This is a perfectly acceptable question in a science course. Just because you don’t have the experience, knowledge, or, barring those two, even just the imagination to understand how a question might apply doesn’t make it strange or dumb. It does speak volumes about you, though.
Exactly. Citing a psychology paper from 1912 is risky business. Young people don’t know precisely when each particular science caught up to the current paradigm.
Is it though? I definitely had teachers in middle/high school with oddball requirements like “only physical books more than 10 years old are valid sources”. Total nonsense but it does happen. College is a place where you are meant to have these bad assumptions challenged and corrected. Presumably after a response they’ll be better for it.
What a strange and dumb question.
Or, you know, not real.
This is a perfectly acceptable question in a science course. Just because you don’t have the experience, knowledge, or, barring those two, even just the imagination to understand how a question might apply doesn’t make it strange or dumb. It does speak volumes about you, though.
Exactly. Citing a psychology paper from 1912 is risky business. Young people don’t know precisely when each particular science caught up to the current paradigm.
Is it though? I definitely had teachers in middle/high school with oddball requirements like “only physical books more than 10 years old are valid sources”. Total nonsense but it does happen. College is a place where you are meant to have these bad assumptions challenged and corrected. Presumably after a response they’ll be better for it.
Nothing ever happens.
Nononono, that was 30 years ago. Can you believe it? Don’t you feel old?
(It actually feels like 60 years ago to me, but I’m weird.)
It feels like an entirely different life to me.
2019 feels like a different lifetime to me.