Peterkin

No, we are not. I want a 1000-word essay on the meaning and use of metaphor in scientific papers by Monday morning.

Oh boy! Well, if you listen to highly paid newscasters reading and repeating gobbledegook without realizing that is gobbledegook, we might conclude that there is some kind pandemic of incomprehension. Attention-span and critical thought begins to be eroded by a child's environment from the year of language acquisition onward. I get that. I was in no wise blaming him! He's instructing at a level where all the spadework should have been done by many, many instructors from grade school upward. By the time he gets to them, many students are already beyond reach. That's why, in elementary school, teachers used to write comments to the parents regarding their child's progress in various aspects of education and socialization, while the grades were earned on a term-end test of what knowledge has been acquired and retained. (I do think, though, that projects and essays represent a test of the skills thus far acquired, as well as the student's facility in the applications of those skills. So it's not unreasonable to grade the product.) I concur. Wholeheartedly. The inability of the system to deliver that kind of instruction - despite the heroic efforts of excellent teachers - involves a whole web of related societal problems. I do also agree with the need for unbiased assessment. OK. I recognize that you plagiarized Newton without citation or recognition.

That has more than anything else to do with the instructor. How the assignment was presented and what explanations, instructions and discussions took place before the student was sent away to work on his own. You're quite right about the preparation: the student must be clear on the purpose of the assignment and what he's expected to do. He should also feel comfortable to ask questions if something isn't clear. Not all instructors are student-friendly. Agreed. When they say result-oriented in education, it should not mean the same as result-oriented in industry. In education, we don't just want to turn out more self-sealing stem bolts than the next factory; we should aim at turning out people who can think, find the information they need and arrive at the solution they need - in anything they undertake.

You don't need to anticipate any questions. As the teacher, I give you an assignment: Write a 2-3000 word essay on the causes of the Italian Revolution of 1848 - 1861. You google the topic, find a bunch of historical sites (of which wikipedia may be the most comprehensive and confusing, so you go to the Britannica instead.) Every encyclopedia entry is an essay. You give it a superficial perusal: yes, it's on topic. * Right away, you're faced with the temptation to cut and paste, without bothering to understand. But then, you stop and reflect. What was the assignment about? Causes. This article is about the events: not what I need. So I have to go back and find out what happened before the revolution, and what the Italians wanted so badly, or hated so much, that they would rise up against a much better armed and organized military force. (Which is what revolution always is.) So it's about passion - a big, collective passion shared by many people with something in common. You have come across the word Risorgimento. Aha! So that's what they wanted! Then you look at each region's history and find out what they hated. You can write a separate paragraph on the central issue in each case. These are the causes of the event. Maybe add your own comment as a conclusion. And that's it! * which, this, incidentally, is not.

I had assumed that from the start. We're talking about purely cosmetic, rather than functional changes. Fair enough - and a considerable alteration can be done now. How easy or difficult it is medically depends to a large extent on what the starting point is and what the aim is. Turning a male football player into a female fashion model is a formidable challenge, while turning a wimpy male stockbroker into a self-assured female stockbroker wouldn't be that hard, either surgically or psychologically. As you say, emergent technology will make alterations more accessible and less arduous. Still, my main concern is not with technique, which is already quite advanced, but with the patient's endurance. Every one of these procedures is lengthy and painful and requires a long recovery time. If you're going to have a new life as the person you've always felt you should be, I don't think you want to spend the best years of it in traction, isolation and physiotherapy. I would very strongly urge every prospective patient to do a cost-benefit analysis, and decide in very practical terms how much they actually need to change. There is a vast range and variety of both male and female body types: it shouldn't be that hard to find the right formula to go from the undesired to the desired type with a minimum of structural damage. You've mentioned that before. I don't know what will become possible, but I hope that, unless our society changes considerably in the meantime, this idea remains science fiction. Not because of what such technology would do for people who want a second chance to grow up the way they think nature should have let them grow up - they have all my sympathy. But for all the other people who would put that same capability to nefarious uses. All new technology has a dark side!

