help!

[Snorri1234]

here was my answer:

4. I would describe a family characteristic of my time as pop culture having too much influence over young children. Children become too immersed in television or computers or cell phones or video games or drugs or violence etc. etc. It wastes their time, money and gets children nowhere. Go back 150 years in England and a boy my age would be under and apprenticeship. Go back 50 years a boy my age would be going outside to play sports instead of staying inside and wasting time.


I went to the teacher after school to ask her what "family characteristics" were. It turns out it meant (i dont remember exactly) but what an "average" family was, how it runs, etc. etc.

Btw i know the answer could have been written much better (not to mention the actual answer itself could have been correct) but note it was very late at night

I would certainly have made it more lenghty but that answer is pretty good. I wouldn't have said pop-culture though. Pop-culture is exactly that which is populair and it has always had a large influence. In fact, I would say that that influence has decreased by subcultures becoming more and more important. At first you had a choice between the Beatles or Rolling Stones, but now you have like 500 different bands all of which you can be a fan off and find more people who are a fan of via the internet. With the increasing easiness for bands to earn money (or basically anything else having easier times to bring whatever they're selling to people), it seems that there are less mass-followings of a particular thing.

[Snorri1234]

http://www.cracked.com/article_15231_7-reasons-21st-century-making-you-miserable.html

[LYR]

Sounds good...you know what I notice? People don't seem to be able to just chill out alone...relax by themselves...

People get in a car and feel the need to call someone on their cell phone for no good reason. They just have to talk to someone else....

And the constant texting...

And the Facebook stuff...

So many people seem to be averse to being with their own thoughts...I find it interesting. A constant need for socialization....but very "shallow" socialization...much like you see here in the CC Forums....

Not that I am criticizing any of these activities on their own...but it is the sum total of all these activities, along with the lack of being alone with one's own thoughts...

Maybe I am imagining some of this, but it really seems that more people would rather have constant superficial relationships than a few closer relationships coupled with time spent alone.

I don't think you're imagining it. In fact you could say that there is an inverse relationship between the breadth and amount of communication available to us and the depth of that communication. What does having 300 facebook friends mean, anyway?

Hahaha...err...ummm...I don't get it...

Where's the sarcastic flame?

Sarcastic flames are for flamewars. Here it is all serious bussines.


Also, that post of yours sums up exactly what I think about this stuff. I have grown up with the fast rise in communication and I notice how stuff has changed in communication. Real-life interaction has become less important because of the increasing amount of ways you can communicate with others through other means. I talk on MSN to people I haven't seen in weeks, which on one hand helps keeping up relationships but on the other hand also makes them a little more meaningless. The increasing amount of unreal communication makes people less happy, and they counter that with futhering those unreal relationships via internet or cellphone when the actual happiness would better increase by doing more with that actual real life meeting.


I read an interresting comedy-article on it, I'm gonna search for it.

I have to agree. I honestly hate it when I come to a friends house and they are texting or on facebook etc. Even when IMing online, sometimes I am so tired of typing (either physically tired, or tired of not being able to express myself enough). I ALWAYS prefer hanging out with my friends in real life, not only is it more fun, but you can express yourself more freely. Btw snorri, I have just started reading that article, and I definetly have at least two or three people I can confide in, and probably 3 or 4 (non-family) members I would trust with a photo like that.

[PLAYER57832]

here was my answer:

4. I would describe a family characteristic of my time as pop culture having too much influence over young children. Children become too immersed in television or computers or cell phones or video games or drugs or violence etc. etc. It wastes their time, money and gets children nowhere. Go back 150 years in England and a boy my age would be under and apprenticeship. Go back 50 years a boy my age would be going outside to play sports instead of staying inside and wasting time.


I went to the teacher after school to ask her what "family characteristics" were. It turns out it meant (i dont remember exactly) but what an "average" family was, how it runs, etc. etc.

Btw i know the answer could have been written much better (not to mention the actual answer itself could have been correct) but note it was very late at night

The main thing is you thought about your answer and gave something original ... that is often the prime thing teachers want. They want to know you heard them (or read the book), thought about it and are able to process the information into a logical discussion or opinion.

[LYR]

here was my answer:

4. I would describe a family characteristic of my time as pop culture having too much influence over young children. Children become too immersed in television or computers or cell phones or video games or drugs or violence etc. etc. It wastes their time, money and gets children nowhere. Go back 150 years in England and a boy my age would be under and apprenticeship. Go back 50 years a boy my age would be going outside to play sports instead of staying inside and wasting time.


I went to the teacher after school to ask her what "family characteristics" were. It turns out it meant (i dont remember exactly) but what an "average" family was, how it runs, etc. etc.

Btw i know the answer could have been written much better (not to mention the actual answer itself could have been correct) but note it was very late at night

The main thing is you thought about your answer and gave something original ... that is often the prime thing teachers want. They want to know you heard them (or read the book), thought about it and are able to process the information into a logical discussion or opinion.

Yeah she said that since I put "effort" into it (actually bother to try and answer the question) she gave me full credit. She said that later in the year she expects correct answers though.

[PLAYER57832]

here was my answer:

4. I would describe a family characteristic of my time as pop culture having too much influence over young children. Children become too immersed in television or computers or cell phones or video games or drugs or violence etc. etc. It wastes their time, money and gets children nowhere. Go back 150 years in England and a boy my age would be under and apprenticeship. Go back 50 years a boy my age would be going outside to play sports instead of staying inside and wasting time.


I went to the teacher after school to ask her what "family characteristics" were. It turns out it meant (i dont remember exactly) but what an "average" family was, how it runs, etc. etc.

Btw i know the answer could have been written much better (not to mention the actual answer itself could have been correct) but note it was very late at night

The main thing is you thought about your answer and gave something original ... that is often the prime thing teachers want. They want to know you heard them (or read the book), thought about it and are able to process the information into a logical discussion or opinion.

Yeah she said that since I put "effort" into it (actually bother to try and answer the question) she gave me full credit. She said that later in the year she expects correct answers though.

Remember "correct" in the context of a classroom is whatever the teacher says. But a good teacher will generally appreciate a well thought out and politely presented disagreement... in some cases, more than the "xerox" types. And another key to success is knowing which type of teacher you have (one who just wants to hear their own word reiterated -- restated or one who actually likes some discussion).

[PLAYER57832]

it means that education isnt really education anymore it just teaches popular opinion like evolution. and that until we start teaching and not informing of popular opinion in our schools education will suffer as we see it already is suffering

We certainly don't need another Creationist/Evolution Thread, but it would be nice if you at least learned about evolution BEFORE claiming you know it is false ... and that means going somewhere other than the Creation Science texts and threads. Want to discuss it more -- try Widowmakers already long thread on the subject.

[jonesthecurl]

I have to say I think she was wrong. The reference seems to me (and I've reread it) clearly to say that there are attitudes common to all throughout an era, rather than that there are things held true by the average family.

Still, she's the teacher, and one thing you'll learn is that when it comes to exams and test, the person that marks them is always right...