"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
m...
Brenda Ann wrote:
There's a difference between memorizing a formula or method and
memorizing specific answers to specific questions. The former is called
learning, and can be applied to many situations. The latter is called
laziness, and teaches nothing that can be used for any other purpose.

That is just hair-splitting. For instance, the first question
in my 2000 Extra Class License Manual is: What exclusive
frequency privileges in the 80-meter band are authorized to
Extra class control operators?

Of the four choices, the correct answer is 3500-3525 kHz.

Now what formula or method will yield the correct answer?
I simply memorized that specific answer to that specific
question. The moral is: "Work smarter, not harder!"
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

In the example YOU give - Cecil - it could be taken either way. In the case
of the "frequencies" you're to operate on for a given license and band -
YES - you could simply "memorize" (not really commit to memory) those
frequencies - for the exam purposes and just refer to a chart from there in.
OR you COULD "memorize" them (actually committing to memory) for the purpose
of NOT having to use a chart! However, once you use those frequencies after
a while - especially if active - then you "would" tend to "memorize" (for
life) those frequencies. Yes, it is definately splitting hairs!

L.

L. wrote:
YES - you could simply "memorize" (not really commit to memory)

Here's the crux of your communications problem. From Webster's:
"memorize - to commit to memory". *Everything* that one
memorizes is the act of committing something to memory. You
definitely need to pick a different word than "memorize"
to describe the concept you are trying to present. Memorizing
is how human beings remember things and it is a good thing.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
m...
L. wrote:
YES - you could simply "memorize" (not really commit to memory)

Here's the crux of your communications problem. From Webster's:
"memorize - to commit to memory". *Everything* that one
memorizes is the act of committing something to memory. You
definitely need to pick a different word than "memorize"
to describe the concept you are trying to present. Memorizing
is how human beings remember things and it is a good thing.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Eh, excuse me, it was not "I" who started splitting hairs here with regard
to MEMORY AND MEMORIZATION.
"I" KNOW what "memorization" means - I was using it in the "SLANG" sense
that YOU all are arguing about - memorizing something for just a few moments
of need as opposed to a "lifetime". There ARE "SLANG" uses for popular words
which do NOT coincide necessarily with Webster. Again, it was not "I" who
started this ridiculous argument.

AND for what it is worth - if you're (whoever this applies to) that freaking
lazy to not want to have to "learn" something - then it is no damned wonder
this country is going to hell. The downfall of our Education system begins
with that very principle (refusal to learn). I don't give a crap WHAT Hitler
or some other idiot said about being lazy and smart - if you're lazy - you
are no damned good to society or yourself for that matter. The REST of us
who have to pick up the pace to deal with the slackers. I'll be damned if I
ever hire a "LAZY" smart person. I want a person who is going to EARN their
keep. Sitting there telling me how things should be isn't what I would hire
them for - the purpose is to DO the things as they're supposed to be done.

Working smarter - not harder - is a good concept - but I DO NOT THINK - the
originator of it meant for LAZY asses to be using it as an EXCUSE to not
have to learn. I live by that concept (work smarter - not harder) often but
it sure in hell hasn't stopped me from having to - OR DESIRING to LEARN.

Lou

L. wrote:
"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
m...
L. wrote:
YES - you could simply "memorize" (not really commit to memory)

Here's the crux of your communications problem. From Webster's:
"memorize - to commit to memory". *Everything* that one
memorizes is the act of committing something to memory. You
definitely need to pick a different word than "memorize"
to describe the concept you are trying to present. Memorizing
is how human beings remember things and it is a good thing.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Eh, excuse me, it was not "I" who started splitting hairs here with regard
to MEMORY AND MEMORIZATION.
"I" KNOW what "memorization" means - I was using it in the "SLANG" sense
that YOU all are arguing about - memorizing something for just a few moments
of need as opposed to a "lifetime". There ARE "SLANG" uses for popular words
which do NOT coincide necessarily with Webster. Again, it was not "I" who
started this ridiculous argument.
but you choose to step into themiddle of of your own free will