Do you actually know this androgyn? How do you identify the average person? As for the list: every one of those thoughts might pass through any human mind at some time or another, and each of the people who had one of those thoughts might care about the subject for some period of time. What you've compiled is more like a list of what a telepath might overhear while hurrying along a busy street. It says nothing about anyone's values let alone the entire "human value system" - if such a thing even existed.

In a very few cases, mainly of adolescent skeletal remains. There is, as in everything, a scale of one type and a corresponding scale for the other type, with extremes at one end and an area of overlap at the other, where the distinguishing features are so little pronounced that identity is ambiguous. Generally, the differences are quite clear to a forensic pathologist or anthropologist. However, the differences are not only in the pelvic girdle but also in the long bones, articulations and especially the skull. Most of those can be altered, but not without risk or diminished functionality. While facial reconstruction is now routine in plastic surgery, the brain-pan is still pretty much off limits and changing the lower jaw is difficult and expensive. That's an interesting question. I'm not sure how silicone would be used. It is certainly done to augment the hips and buttocks of women, just as it is for breasts, and it is certainly easier than changing the bones. Ah, here we are! https://thetranscenter.com/transmen/body-masculinization-procedures/ The same kind of implant is used in feminizing a transgender body, for a fuller, more rounded shape. On female bodies, to become more masculine-looking, they do liposuction to flatten chest and buttocks. None of these procedures change the bones, so, yes, they are far less invasive than orthopedic surgery, but they don't answer the OP.

That's true. But we shun the periodic die-offs like the one we're experiencing now. Herd immunity, when the herd has attained such inflated numbers, is very expensive in terms of individual lives. Individual immunity or resistance is far more difficult to maintain in a crowded, cosmopolitan setting than it was in small groups scattered far apart in an open landscape. Different lifestyles demand different approaches.

Then you must 1. Approach your instructor and ask for remedial help. 2. Find out what the obstacles are and overcome them. 3. Pass your tests and exams with high enough grades to compensate for the poor term-mark. 4. Do not attempt to pursue higher education, or a career wherein communication skill is required. That's a mini-essay right there. You didn't quote anybody or cut it out of a magazine: you made a clear statement about something you know of your own experience. So maybe you have to take a different approach to essay writing - for example, cut up the material into small enough sections to deal with individually, so that it's less intimidating and your attention doesn't wander. Those many quotes you want to string together - how did you select them? That was research. If you understand them, you can explain them. So, take each one and translate it into your own words. Then string those translations together. List your sources at the end, and you're not cheating.

Yesterday, and we both did. But then, we are long practiced in communicating with each other, and we both have a vested interest in minimizing conflict. People argue over a great many things. Some are matters of personal importance, like the allocation of resources or balance of power or relative autonomy - whether in a family, a sport team or a nation makes no difference. Some matters are academic. These carry a great deal of weight in a professional forum, but very little around an office water-cooler. In every kind of argument, in every setting, there are risks and aspirations, costs and rewards. n each kind of argument, the motivation of the participants is determined by a set of variables that may not be obvious to an onlooker - and cer5tainly cannot be summed up in a template for "typical" argument. This may sometimes be true. But in real life, children are far more likely to be censored for asking uncomfortable questions than reward for ceasing to ask them. There are plenty of scoldings, and stern looks and shocked expressions, hisses and hushes and penance. What might be "the right thing" for a 12-year-old with a library card who wants to know where his dead grandmother went, when some adults are telling him she's in heaven with God, and some are saying she's watching over him as a guardian angel, and some say she's probably a ghost and some say she's still alive in your memories. Not the same thing is necessarily appropriate for a three-year-old wants to know where her gramomma went. The word and concept "parenting" hasn't been around very long, even in affluent western societies. In most of the world, it doesn't exist. People just have kids, try to keep them alive and teach them whatever the parents consider necessary for them to fit into the society where they will have to stay alive on their own. That, of course, includes the lies, delusions and irrational beliefs of their culture, as well as the moral and economic values to which the parents subscribe. Then reject it. I should add: There is the kernel of a serious discussion in there. If, for example, you asked what purpose it serves in particular kinds of situation for one party to deflect logical argument with distraction, intimidation, blandishment or non sequitur. Or raised the inquiry to the societal level and cited political consequences. But that wouldn't be philosophy; it would be sociology or psychology.

