What every educated person should know

[Dinsdale]

Can we compile a list of "things" any person should know at a bare minimum to be considered "educated"? Allow me to suggest we make two lists, one for "humanities", and the other for "science/technology." When suggesting an entry, please try to quantify the depth of knowledge of that topic required. Please comment on all proposed entries so we can decide whether they should be included or bumped.

I also acknowledge that my ability to participate in this limits it to a "western" focus. Perhaps that can be discussed as well.

Here go my starters:

Humanities:
1. Know that Shakespeare was an English poet/playwright, and be able to identify the names and very rough plots for at least a couple of his plays. Extra credit for a quote, or at least realizing one or two common sayings are from his works.
2. An ancient Greek guy named Homer wrote the Iliad and the Odyssey, and at least some idea of some aspect of the stories.
3. The names of the 4 Beatles, and be able to hum at least one of their tunes.
4. What happened in 1066.
5. Be able to distinguish between paintings by Renoir, Monet, Picasso, and Warhol.
6. Know who painted the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel.

Science/technology
A. The earth is round and revolves around the Sun.
B. You should be able to connect E=mc2 w/ Einstein. Extra points if you have the faintest idea of its significance.
C. Some concept of the structure of an atom, and a realization that atoms make up molecules, which make up matter.
D. the ability to solve for "x" in a basic algebraic equation.
E. The average velocity of a coconut-laden sparrow.

See, I'm not asking for much.

[wring]

Damn, by your criteria, I qualify in both - that alone should frighten you since I made a studied effort to NOT take science in college (for example, took Rocks 101 for non majors, and the astronomy class where they likened the galaxies to giant pizza's being tossed around).

I'll have to think about this some more.....

[iampunha]

How about just knowing your name? And knowing a very basic history of your country of origin.

[MikeG]

African or European?
:d+r:

[OESGal]

I'm with Wring, I do know that stuff. The only one that has me stumped is "what happened in 1066"??? What was that? I feel sure I will know with just a little more detail than just the year.

Oh, and about the E=mc^2 and Einstein, shouldn't we also know that this is associated with his realtivity theory? Otherwise, we will look stupid when we say, "Oh yeah, Einstein, he's that guy who came up with that wierd looking number combination, E=mc^2

[Revtim]

B. You should be able to connect E=mc2 w/ Einstein. Extra points if you have the faintest idea of its significance.


I would make knowing its significance mandatory, and its connection with Einstein the extra points. It's important because of what it means, not who it came from.



Regarding 1066, I remembered that it was the Battle of Hastings, but drew a complete blank as to its significance. Looking it up, I see that it "ended in the defeat of Harold II of England by William, duke of Normandy, and established the Normans as the rulers of England." I'm still not sure why this is so significant; sure, at the time it was a pretty big deal, but what makes it one of the most significant historical facts of nearly the last 1000 years? I would say that the wars of the last century are more significant, and perhaps should be considered more important to today's historical education.

I would add the basic causes and resolutions of WWI and WW2 to the list, and Korea/Vietnam/Gulf War for US education systems.

[Dinsdale]

Yeah, I'm asking for REALLY basic stuff. Like when shown a photo of Mao, you should know he had something to do with China and communism. What I find disturbing is how many people seem to have no clue what or who really famous things/people are. A couple of years ago, I asked my 3 brothers-in-law, all college grads, all very successful in their careers, if they knew who Fellini was. None of them even knew he was a film director. That kind of thing makes me sad.

OESYou want to include the ability to spit out the word "relativity"? Fine with me. Need we require any more? Some idea what the hell it means?

See, my basic premise, which I may not have explained adequately, is that there are certain things a person should know one or two things about to "appear" educated. For example, if I say to you "Einstein", you should be able to say back "E=mc2" and "relativity." Generally, social interactions require little more depth. And if I were to say to you "1066" ...

Now let's get some suggestions here.

Al right, I've given
6. Recognize mao's picture and
7. Know Fellini was a director

Am I playing by myself here?

[Dinsdale]

Originally posted by Revtim

I would add the basic causes and resolutions of WWI and WW2 to the list, and Korea/Vietnam/Gulf War for US education systems.


I agree something is needed about WWI-II, but disagree with the latter 3, other than that one should know we were involved in some conflict there. And I suggest the Vietnam War may be more significant that the other 2.

What, specifically should one know about WWI-II?

[Robot Arm]

Originally posted by Dinsdale
What, specifically should one know about WWI-II?


The years they took place (People in the United States should know the years of U.S. involvement too.), how they were started, which countries aligned themselves on which sides, and who won.

[wring]

Originally posted by Dinsdale

What, specifically should one know about WWI-II?

I think they should at the very least recognize the name "Hitler", know that Japan and Germany were on the same side, and be able to name at least two participants on the other side. They should also have some awareness of the mass murders of the Jews. At LEAST! Bonus points if they know that fighting went on in Europe, the Far East and Northern Africa as well. (yea, I know, Pearl Harbor, too).

[Stoid]

I believe I have it on my shelf somewhere...can't remember the name.

1) Be able to name all the presidents in order since Roosevelt. This is minimum, people.

2) Who was Pres during the Civil War, what that war was about (you lose points if you say simply "slavery") and who won.

3) Your US congressperson and Senator. Your mayor (if applicable, some towns have other types of leaders - know yours) your governor and your state reps and senators. (I'd fail this one)

4) That "Citizen Kane" is generally acknowledged to be the best film of all time. You are permitted to disagree; I do. You should also know who made it and what it was about.

5) Who invented the airplane, the telephone, the electric light, and the automobile, and approximately when.

6) What DNA is.

7) How babies are made. (By the way, how many of you know that pregnancy occurs in the fallopian tubes, not the uterus?) This includes a basic understanding of the female reproductive system and menstruation, even if you are male.

