[HPforGrownups] Re: The foggy future

[Denise]

No: HPFGUIDX 536

This could apply to my course at Akron U, Physics of Light, where we had to blow soap bubbles and then write a paper about how the light was refracted through them....  Imagine my roommates'  horror when they looked at what I was doing, blowing bubbles in the middle of winter in the backyard, in an Ohio snowfall!

:P
Dee
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Brooks R 
  To: HPforGrownups at egroups.com 
  Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2000 2:12 AM
  Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The foggy future



       
       My Groups | HPforGrownups Main Page | Start a new group!  


  --- In HPforGrownups at egroups.com, "Vicki Merriman" <vjmerri at i...> 
  wrote:

  > But if it's so imprecise that its not practical, then why study it
  at 
  > all.  Best to leave it undisturbed.

  I suggest three reasons, which are not mutually exclusive, either.

  Reason I: The MoM / Board of Governors of Hogwarts requires it be on 
  the curriculum.  Trelawney was the only applicant.  After all, DADA 
  must fall in the same category, and they have a succession of 'only 
  applicants; and Trelawny is probably no more useless a divination 
  teacher than Quirrell was a DADA teacher even BEFORE he was possessed.

  Reason II:  Dumbledore is content with it because the more observant 
  students will figure out what a load of hooey Divination usually is; 
  and the less observant ones may someday figure that out too and feel 
  more ashamed of themselves for not figuring it out sooner, which will 
  also be a good object lesson.

  Reason III:  Lots of schools have courses in what can charitably 
  described as subjects which are hooey.  Some people can construct
  whole 
  graduate courses out of "contemplating the whichness of what", to
  quote 
  Heinlein.  Sometimes courses even in things popularly considered to
  be 
  sciences are in fact not truly sciences -by the definition, science
  is 
  supposed to be about hypotheses which are tested by repeatable, 
  controlled, experiments.  But some things we call science really 
  consist of nothing more than observations, because it is not feasible 
  to actually create and carry out a repeatable controlled experiment.  
  Economics, for example.  Of course, this also applies to
  astronomy.... 
  and there are some things we should be grateful are not amenable to 
  repeateable controlled experiments, such as cosmology!  (Destroy the 
  universe and recreate it to see if it comes out the same next
  time....)



  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
  HPforGrownups-unsubscribe at egroups.com






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]