I have not heard it in those terms, except as regards an individual human in the divine scheme. I have heard : Given the vastness of the universe, why do humans think it was all created just for us? Given how little we know about who and what else is conscious in the universe, or even about the capabilities of other life-forms on this planet, let alone the potential capabilities of artificial intelligence, where do get off thinking that human intelligence is the epitome of cognitive power? Again, I have not heard it phrased in this way. Rather: Why do we think were are the only important thing in the universe? Worth, significance and importance are different, although related concepts, but they are all comparative. Comparison has to be in relation to some category, and according to some standard, which both need to be specified before the words can mean anything. It's nothing to to do with mass. As the species on this planet go (and we don't know about the other planets), we are among the large animals, and we have appropriated the privilege of destroying whales and giant sequoias, as well as mosquitoes and mice, because whatever we want is so much more important than they are. You mean, like "The God who created the entire universe looks exactly like me and wants exactly what I want."? Because, since we've been doing that, we have devastated the only planet we know we can survive on. It has not proved a sustainable policy for us. Is that really what " the problem" is? Exactly! The greatest philosopher couldn't exist without the meanest plankton, but all the rest of the world's life-forms including most humans, would be just fine without great philosophers. So, which is more important?

Works for me! That's quite strict. I suppose the words would have to be distinctive enough (i.e. not "came from that direction" or "a fat grey dog walked") to be recognizable. I'm pretty sure I wouldn't catch that... unless it were "It was the best of times;"

That's quite true, but we're unlikely to solve the problem without a massive ad campaign - and that still leaves all the distrusters of public media and conspiracy subscribers. About the most positive approach, in the meantime, is advocacy of natural and simple remedies, rather than commercial overkill products. It's the same with insect and weed control in the garden - chemical warfare on everything. I figure, if ScienceNostalgia is shunning that route, he's already on the right track. That's what will kill us all - plastic everywhere.

I honestly don't know any more ways beyond those we've already tried to explain the difference.

No, salt water won't do it. Drop the cap into a small container of vinegar, then rinse and air-dry. Ingesting vinegar residue won't harm you in any way.

Plagiarism is cheating. It's like buying an essay - or the research that someone else did in writing their essay - only, without paying for it; IOW, stealing it. It's also a form of cheating yourself out of the process of learning, and thereby, out of the earned knowledge. And cheating the other students who may be competing for the same reward but doing their on work. And cheating your future employers, clients, patients or whoever depends on your knowing everything your certificate claims you know when you graduate. Using another person's work and words is nothing like using examples from history to elaborate on your own work. If you researched a historical period or event, and looked up contemporary documents, you can quote short passages to illustrate your thesis, footnoting source and author - preferably several different sources. Handing in a seven-page passage from Gibbon with your own name on top of it is cheating.

It looks to me like a giant salamander. https://nationalzoo.si.edu/animals/japanese-giant-salamander They're amphibian, but can survive on land.

I sympathize - and wonder how many excellent academics feel the same way. It's a spiral, innit?

He may or may not be capable of understanding. We can't tell from his work, because he he hasn't done the work. So, it's better to assume. If he understood the subject matter, he wouldn't need to cheat, and he would avoid the risk of being caught, failed and expelled.

In the case of plagiarism, they're not taking the lecture, or copying what the teacher wrote on the blackboard. They're given an assignment to research a topic and produce their own report on it. Instead, they are copying another person's report, without doing the research, which was the path to understanding. Therefore, understanding does not enter into the issues surrounding plagiarism. That's completely beside the point. It's not about great pedagogy or understanding. They want the paper credits: the certificate, the diploma, the official recognition that they have completed a course of studies, so that they qualify for a position. But they have not actually learned the material, so they will not be competent in that position. You'd better hope none of them are your pharmacist!