8) You should have read at least one work by each of the following authors:

Twain
Dickens
Dickenson, Emily
Robert Frost
William Faulkner
Vonnegut
Dorothy Parker
Steinbeck

And more that I can't think of right now.

I have to go. I'll be back, tho...

[pepperlandgirl]

I'm still not sure why this is so significant; sure, at the time it was a pretty big
deal, but what makes it one of the most significant historical facts of nearly the last 1000 years? I would say that the
wars of the last century are more significant, and perhaps should be considered more important to today's historical
education.
Well, from what I can remember from 10th Grade World History, the Norman, William the Conquerer (SP?) Now, when he won in the Battle of Hastings, both the language and the Royal Family changed. The Germanic language that English is based in got a hefty dose of French, which is what makes our Modern English so damn complicated.
Also, William was the father of King Richard the Lionhearted and King John (You know, the guy with the Magna Carta).

Of course, I could be horribly wrong about this. If so, sorry.

[ignatzmouse]

O.K., I'll play. So far, all of what you have listed seems to indicate only a minimal education. That is to say, a person who did not know the things you listed would seem to me to be a little freakish. That is not to say that I don't encounter such people every day. In light of this, I provide the following examples of things that have genuinely startled me when people didn't know them. (Uh-Oh, this sounds awfully similar to that thread from the other day…)

-Know the continents.
-Know who Thomas Edison was and be able to identify two or three inventions attributed to him.
-Be able to identify the following as modern (late 19th or 20th century developments): The automobile, airplane, telephone, radio, television, computers, the internet.
-Know when Adolph Hitler lived and what country he led. Be able to identify the Holocaust and at least identify Jews as one of the victimized groups.

I have to wonder about the Beatles. I am generally startled when someone hasn't heard of them, but I would not be surprised or terribly concerned if someone couldn’t name them all. I assume that at some point they will be removed from the list, while Einstein, Hitler, and the Norman Conquest seem like pretty long-term residents.

There was a book on this, by E.D. Hirsch. Unfortunately, his proposition was that all these facts were the point of education. I see this as more of a curiosity. I would far rather have people be able to really understand half of this stuff than know all the facts. Also, as I recall, some of the stuff in Hirsch's book was simply false.

[Dinsdale]

Originally posted by Robot Arm
Originally posted by Dinsdale
What, specifically should one know about WWI-II?


The years they took place (People in the United States should know the years of U.S. involvement too.), how they were started, which countries aligned themselves on which sides, and who won.

I suggest it would be sufficient to know the general decades in which they occurred. And is it inappropriate for me to suggest WWII has had more lasting significance than WWI? How many folk really know how/why WWI started, other than that Archduke Ferdinand got offed? And is that why it started?

originally posted by wring
I think they should at the very least recognize the name "Hitler", know that Japan and Germany were on the same side, and be able to name at least two participants on the other side. They should also have some awareness of the mass murders of the Jews. At LEAST! Bonus points if they know that fighting went on in Europe, the Far East and Northern Africa as well. (yea, I know, Pearl Harbor, too).

This is the kind of stuff I'm suggesting. Allow me to offer as well, c/o WWII, D-Day, buzz bomb, Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

[Dinsdale]

Okay. So far, by our de minimis standard, I'm relatively educated. Except ---

stoid
Who the heck invented the automobile?
And I do not believe I have read anything by Dorothy Parker.

How did you select your 8? Regarding many authors, I believe some awareness of their work and it's importance is required. Having actually read them is a bonus.

Oh yeah. Fuck Hirsch. He stole my idea pre-emptively.

[Robot Arm]

Originally posted by Stoidela
1) Be able to name all the presidents in order since Roosevelt.


Which one?

[Phobos]

general science
- the Scientific Method & terminology (theory, law, hypothesis, etc.)
- Critical thinking....such as Sagan's Baloney Detection Kit (http://www1.tpgi.com.au/users/tps-seti/baloney.html)

Astronomy
- The sun is a star.
- The sun and 9 planets are the main parts of the solar system.
- Our solar system is part of the Milky Way galaxy (and is just one of billions of others in the galaxy).
- The Milky Way galaxy is one of billions of other galaxies in the universe.
- The Earth is mindbogglingly small compared to the universe.

Biology
- Life evolves.
- "nature vs nurture"

anthropology/sociology
- a wide variety of cultures exists/existed that may have different viewpoints on something one culture may take for granted
- survival can be difficult

history
- basic familiarity with the past major civilizations of the world (time period, location, general characteristics)

geography
- be able to identify your location on a globe that does not show country/state boundaries
- be able to identify the 7 continents on that same globe

[ignatzmouse]

stoid
Your list of authors does seem a bit arbitrary. First, they are overwhelmingly American. In addition, although I very much enjoy Parker and Vonnegut, it seems strange that they should supercede Poe, London, or Hemingway.
This seems to be part of the problem with such lists. At some point they become lists of personal preferences. A person who does not know that the U.S. dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki cannot claim to be educated. I would argue that one can be educated without having read Breakfast of Champions.

[Phobos]

Originally posted by Stoidela

2) Who was Pres during the Civil War, what that war was about (you lose points if you say simply "slavery") and who won.


Reminds me of the Simpsons episode where Apu was applying for U.S. citizenship and was asked this question. (I won't attempt to quote his long, involved response before the instructor said "just say 'slavery'") :)

[Crusoe]

Stoid - your criteria are US-specific, right?

My humble tuppence-worth:

A person should be able to outline briefly the what and why (even if only a sentence or two) of World War I, World War II (including the Holocaust), and the Cold War. They should have a basic understanding of sexual reproduction (as Stoidela said) and (I might be being optimistic here) a basic understanding of where to find out things they don't already know - whether libraries, internet or the media.