AND for what it is worth - if you're (whoever this applies to) that freaking
lazy to not want to have to "learn" something - then it is no damned wonder
this country is going to hell. The downfall of our Education system begins
with that very principle (refusal to learn). I don't give a crap WHAT Hitler
or some other idiot said about being lazy and smart - if you're lazy - you
are no damned good to society or yourself for that matter. The REST of us
who have to pick up the pace to deal with the slackers. I'll be damned if I
ever hire a "LAZY" smart person. I want a person who is going to EARN their
keep. Sitting there telling me how things should be isn't what I would hire
them for - the purpose is to DO the things as they're supposed to be done.

Working smarter - not harder - is a good concept - but I DO NOT THINK - the
originator of it meant for LAZY asses to be using it as an EXCUSE to not
have to learn. I live by that concept (work smarter - not harder) often but
it sure in hell hasn't stopped me from having to - OR DESIRING to LEARN.
and nobody but your side has suggested it does

but there still ramins no need for me to ever know the differentce
between a collpitts and hartely occilator. If I should need that
knowledge It sits in the trdh shelf down bout the middle in nice bright
red book I used in college where it describes the difference in detail
"so that the reader my find older reference book usefull" or words to
that effect as I recell

and occionaly I do take it off the shelf and refer to it to exactly
that materail

Lou

an old friend wrote:
and occionaly I do take it off the shelf and refer to it to exactly
that materail

A brilliant lazy person knows that having the answer
within arm's reach is just as effective as knowing the
answer and probably much more efficient. At this very
moment, I have about 60 reference books within arm's
reach.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
m...
an old friend wrote:
and occionaly I do take it off the shelf and refer to it to exactly
that materail

A brilliant lazy person knows that having the answer
within arm's reach is just as effective as knowing the
answer and probably much more efficient. At this very
moment, I have about 60 reference books within arm's
reach.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

For a short time, you had my attention as being correct at least part of the
time - in this ongoing dumb argument. But here's where we part ways - "along
with the "memory" deal - which "I" didn't start.

A "brilliant" "lazy" person - isn't worth a dime. Brilliant ? BY WHO's
DEFINITION? I have a ton of books in my reach too - so whats your point?
Yes, SOME are "reference" books - but many I spent hours in "STUDYING".
It is the "reference" books I use for things not used daily or even at times
month to month. Books on hobbies I have but not enough time to get into as
much - or repair manuals for my test equipment - should I need to do so.
Having a ton of books at arms length doesn't substitute for KNOWLEDGE OR
WORK. Those "books" sure in hell aren't going to "troubleshoot" equipment
for me to earn my pay. They're not going to diagnose my body to heal me.
They're not going to fix my vehicle "just" by having them at arms length.
They may make you LOOK smart! They won't "make" you a Ham operator, Nuclear
Physicist, Doctor, Lawyer, Mechanic, etc.
SO what - you can pull (legal/physics/etc) laws out or Meds and dosages,
spark plug clearances and so on - BIG DEAL. anyone with half a brain can do
that. Even those who busted their ass to get to the top have to keep
"working" at it to STAY at the top. Even today, Bill Gates - smart as he is,
I'm sure is still working on "something". I'm sure he doesn't sit there with
his ton of "reference" books at arms length - and do NOTHING. And I'm
DAMNED sure - he had to study long and hard to learn all he knows to get to
where he is today. I will bet my last dime he would tell you himself - it
wasn't easy. It took LOTS of hard work, dedication, studying, committment,
TRIAL AND ERROR - to make things work. TRIAL AND ERROR doesn't get done
sitting on your ass. NOTHING worth while - does. UNLESS of course that so
called "brilliant" "lazy" person is collecting a welfare check - smart yes -
but not enough to be gainfully employed. Ya know - I have knowledge of a man
who can recite transistor theory and much much more - formulas and all from
his head. BUT - the poor ******* can't even solder. He has NO clue on how to
troubleshoot or repair. So, tell me - what good is it to JUST be
"brilliant"? AND AGAIN - BY WHO'S STANDARDS? Hell, I've known supposedly
slow and/or "mentally retarded" people that put so called "knowledgeable"
people to shame. They talked with more sense, didn't assume they knew
everything and sure in hell weren't afraid to TRY to work. Those who "CLAIM"
to know everything - usually aren't worth a plugged nickle. We ALL have
something to "learn" each and every day of our lives. Anyone who thinks
otherwise or that they know it all - are DEAD already. They won't get
anywhere in life. "I" for one will NEVER EVER claim I know "everything". I
LOVE to learn new things and look forward to each new adventure - be it
repairing something - tackling a new problem never seen before to learning
things to do with my "other" activities that take up many hours of my life.
In THOSE fields - "knowing it all" can get you KILLED.