What is often - even routinely - replaced is the head of the femur and the lining of its socket. That's done without disturbing the pelvis or changing its shape, so none of the ligaments or muscles have to fit any differently after the surgery. (Still a longish recovery time, though.) But if you tried to do it the other way around, the legs wouldn't fit right. See what I mean? One relatively simple way I can see of making the hips wider or narrower is adding a graft to or taking a piece out of the pubic bones on either side of the pubic symphysis. If the change is not too drastic, the alignment of the legs could adjust. That's assuming that childbirth is not an issue. That, In conjunction with reshaping the flare of the pelvis, might be all you need. It wouldn't affect function or load-bearing capacity, yet produce a more desirable body shape. Perhaps not an ideal one... But I think you have to consider practicality (risk, discomfort, healing time, long-term function, ease of locomotion) over vanity. I don't know which is better. The plastic version is light, durable, replacable and probably a whole lot less expensive. It's custom designed ahead of time, so you know exactly what the final product is. The greatest advantage is speed. Growing your own is great for repair, and certainly an enormous amount of progress has been made since I harvested graft material back in the last century sometime. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1359836820334946 Those attachments can't be got around. They're literally everywhere. All surgery on bone compromises some muscle function. With cosmetic surgery, you have to find the balance: how much risk for how much improvement? But the techniques and materials are advancing all the time: they can do magic now that was unthinkable in 1980. Not exactly my position. What I said, in the context, was that undergoing the most drastic version of such surgery for only a slightly improved appearance would be crazy. I'm perfectly fine with the corrections I did suggest: reshaping the flare at the top, along with reduction or extension of the pubic bones. That would change the appearance of the hips and waist sufficiently, with far less risk, pain and time than replacement of the entire pelvic girdle. Weigh and balance! It's actually the other way around. Techniques developed for traumatic damage can now be used for elective surgery. (Which is great, IMO) I have no idea. That's way beyond my area of imperfect understanding. Sounds pretty cool, though. It would revolutionize plastic surgery. But I'm afraid, with everything else going on in medicine as well the world these days, such esoteric research may be retarded in its progress.

I should think a textbook, small or huge, is not read continuously like a novel, but one lesson at a time, taking notes all the while, presumably following a lecture and followed by a discussion, each accompanied by notes. A research paper would serve a different purpose and would be read as background to course material. I wouldn't read it sequentially, but in sections. Read the abstract: that tells you the reason a study, experiment or project was done, on what, in what existing conditions, with what limitations, in what framework, and what it aims to accomplish. After that, you don't necessarily have to understand every single paragraph. What do you need to know? Scan the introduction and look at the table of contents, if there is one. What are you going to use from this paper, and what will you use it for? Once you figured that out, you can pick out the relevant sections; scan or browse the intervening parts and study more intensely the sections that relate to your own work.

Something else to factor in is the age/maturity/dependency of the student. In the early grades, a child is very much influenced by parental and societal behaviours and expectation. They may simply want to please a demanding parent, or they may have great pressure exerted on them to perform to an adult's standard. These habits may then become ingrained, unless some other very strong influence turns them in another direction. In some cultures, parental expectation and control is all but absolute throughout a young person's life, until they become self-supporting. In some cultures, competition for ranking, prizes, places in the respected institutions of higher learning, prestigious professional firms or hospitals is so intense that a weaker student may resort to desperate measures - simply because the price of failure, or even just quitting, is too high. Some students commit suicide. Some act out, act up, get arrested, get expelled - anything to get that achivement-monkey off their back. Some cheat and get away with it and go on to become extremely successful business tycoons. That seems like nothing more than laziness to me. * Obviously, I started the above a long time before posting it. Duties elsewhere intervened.

So, it's really not so much about the ethics of plagiarism - or whatever degree of appropriation of other people's effort - as about education itself. Whether it's meant to be a process of knowledge building, or just a means to some unrelated end.

There is also - and most of all in science - the matter of intellectual engagement. In doing research for an assignment, even if the assigned topic doesn't make your heart flutter, you come across data that lead to some other information that opens a new path of inquiry, and so forth. Not only do you retain more of the information itself, but you also become more adept at tracking down relevant facts and making connections and that, in turn, can lead to discoveries.