They should be able to give a couple of reasons as to why inventions such as the internet, telephone, television, radio, print media, automobiles and aircraft are important in the world. I don't care if people don't know who invented them, but I do care that they understand why they're important. They should also know who the leader and opposition leader are in their own country, and roughly what the political differences are between them (if applicable).

[Eggs à la Ted]

I definitely think Leonardo da Vinci should be included somehow. As should Karl Marx and maybe one or two greek philosophers.

The Renaissance is pretty important, so you should know roughly when and where it took place, and be able to name a few key figures.

Stoidela's suggestions seem much too anglocentric for my taste. At least that's my excuse for failing half of them.

[ignatzmouse]

Probably one should be aware of the major religions and their basic ideas. Of course, like MattK, I think that real education means real understanding; better that one should understand two religions than be able to spit out a quote about twenty. On the other hand, I understood the original post to be more about superficial identification of minimally educated people, rather that a prescription for education.

[Fiver]

Dinsdale:And is it inappropriate for me to suggest WWII has had more lasting significance than WWI? How many folk really know how/why WWI started, other than that Archduke Ferdinand got offed? And is that why it started?

It's not inappropriate, as such; it just illustrates the ultimate pointlessness of knowing a handful of random facts without a minimal depth of understanding of the history, science and processes surrounding those facts.

Yes, WWII has had more lasting significance, if you think about such events as the Holocaust and the invention of nuclear weapons. But WWII was also, in an easily demonstrated way, a direct consequence of WWI. Both wars were part of the tide of the 20th century, and it's ridiculous to assume one comprehends them both just because he knows who Ferdinand and Hitler were.

[Wozzo]

Good question, and lots of interesting responses. I want to think about this for a while. But I gotta say this now - I think distinguishing between Renoir and Monet is pretty far down on the list!

One thing that leaps to mind is major muscle groups - that is, knowing more than just the word *abs* or *delts*.

[casdave]

Good education is surely about being able to disinguish from real evidence and opinion.


Being able to understand and use information at hand to arrive at the best fit conclusion.

Understanding that there are many solutions to a particular problem or challenge and having the imagination to try something differant.

Understanding that there is so much more to us than a mechanistic being, that we need cultural enrichment.

[Dinsdale]

I guess what I had in mind was something along the lines of "100 things everyone should know something about."

Yes, I fully agree with everyone's observation that the recitation of isolated facts does not constitute knowledge. But I was wondering if we could boil things down to some sort of list, aware of the benefits and shortcomings of any such activity.

So it was in such an ultra-reductivist midset that I made certain comments.

Oh yeah, some knowledge of human anatomy is required. I'll have to figure out how much I can reduce it.

Carry on.

[Muffin]

Originally posted by OESGal
The only one that has me stumped is "what happened in 1066"??? What was that?
Originally posted by Revtim
[quote]Regarding 1066, I remembered that it was the Battle of Hastings, but drew a complete blank as to its significance. Looking it up, I see that it "ended in the defeat of Harold II of England by William, duke of Normandy, and established the Normans as the rulers of England." I'm still not sure why this is so significant; sure, at the time it was a pretty big deal, but what makes it one of the most significant historical facts of nearly the last 1000 years?

1066 is simply a key date in the Norman Conquest, which in the long run resulted in two things: Middle English and English law.

In the centuries following the Conquest, our language changed from Old English, which is extremely difficult for modern English users to follow, to Middle English, which is easily recognizable and fairly comprehensible to Modern English users. The use of Middle English for both religious and secular writing became popular (previously Latin was the norm), and within a couple of centuries of the Conquest, Middle English became the language of the state in England (previously Latin and French were the norm).

Similarly, in the centuries following the Conquest our legal system developed. Regular law courts, including travelling courts were established early on following the conquest, and although they were based on the pre-existing shire system and feudal traditions, they still helped protect people from oppessive feudal laws. This set the basis for our system of common law which most (but certainly not all) of the English speak world still uses. However, the ongoing conflict between the Crown and aristocracy eventually resulted in the Magna Carta (1215), which for the first time limited the power of the Crown by making the Crown responsible to the law. Think of it as the first bill of rights.

Obviously the changes in language and in law took hundreds of years. Why then is the date 1066 so important? The conquest provided the underlying structure for the linguistic and legal changes. It provided a French court structure to play against the pre-existing Anglo-Saxon political alliances. It provided a court language to play against the common tongue. It provided power tensions which led to our present legal system.

By analogy, look at the US in 1776. Yes, there was a revolution, but nothing much really changed in the people's daily lives. The true significance of 1776 can only be seen at a distance, where now, a couple of hundred years later, the results are impressive. Well, the same can be said for the Conquest back in 1066. It put social, linguistic, political and legal forces into play which led to fundamental changes within a few centuries, including our language and our law.

-----
"1066 And All That" by W.C. Sellar and R.J. Yeatman, ISBN: 0413772705, is one of the best potted histories ever written. It keeps things simple: good kings, bad kings, good things, bad things. If you are not into boring tomes, you might find it enjoyable.
-----

[Mauvaise]

Originally posted by pepperlandgirl
[quote]Also, William was the father of King Richard the Lionhearted and King John (You know, the guy with the Magna Carta). Of course, I could be horribly wrong about this. If so, sorry.

William wasn't the father of King Richard and King John, that was Henry II (who was married to Eleanor of Aquitaine (?sp)--a fascinating woman), however, IIRC, he was the 'father' of the Plantagenent (?sp) line which included Richard (LH) and John. The last of which was Richard III (who got a bad rap by history, IMHO).

Not that any of this is required knowledge, of course, I just happen to have a fondness for English History.

