Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watnot!watmath!ubc-vision!ubc-cs!manis From: manis@ubc-cs.UUCP Newsgroups: can.politics Subject: Elementary education and military spending Message-ID: <892@ubc-cs.UUCP> Date: Fri, 6-Mar-87 14:08:18 EST Article-I.D.: ubc-cs.892 Posted: Fri Mar 6 14:08:18 1987 Date-Received: Sun, 8-Mar-87 08:39:35 EST Reply-To: manis@ubc-cs.UUCP (Vincent Manis) Distribution: can Organization: UBC Department of Computer Science Lines: 46 Rob Aitken raises two points, in separate postings, to which I'd like to reply. 1) Requiring a bachelor's degree for elementary teachers? I'd go for that. An appropriate program would be a major in psychology, with emphasis on developmental psychology, and a minor in another subject. Elementary teaching is a very difficult task, and a good academic preparation would be appropriate. (In general, educational psychology is a pale imitation of the real thing.) 2) Military spending: Rob says that the military awards money because it thinks it will get some long term advantage from it, and points out that a better potato peeler will free up money which will be used for napalm. There is some merit to this argument, but, I'm afraid, not enough. First, the US (and even more, the USSR) has a highly militarised economy, and therefore one should consider the military budget to be a part of (and indeed a controlling factor in) the overall govt budget. Thus making education more efficient (see? there *is* a connection between these two points!) frees up money for napalm, too. Second, the military spends money not so much because it wants to get advantage out of it, but because it exists to spend money. Any aficionado of "60 Minutes" knows that. Thus, a high-profile project to develop psychokinetic powers of deflecting enemy missiles (SRI was actually funded to do some of this, in the 1970's, I believe, back when they were playing around with Uri Geller) consumes money that might otherwise go into something more directly lethal. The fact is that unbridled military spending is one of the worst curses you can wish on an economy. (On the other hand, as a Canadian nationalist, I support spending considerably more money than we presently do on our Forces, provided that (1) the money is used in a constructive way, and (2) that the Forces are compelled to follow the Charter of Rights in their recruitment and assignment policies.) My point in my previous posting was to point out that military funding of research has bad effects, even if you ignore the moral issues. ----- Vincent Manis {seismo,uw-beaver}!ubc-vision!ubc-cs!manis Dept. of Computer Science manis@cs.ubc.cdn Univ. of British Columbia manis%ubc.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa Vancouver, B.C. V6T 1W5 manis@ubc.csnet (604) 228-6770 or 228-3061 "BASIC is the Computer Science equivalent of 'Scientific Creationism'."