Definition of "book learning"

Shit, this thread has gone to every tangent imaginable. First its about whether book learning is worth it or not, then it goes on for several pages about kokonuts supposed acceptance letter to a Ph.D program, and now we are discussing advertising tactics?

Here is my opinion on all matters discussed:
1. I believe that book learning is just as important as experience. It's impossible to experience everything, you don't have time to make all the mistakes, and therefore you must read of other people's mistakes in books. Like all things - in order to have a well rounded education, one must make a well-rounded approach to that learning to receive the education. Books, common sense, and experience is much more effective at teaching if they are done together, not independently.

IE - Tyson foods requires all applicants for a supervisory position to hold a 4 year Bachelor Degree, Poultry Sciences preferred but not a required major. My take on it is this, you can take every course possible on poultry science and learn about the structure, biology, and whatnots of chickens, BUT all of that is completely worthless if you can't apply that knowledge to Evis, or Deboning or, even raising broilers or layers. You also will have trouble earning the respect of your employees if you can't process a chicken yourself, so maybe a good 5 years exp in poultry processing on the line is great experience, you know your chicken from the processing standpoint. And you have got to have people skills as a supervisor, if you can't mediate a dispute between two hotheaded people, or if you can't handle a worker cussing you from one end to the other, your going to be a door mat at best.

2. As for kokonut's claim of an acceptance into a Ph.D program but refused the offer on the grounds of "better things", but yet cannot fully and accurately describe the Ph.D application process nor keep his stories straight, as well as avoidance of questions only leave me suspicious rather than having my couriosity fullfilled.

3. As for advertising tactics, all advertisers omit the bad things about their products, or don't tell the entire truth about their products as a way to lure buyers, if you also notice certain products or services are advertised during certain times of days and/or on certain days to reach a target audience. Also it is common knowledge that advertisers use empty phrases that sound all positive such as "New and Improved", and "Popular" or "Recommended by Dentists" to get people to think the product is really good. This way it has the same effect as "Recommended by the American Dental Association", without actually having to get the approval or recommendation by the American Dental Association" Just using "Recommended by Dentists" pretty much says any dentist, even a shade tree dentist will recommend this toothpasts even though studies show that this product may actually be harmful for your teeth.

This is why we see a lot of products such as "Juicy Fruit" but when you read the package closely in fine print it says something like "Not made from fruit juice" and the first ingredient listed on the back is usually high fructose corn syrup, sugar, and/or dextrose.

Not false advertising but it comes pretty damn close. Companies always look for a loophole to get through to increase advertising while increasing sales as well.
 
As a rule, no. There are some gray areas like when an ads say "4 out of five Denists approve of product x" What they don't tell you is the context behind this approval. Perhaps dentists recommend product x because of it's stock value not because it's sugar free.

Blatant disregard for people's safety is a whole another can of worms like that peanut butter company (I think it was Peanut Peanut Corporation of America) who blatantly disregarded people's safety by knowing the product was tainted and they sent it out regardless. If they had their own advertising dept who knew about it, that dept could be legally held responsible.

I think the safety dept was too lax. You need laws and people who are willing to enforce it. A law is no good if no one will enforce it.

They also forget to tell you that it was only 4 out of 5 that were consulted. That provides a different context than 4 out of 5 of a representative population.
 
Yes, "dermatologist recommended" could be somebody's brother-in-law that says, yep, I recommend it.
 
I didn't read all of sallylou's post so I'll answer a bit more.

Tobbaco ads were unethical. after it became known they caused cancer. One of Reynold's heirs refused to have anything to do with tobacco because the fact it caused cancer troubled him.

I don't know much about drug safety but I assume they're under FDA or a department similar to it. I would imagine that there are strict federal regulations regarding drugs as they can have powerful effects on the human body.

I wouldn't call ads for Coke unethical.

I have to agree with Dixie regarding the tactics of many advertisers. Many people think of Gatorade as a healthy sports drink. It's anything but... It has tons of sugar and I had to give up Lime/lemon Gatorade after I found out I have Diabetes. I love anything that's lime flavored.

I'm quoting Dixie here:
As for kokonut's claim of an acceptance into a Ph.D program but refused the offer on the grounds of "better things", but yet cannot fully and accurately describe the Ph.D application process nor keep his stories straight, as well as avoidance of questions only leave me suspicious rather than having my couriosity fullfilled.

I could see this coming to Koko as early as my debate in Ironies of Ironies, Gore thread. I figured if that the inconsistencies were as glaring to others as to me, he'd get questioned.
 
because AD is a rather unique forum. more like..... a family-type community where everybody knows everybody... and we have meet each other in person unlike most of other forums which are anonymous and you can be whatever you want.... but not in AD.

It does hurt us when a person isn't what he/she is. so you understand sometimes we must scrutinize one's credibility.

Actually this is pretty true. At least one couple on this forum knows my daughter personally and she considers them friends. They can find out anything they want to about me in a ten minute phone call.
 
Back
Top