[Cantrip]

People should be able to locate and name each of the seven continents know major world countries, their locations and possibly their capitals (e.g., locate Canada if you're an American) have some familiarity with the Greek philosophers (enough to know what I mean if I refer to the Cave) be able to converse and write in one's native language without more than an occasional error of oversight understand metric measurements I'll add Dante to the list of authors who should be readDinsdale, if anything I think you're being too lenient. I would expect every American to know the signficance of December 7, 1941 and June 6, 1944, as well as they do July 4, 1776. OK, maybe that's too low a bar. :)

[The Asbestos Mango]

Religion/Philosophy

At least have heard of, and know some of the basic teachings of

Christianity- Catholicism and at least three of the major Protestant demominations- Lutheran, Baptist, and the charismatic prot denom of your choice.

Islam- know that there are Sunni and Shi'ite Muslims, even if you don't know what the difference is.

Bhuddism.

Shintoism

Confucianism

Hinduism

Zoroastrianism

[The Asbestos Mango]

note to self, do not click "post reply" until I'm finished.

You should also have heard of the following philosophers, even if you don't know what they taught

Blaise Pascal
Freidrich Neitzche
Emmanuel Kant was a real pissant, he was very rarely stable- oops, sorry
Socrates
Plato
Aristotle


You should also know who Sigmund Freud, Erich Fromm and Carl Gustav Jung were.

[Stoid]

Originally posted by Robot Arm
Originally posted by Stoidela
1) Be able to name all the presidents in order since Roosevelt.


Which one?


Indeed. FDR.

stoid

Let's see..c.an I name all of them since Teddy? Nope.

[Stoid]

Originally posted by ignatzmouse
stoid
Your list of authors does seem a bit arbitrary. First, they are overwhelmingly American. In addition, although I very much enjoy Parker and Vonnegut, it seems strange that they should supercede Poe, London, or Hemingway.
This seems to be part of the problem with such lists. At some point they become lists of personal preferences. A person who does not know that the U.S. dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki cannot claim to be educated. I would argue that one can be educated without having read Breakfast of Champions.


Well, it was off the top of my head. I would certainly put Poe and Hemingway on the list, and was thinkin' hard on London when I had to go.

I knew I'd get some raised eyebrows at Vonnegut and Parker, but if we are including some familiarity with great authors in our "is me edookated" list, i think they rank in a larger list I have not completed. I think they are unique voices we should all have had some exposure to in order to be able to assess literature, which is my essential reasoning behind the list.

stoid

[TheNerd]

Just to be contrary, I hereby disagree with all the above points that are of the "know who" or "know when" categories.

"how" is most important, then "why", then maybe "where". All that's left is to choose which subjects you think are most important. So far, Phobos' suggestions makes the most sense to me.
Basic understanding of the scientific method and math through algebra are necessities. Knowing anything about Zoroastrianism is not.

[Billdo]

I think the following items, not previously mentioned, should also be included:

Identify (in at least a short sentence) the following historic figures/events:

Julius Ceasar

The Crusades

The Dark Ages

The Renassance

The Spanish Inquisition (nobody expected that)

The French Revolution

Napoleon

The Industrial Revolution

Gandhi

Name at least two or three areas of the world where petroleum products are produced/extracted.

Explain the basic relationship between supply and demand.

Explain the core difference between the philosophies of capitalism and communism/socialism.

Name at least four major world currencies.

Point out on a globe the regions of the world in which the following features are located:

Panama Canal

Suez Canal

Mississipi River

Nile River

Amazon River

Ganges River

Persian Gulf

Mount Everest

Sahara Desert

Gobi Desert

Capes of Good Hope and Horn (mixup between them ok)

Name the country or city in which the following landmarks are located:

The Acropolis

The Louvre

The Colosseum

The Sphinx

The Taj Mahal

Times Square

Buckingham Palace

The White House

The Kremlin

Versailles

The Vatican

Mecca

Explain (in a sentence) the germ theory of disease and at least one way of looking at disease that preceeded it.

[Fenris]

Originally posted by Dinsdale

Oh yeah, some knowledge of human anatomy is required. I'll have to figure out how much I can reduce it.


How 'bout:
Name 3 internal organs
Name 1 component of the nervous system
Name 1 component of the circulatory system
Name 1 exclusivly male and 1 exclusivly female reproductive part, other than the penis or vagina
What are the functions of the heart, lungs and brain?
Describe, in detail the specific function of each major gland, with special attention to the pineal.



Well, maybe not the last one. :D

Fenris

[pepperlandgirl]

Originally posted by Mauvaise
Originally posted by pepperlandgirl
[quote]Also, William was the father of King Richard the Lionhearted and King John (You know, the guy with the Magna Carta). Of course, I could be horribly wrong about this. If so, sorry.

William wasn't the father of King Richard and King John, that was Henry II (who was married to Eleanor of Aquitaine (?sp)--a fascinating woman), however, IIRC, he was the 'father' of the Plantagenent (?sp) line which included Richard (LH) and John. The last of which was Richard III (who got a bad rap by history, IMHO).

Not that any of this is required knowledge, of course, I just happen to have a fondness for English History.




Oh my, I feel stupid now.
At least they are in the same family line though.

[bare]

wring
I think they should at the very least recognize the name "Hitler", know that Japan and Germany were on the same side, and be able to name at least two participants on the other side.

How is it that Germany and Japan were on the same side? Wouldn't "being on the same side" indicate co-operation? Both were enemies of the U.S. but I don't believe they were on the same side.

[bare]

Note to self: learn how to make a stinkin' QUOTE!

[Lissa]

I'd also add a few things to the list:

1) A basic knowledge of Greek/Roman mythology.

2) Know when man landed on the moon, and who was the first man to walk on its surface.

Couldn't hardly believe my ears when I spoke to a young woman about a month ago who honestly did not know we had ever landed on the moon. I teased her by saying, "Well, where do you think Moon Pies came from?" My joke fell flat when she said, in all seriousness, "Really?!?"

