Dear Kevin...
Part of the message I sent to my Hst467 teacher:
Today, I learned two things (both from you): That the Japanese dropped incendiary devices in places in the US and that there were internments in most allied countries. I would have liked to have known more about these two facts because I think that they are incredibly relevant to examining the pros and cons of internment and to having a complete understanding of the social ramifications of WWII. Unfortunately, our class discussion is frequently wrapped up in inconsequentialities, like what the definition of “luckier” is. Our class discussions are usually about people's emotional reaction to the material or to the issue at hand (like how “sad” it is), rather than about the validity of the source, the accuracy of the statements, oppositional arguments, causation, or ramifications. Valid comments seem to be quickly cut off by emotional purging.
Don't you think this sounds like a nice way of saying, "I'm surrounded by idiots."?
Today, I learned two things (both from you): That the Japanese dropped incendiary devices in places in the US and that there were internments in most allied countries. I would have liked to have known more about these two facts because I think that they are incredibly relevant to examining the pros and cons of internment and to having a complete understanding of the social ramifications of WWII. Unfortunately, our class discussion is frequently wrapped up in inconsequentialities, like what the definition of “luckier” is. Our class discussions are usually about people's emotional reaction to the material or to the issue at hand (like how “sad” it is), rather than about the validity of the source, the accuracy of the statements, oppositional arguments, causation, or ramifications. Valid comments seem to be quickly cut off by emotional purging.
Don't you think this sounds like a nice way of saying, "I'm surrounded by idiots."?