesn't change anything. People that don't have it still think "if I only had a little more I'd be happier". Meh, not necessarily. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 14, 2012 11:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Whenever I hear someone say that "Money doesn't matter" I roll my eyes. Money doesn't matter until your kid sister needs 50,000 dollars of cancer treatment. Then money does matter and you realize that the money you blew spending an extra year in college and smoking weed and taking off to Europe to "find yourself" could have gone to save her life. Of course, then that person will blame the Health Care program for putting people over profits and saying our society shouldn't be about the money.
Money doesn't make you happy. But it sure can be good at preventing misery. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KimchiNinja
Joined: 01 May 2012
Location: Gangnam
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 14, 2012 11:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yeah but people die, that happens.
I've worked with some of the richest people in the universe. But I didn't find them to be any happier than the poor person I met in the Philippines climbing a tree get a free lunch from some fruit amongst the branches.
Now yes, the rich guy can use that money to try to fix grammas cancer. But also comes trouble and responsibility and decisions revolving around money, how to use it, how to protect it. It consumes people's lives. And then you get hyperinflation and poof it's gone! Hahaha.
The free guy climbing the tree eating the banana doesn't care, he's just living in the moment. Kids are cool like that too. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
isitts
Joined: 25 Dec 2008
Location: Korea
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 14, 2012 11:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| KimchiNinja wrote: |
| People always say that: "people with money say money doesn't matter because they have it". But it's more that they know from experience that having it doesn't change anything. People that don't have it still think "if I only had a little more I'd be happier". Meh, not necessarily. |
Or they know from experience of not having it. Anyway, I wasn't really criticizing what you said, or the student you quoted. It just came to mind. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
isitts
Joined: 25 Dec 2008
Location: Korea
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 15, 2012 10:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| KimchiNinja wrote: |
| The free guy climbing the tree eating the banana doesn't care, he's just living in the moment. |
Fair enough, but what happens when that guy climbs the tree to find the bananas are gone because some other free guy got there before him? We can argue that money is an arbitrary and bizarre middleman to the things we need, but if we took out the middleman and were no longer chasing money, then we'd be chasing the bananas instead.
Also, neither you nor anyone else here is climbing banana trees. We're earning fairly decent salaries and live in a fair bit of comfort because of the money we make. So we're hardly in a position to say money isn't everything, hence the quote I posted.
If you have no money and are still able to say money isn't everything, then fine. But there are stresses that come with that, too, that consume your life.
Again, not totally disagreeing with what you've said so far. There's certainly a balance as to how much influence we should allow money to have over our lives. And chasing money that constantly loses value and is part of a fractional reserve banking system, doesn't give a lot of incentive for financial planning. I've looked into living off the grid, but I don't see that as solving much. I may consider it as a fallback plan, but it's not my first choice.
Anyway, just my thoughts on the matter. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