3) To know what the Magna Carta is.

4) To know that Michaelangelo painted the Cistine Chapel, and to be able to identify the most famous image of God reaching out his finger to man. (Extra points if you know where the Cistine Chapel is.)

5) To know who Beethoven, Bach, and Motzart were (extra points if you can hum the first few bars of Beethoven's 9th)

6) To know Supreme Court Justices are (as a group), be able to name at least two of them, and give a general explanation of why they are so important.

7) To have basic knowledge of the structure of our government, and how bills are passed.

8) To know what the cases of Brown vs. The Board of Education and Roe vs. Wade were about.

9) To recognise the names Emmett Till, and Rosa Parks, and to understand the significance of the Woolwoorth's lunch counter.

10) Be able to name at least two signers of the Declaration of Independance, and to be able to name at least two of the rights listed on the Bill of Rights.

[BiblioCat]

Originally posted by Stoidela
I believe I have it on my shelf somewhere...can't remember the name.


"An Incomplete Education" ?
I have this one, but it's packed away in a box, so I can't get the author's name.

[Revtim]

Originally posted by Stoidela
1) Be able to name all the presidents in order since Roosevelt. This is minimum, people.


Stoidela, I am curious as to why you feel this is so important, and why you chose FDR as your starting point.

[SmackFu]

Originally posted by Lissa
4) To know that Michaelangelo painted the Cistine Chapel, and to be able to identify the most famous image of God reaching out his finger to man. (Extra points if you know where the Cistine Chapel is.)
Extra points if you can spell Sistine correctly. :)

To the OP, how about being able to identify what school a painting is from visual id? Like that a Monet is impressionist or that a Picasso is Cubist. That implies real education in art, not just memorizing famous pictures.

[porcupine]

The book "Cultural Literacy" by Ed Hirsch covers this topic. It is geared for Americans. There is a followup - "The Dictionary of Cultural Literacy."

And Dinsdale, you should be asking about swallows (African or European), not sparrows. For shame! ;)

[Mauvaise]

Originally posted by pepperlandgirl
[QUOTE]Oh my, I feel stupid now.
At least they are in the same family line though.


No, you shouldn't feel stupid, pepper, I really don't think that stuff is common knowledge, or even in the category of the OP. I just really like English History.

[Lissa]

Extra points if you can spell Sistine correctly.

Aw, jeeze!

I feel like such a dumbass.

Pardon me while I go and repeatedly slam my head in a door.

[Saint Zero]

Hm... why do I need to know the beatles again?

[DRY]

Originally posted by Mauvaise
William wasn't the father of King Richard and King John, that was Henry II (who was married to Eleanor of Aquitaine (?sp)--a fascinating woman), however, IIRC, he was the 'father' of the Plantagenent (?sp) line which included Richard (LH) and John. The last of which was Richard III (who got a bad rap by history, IMHO).

Correct.

William the Conqueror was the father of William Rufus (who inherited the English throne when he died) and Henry I (who inherited the throne when William Rufus died).

Henry I's daughter, Matilda was his heir, but Stephen (Henry's nephew) usurped the throne upon Henry's death. Matilda married Geoffrey of Anjou, who was nicknamed "Plantagenet" (because of the planta genesta, which was native to Anjou). Geoffrey, though never king of England, was believed to be the first person to use "Plantagenet" and is probably the best candidate for being the "father" of said line.

Matilda and Geoffrey had several sons, and the eldest, Henry, inherited the throne as Henry II upon Stephen's death. Henry, as mentioned above, was the father of Richard the Lionhearted and John.

Richard III was indeed the last Plantagenet king, though it should be noted that Henry VIII and his offspring had Plantagenet blood in their veins thanks to Elizabeth, Henry VII's wife.

[MattTheCroc]

Besides the obvious americo-centrism (although I doubt I could list the last 5 australian prime ministers, anyway :)), I think expecting people to have read obscure pieces of literature and knowing a specific piece of Beethoven's music is a bit much. Personally, I hate novels without a story that offer some comment on the human condition. I find Dickens extremely boring, plus a few of the others. Why should I force myself to read the others just to be "educated". I think knowing things like the scientific method and basic anatomy are much more relevent. Plus the astronomy. Being able to remember rote facts like presidents/prime ministers/kings/queens/whatever seems to indicate the quality of one's memory rather than their education.

[Bawdysurfer]

With the operative word educated being open to at least a modicum of interpretation: How to socialize at several levels, whether one is at ease with those who surround you or not How to curb one's tongue, regardless the pain, when to unleash might have been the gut choice How to ease the discomfort of others when no one else is willing to step forward Methods of hiding one's true feelings by controlling facial expressions when others might make poorly disguised attempts A willingness to sidestep the 'crowd', when all those about you have joined the group mentality


ad infinitum

[The Great Philosopher]

I'd say the ability to take a non-biased, obervational view of happenings; eg. during wartime not to believe all the media and consdier the enemy 'pigs' and your country 'brave lads' and that you're in the right (basically every war does this).

Oh, someone said the ability to point out one's country on a map. Our geography teacher claims that when she asked a class of twenty 11-year-olds to point out Great Britain (they, like, I, actually live there) on a map, and only one could do so. None of the others had a clue where not only their country, but their entire habitual island was situated.

[McMurphy]

History

Know the starting and end dates of WWI and WWII and who was involved.

Recognise Hitlers name. Extra points for knowing the names and something of the significance of other leading Nazis such as Himmler and Goebels.

Know something of the rise of Communism. For example, that it was created by Marx and Engels and that Lenin, Trotsky and the Bolsheiviks were instrumental in its implementation in Russia.

Know who Napoleon was.

(if American)

Know the names of the first 5 US presidents and the name of each president since FDR as well as the order in which they were appointed to the presidency.