Sorry dude - I jumped track from agreeing with you............ Pick it apart
all you want. LAZY DOES NOT WORK - no matter which way you cut it. I'm
leaning in the direction that you've apparently bought one of those GET RICH
QUICK WITHOUT WORKING books............ SORRY DUDE - THEY DON"T WORK.

L.

And as for "Hitler" claiming that - as you said about his admiration for a
brilliant lazy man - eh......... last I heard - the man was a fruit cake,
lost the war, cost thousands of lives, innocent ones at that - and ended up
committing suicide - WHAT A LOSER. And I would want to follow his
examples/principles - why?

L. wrote:
I have a ton of books in my reach too - so whats your point?

If you are ambitious enough to already possess the knowledge,
you don't need the books. I am too lazy to try to possess all
knowledge so I need the books. Not having to memorize all
knowledge frees up my mind for creative thought.

And as for "Hitler" claiming that - as you said about his admiration for a
brilliant lazy man - eh......... last I heard - the man was a fruit cake,
lost the war, cost thousands of lives, innocent ones at that - and ended up
committing suicide - WHAT A LOSER. And I would want to follow his
examples/principles - why?

The statements that I quoted were from a WWI German military
leader probably uttered while Hitler was still a private or
corporal. Why do you have to try to misrepresent what I said?
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 18:37:57 GMT, Cecil Moore
wrote:

an old friend wrote:

and occionaly I do take it off the shelf and refer to it to exactly
that materail

A brilliant lazy person knows that having the answer
within arm's reach is just as effective as knowing the
answer and probably much more efficient.

You conflated "stupid" with "brilliant".

Any knowledgeable person knows that knowledge is valuable for its own
sake.

On 12 Aug 2006 10:58:17 -0700, "an old friend"
wrote:

but there still ramins no need for me to ever know the differentce
between a collpitts and hartely occilator.

There's no *need* for you to even know that you can use a radio to
talk to people.

There's a need, if we want a ham license to say that the holder of
said license has achieved a certain level of technical competence, to
test for that competence. Otherwise all the license says is "I have
this piece of paper with ink on it".

On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 19:16:28 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 18:16:39 -0400, Al Klein
wrote:

but there still ramins no need for me to ever know the differentce
between a collpitts and hartely occilator.

There's no *need* for you to even know that you can use a radio to
talk to people.

there is if I want a license for it

Learn (now there's a new concept for you) the difference between
"specific" and "general".

There's a need, if we want a ham license to say that the holder of
said license has achieved a certain level of technical competence, to
test for that competence. Otherwise all the license says is "I have
this piece of paper with ink on it".

no it say I have legal license to do xyz with it that is all it has
ever said

In your limited experience - which is about 0% relevant to anyone
else.

experhaps in the epriod where the general advanced and
Extra class all had the same preveldges

Which was ... oh ... only a few decades. But you weren't licensed
then, so they don't matter, right?