(If English)

Know who Oliver Cromwell was and the part he played in the English Civil war.

Know (roughly) when the first English Civil war took place.

Know the name of the monarch who was on the throne at that time.

Know who Winston Churchill was and what he did.

Arts

Distinguish between paintings by Monet, Picasso, Dali, and Rembrandt.

Know who Shakespeare was, the basic plots of a couple of his most famous plays and, preferrably, to have read one of them.

Same with Dickens.

Know a little about poetry (ie to be able to distinguish between poetry and prose, to know about rhyme and meter)

Know a little about musical theory, ie. 4/4 time, 3/4 time etc...

Know who Beethoven, Mozart, Chopin and Schubert were and be able to name at least one composition by each.

Know who the Beatles were (not essential but definately important IMO)

Maths

Know the times tables up to 12

Know long division / long multiplication

Know how to find the value of x in basic algebra.

Know how to work a scientific calculator.

Biology

Know the names of the major organs and their functions

Know about sex and reproduction.

General Science

Know about scientific method and be able to implement it (ie, be able to construct a hypothesis and then prove or disprove it).

Know the names of basic scientific equipment (ie, a bunsen burner) and how to use it

Geography

Be able to find all the continents.

Be able to find specific countries within those continents

Know the names of at least 3 other currencies and where they are used.

Know how to read a map.

[Dinsdale]

This is really fun, folks! It'll take me a while before I can put these into a list, and we can see how precisely we can hone it.

Yes, being educated means something far more than the accumulation of a certain mass of facts. But I believe you cannot exhibit educated "behaviors" without familiarity with sufficient facts.

I believe "intelligence", is largely the act of making comparisons and contrasts. Learning from the past to understand the present and help prepare for the future. You cannot understand where you are, if you have no idea how you got there. And while in-depth knowledge is wonderful, I believe a decent level of "understanding" is possible with far more superficial familiarity with a limited number of diverse facts. I believe there may be a certain minimal fund of information that is required to be able to make such connections/comparisons. So when posing/criticizing a suggested entry, be aware of the "connections" that "fact" make possible.

-We can't all be Peter Ustinovs, waxing eloquently on any number of topics. But, if you hear some people talking about Goddard and Fellini, you should know they are discussing film.
-If someone makes a comparison to Proust, you should at least know that is likely a common reference to an incredibly long book that more people talk about that have read.
-You should have some awareness of the idea of needing a wheelbarrow of bills to buy food in the Wiemar Republic. Which lends you to economic theory, forward to WWII, back to WWI, and any number of other places.
-And you should know who the Beatles are because so many other people do. It creates a common fund of reference. And if you are not at least minimally aware of the Beatles music (and their history as a band), you are hampered in your ability to understand or discuss any modern music.
-Most importantly, you should make sure you are accurate in your use of MP references. All I can say in my defense is "Burma!" (I panicked.)

[casdave]

Some of these facts are not at all challenging unless there is an age stipulated with them.

Most of them seem to be at the level of 15-16 year old kids.

IMHO the poster who mentioned that education is about the whys and wherefores, especially when it comes to history is closest to what I'd call educational requirements.

Being able to prepare a full meal for a family has to be fairly important, so many men seem unable to do this.

Basic first aid is another.

Understanding enough about engineering, maintenance, electricity to know when you should leave alone and to be able to diagnose and repair simple faults such as a blown fuse(yes I know there can be much more to it than that), recognise when a tyre has low pressure etc, how to put a shelf in place are things everyone should know.

Nowadays being able to understand the differance between types of loans, apr and flat rate interest, mortgages and security, and budget management are all vital but its surprising how many do not, and how many let impulses rule their finances.

I personally think that everyone should have owned pets and be able to recognise when they are suffering certain illnesses.

Everyone should be able to know how to obtain information and use it, wether it is from the library, the internet or advice from a proffessional in a particular field.

Reading certain books is not much use unless you are able to understand or interpret what the author is trying to illustrate, many folk think as an example that Catch22 is merely a funny book.

[Mauvaise]

[hijack 1]

Dry: you quote shakespeare and know your English History?! If I did the crush thing you'd have another mention from me end! :D

[/hijack 1]

I did know most of that off the top of my head, except for the life of my I couldn't remember William Rufus' name and I had forgotten that bit about Geoff.

[hijack 2]

I've read some good historical fiction on the subject (E.H., not just this time period), but with the exception of Henry VIII, Elizabeth I, and Eleanor of Aquitaine, I don't have any [/i]good[/i] non-fiction. Can you recommend some books, Dry ?

[/hijack 2]

[AndYrAStar]

Of the above listed things, I know/can do:


Recognise Hitlers name
Know who Shakespeare was
Same with Dickens.
Know a little about musical theory, ie. 4/4 time, 3/4 time etc...
Know who the Beatles were (not essential but definately important IMO)
Know long division / long multiplication
Know how to find the value of x in basic algebra.
Know how to work a scientific calculator.
Know the names of the major organs and their functions
Know about sex and reproduction.
Know about scientific method and be able to implement it
Know the names of basic scientific equipment
Be able to find all the continents.
Be able to find specific countries within those continents
Know how to read a map.


:(

[wring]

Originally posted by bare
wring
I think they should at the very least recognize the name "Hitler", know that Japan and Germany were on the same side, and be able to name at least two participants on the other side.

How is it that Germany and Japan were on the same side? Wouldn't "being on the same side" indicate co-operation? Both were enemies of the U.S. but I don't believe they were on the same side.

From Encyclopedia Brittanica: here ( http://www.britannica.com/bcom/eb/article/7/0,5716,11617+1+11483,00.html?query=world%20war%20ii%20japan%20germany%20allies) :"then by the German-Japanese Anti-Comintern Pact against the Soviet Union (Nov. 25, 1936). The connection was strengthened by a full military and political alliance between Germany and Italy (the Pact of Steel, May 22, 1939), and the Tripartite Pact signed by all three powers on Sept. 27, 1940. "

OK?

[Tamerlane]

Because I can't resist - A further English history hijack :) .

DRY: Henry VII was a Plantagenet by blood as well, a descendant of John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster ( 3rd surviving son of Edward III ). Elizabeth was a descendant of Lionel, Duke of Clarence ( 2nd surviving son of Edward III ). The dynastic name change came about because Henry VII claimed the throne as the last male heir to the Lancastrian line, but traced it through his mother, Margaret Beaufort. Just nitpicking :D .

Oh and to amplify slightly on what pepperlandgirl posted earlier - Hastings was of such great significance because it was the pivotal moment in the definitive reorientation of England ( economically, politically, culturally, and even linguistically ) from Northern Europe to Western Europe.

As to the OP - I like some of what has been said here ( but this thread has become too lengthy for me to expound on each post ;) ). But I think it is a fruitless task from a practical standpoint to sort out which factoids should be included for a well-rounded basic education and which shouldn't ( or needn't be ). There is always going to be too much disagreement over what's important enough to include. Or even how detailed we should get.

But this certainly has value as a fun mental exercise and I'm enjoying all the thoughts :) .

-Tamerlane

[bluecanary]

This thread is most interesting!

As a student at the science end of the sciences <-> arts spectrum, I feel that Phobos]'s list (pg 1) is the most applicable, plus the following:

History:

What Phobos said plus:
* Knowledge of the time periods of WW1 and WW2, plus some key involved figures, including Churchill

Geography:

What Phobos said, plus:
* Ability to name the capitals of Great Britain, France, Germany, Canada and preferably more.

Politics:

* Awareness of your country's political system
* Awareness of NATO, and the European Union

Biology:

Further to Phobos's suggestion of evolution:
* Awareness of Charles Darwin

Literature/Art:

* Awareness of some basic figures in Literature and the Arts (e.g. Shakespeare, Dickens, Picasso, Dali, Rembrandt, Monet, Mozart, Beethoven, the Beatles, Kubrick, Welles and Hitchcock as a basic list)

However, I strongly disagree that having read a particular book, or seen a play/film is required to be considered 'educated'. Such things are subjective.

[DRY]

Originally posted by Mauvaise
[hijack 1]
Dry: you quote shakespeare and know your English History?! If I did the crush thing you'd have another mention from me end! :D
[/hijack 1]
Well, why *don't* you do "the crush thing"?? Heck, I've seen your picture, and you are well worth a mention whether or not you know ANYTHING about English history! :)

As to English history, I'm not as strong "Post Plantagenet". However, there are certain periods (particularly the Wars of the Roses), that I know pretty well. MUCH, MUCH, better than Shakespeare, in fact.

This thread shows exactly how obsessed I am with British history (If you ever wanted to discuss British History on the boards, this thread is as good a place as any):

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=28582

I did know most of that off the top of my head, except for the life of my I couldn't remember William Rufus' name and I had forgotten that bit about Geoff.
William Rufus didn't exactly have the longest or most noteable of reigns.
[hijack 2]
I've read some good historical fiction on the subject (E.H., not just this time period), but with the exception of Henry VIII, Elizabeth I, and Eleanor of Aquitaine, I don't have any [/i]good[/i] non-fiction. Can you recommend some books, Dry ?
[/hijack 2]
Sure I could. What historical periods interest you the most?

There's lots of great stuff on the Wars of the Roses, and as I've previously said, that's my strongest interest. I'm particularly enamored of Thomas Costain's four book series, covering the beginning of Norman rule down to the last of the Plantagenets:

The Conquering Family
The Magnificent Century
The Three Edwards
The Last Plantagenets

There's a lot more good stuff out there, though. Tell me what historical period you like (either on this thread, or e-mail me)!

Have you read "The Sunne in Splendour" by Penman? Great book---probably my favorite work of historical fiction. Penman's other books are quite good, too!

[rowrrbazzle]

Physics: [list=1] the already-mentioned E=mc2 and its consequences. Also a rudimentary understanding of how nuclear reactors operate.
Newton's equation F=ma and its basic applications.
the equations for a falling body near the surface of the earth: v=9.8t and s=4.9t2 (using the meter as the length unit)[/list=1]Math (additional):[list=1] the equation y=x2, its basic properties, and basic examples (see Physics #3 above).
the rudiments of calculus: how to develop the derivative of x2; the basic derivatives and anti-derivatives. Use Physics #3 for a basic example.[/list=1]Misc:[list=1] how to distinguish between science and pseudoscience.
how to recognize fallacious arguments.
the basics of reading music: the ability to plunk out a simple tune on the piano from sheet music.[/list=1]

[DRY]

Originally posted by Tamerlane
Because I can't resist - A further English history hijack :) .

DRY: Henry VII was a Plantagenet by blood as well, a descendant of John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster ( 3rd surviving son of Edward III ). Elizabeth was a descendant of Lionel, Duke of Clarence ( 2nd surviving son of Edward III ). The dynastic name change came about because Henry VII claimed the throne as the last male heir to the Lancastrian line, but traced it through his mother, Margaret Beaufort. Just nitpicking :D .

You're right, of course. To be honest, I meant to mention this, but forgot.

More nitpicking:

It should also be pointed out that Henry VII descent was "tainted" by bastardy on both his father's and mother's sides:

Owen Tudor was Henry VII's grandfather (IIRC) and his children were considered by many to be bastards because there was some question whether his marriage to Katherine, widow of Henry V, was legitimate--or whether the marriage even took place. Also, Henry VII's mother, Magaret Beaufort, was descended from the illegitimate children of John of Gaunt. The Beauforts were later legitimized by Richard II, but the next king, Henry IV, made the Beauforts ineligible for the throne (there being some question whether Henry IV could legitimately do this).

So Henry VII was a bastard on both sides. Of course, this didn't prevent William the Conqueror from gaining the throne in 1066.

Finally, Henry VII's wife, Elizabeth was not only a descendant of Lionel, Duke of Clarence and Edmund, Duke of York, but also of John of Gaunt as well, through her mother, Cecily Neville. Since we're nitpicking...:)

[Ben]

Originally posted by Dinsdale
A couple of years ago, I asked my 3 brothers-in-law, all college grads, all very successful in their careers, if they knew who Fellini was. None of them even knew he was a film director. That kind of thing makes me sad.


I think this raises an interesting distinction between "things everyone should know" vs. "how the hell did you end up not hearing about *that*?" I mean, how did I end up hearing about Fellini in college? I don't know- I just picked it up somewhere.

I'm reminded of those surveys which are meant to shock us with the ignorance of the average American- "only 3% of teenagers could name a Supreme Court justice, but 65% knew that Leonardo DiCaprio was the star of Titanic." Huh? How did 35% of American teens end up not knowing about Leo being in "Titanic" when there was such an incredible ad blitz surrounding the movie? It seems to me that if you're an american teen, and you go hang out at magazine stands and watch TV, and somehow you never notice that there's this movie out named "Titanic" and Leo is in it, then we have no hope for America. In some ways I find that more shocking than the kid they quoted in the _New Yorker_ saying that he didn't think the Confederate flag was a big deal, but then he heard that "they fought this war over it or something."

-Ben

[Tamerlane]

DRY: And of course you're right as well :) . History geeks, unite :D .

- Tamerlane

[Patty O'Furniture]

Every educated person should know how to spell Recognize (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=53322). ;)

"Recognise" appears five times in this thread.

[Crusoe]

...which is a perfectly acceptable spelling outside the US.

;)

[Muffin]

Originally posted by Attrayant
Every educated person should know how to spell Recognize (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=53322). ;)

"Recognise" appears five times in this thread.

Spelling correctly is politically impossible for Canadians.

[Mauvaise]

Originally posted by DRY
Well, why *don't* you do "the crush thing"?? Heck, I've seen your picture, and you are well worth a mention whether or not you know ANYTHING about English history! :)
I don't normally because, while I think harmless flirtation is ok, a crush wouldn't be fair to Mr. Mauvaise, but I may have to make an exception in your case ;)


As to English history, I'm not as strong "Post Plantagenet". However, there are certain periods (particularly the Wars of the Roses), that I know pretty well. MUCH, MUCH, better than Shakespeare, in fact.


My strength kind of wanes post Tudor, but not do to a lack of interest, just haven't found anything good to read yet. Thanks for the link, I'll check it out.


There's a lot more good stuff out there, though. Tell me what historical period you like (either on this thread, or e-mail me)!


Check your email.

[Togepi no Miko]

As no one has brought this up, I would like to see a familiarity with semantics be added to the list. I'm not saying you have to read Korzybski, but reading S. I. Hayakawa is not unreasonable. (Language in Thought and Action, if anyone is interested.)

[Eggs à la Ted]

Originally posted by IJGrieve
Biology:

Further to Phobos's suggestion of evolution:
* Awareness of Charles Darwin

And they should know that evolution is Darwinian, not Lamarckian.

[BiblioCat]

Originally posted by Bawdysurfer
With the operative word educated being open to at least a modicum of interpretation: How to socialize at several levels, whether one is at ease with those who surround you or not How to curb one's tongue, regardless the pain, when to unleash might have been the gut choice How to ease the discomfort of others when no one else is willing to step forward Methods of hiding one's true feelings by controlling facial expressions when others might make poorly disguised attempts A willingness to sidestep the 'crowd', when all those about you have joined the group mentality

ad infinitum

I like Bawdysurfer's list.
Getting away from the "book-learnin' stuff", how about some basic life skills like being able to change a tire, pump your own gas, how to check your oil (but not necessarily change it...that's why God invented Jiffy Lube), creating and living on a budget, being able to balance a checkbook, how to write a resume, how to behave in a job interview, knowing what to wear when the invitation says "Casual" or "Black Tie," picking gifts for different occasions, how to behave in different social situations, how to write a 'Thank You' note, how to read a map, basic homeowner's maintenance...unclogging a drain or toilet, etc.

[The Asbestos Mango]

I also think that in order to be considered culturally literate, a person should be able to hum the first eight bars of "Smoke on the Water".

[lolagranola]

I disagree with a lot of things on the lists. I'm terrible at geography and anatomy, yet I have a fairly adequate knowledge about physics and math. I have people lined up at the door for tutoring in math.

I'm fairly well read, but have missed some of the ones that were considered important. I don't care much for movies, although I can name tons of them, who starred in them, basic plotlines, I don't think that it's a really important part of education.

I know a smattering of many subjects. Enough for me to be able to follow conversations outside of my expertise. Despite gaping holes in my knowledge, I manage to win Trivial Pursuit regularly.

I cannot distinguish between Renoir and Monet. I missed Eisenhower when trying to name the presidents after FDR (bear in mind that I'm not American). The only significant fact I can name about WWI is that it was started with the assasination of Archduke Ferdinand. I know when the Magna Carta was signed without really knowing anything more about it. I get by quite well without a lot of the listed knowledge. I even scored in the genius range on a test about events in world history and general knowledge.

I think that a lot of this list is subjective. Everyone thinks that people should have general knowledge about their pet subject.

My list? Pretty basic.

Is the sun a star?
How many planets in the solar system?
Who was Hitler?
How many world wars?
Be able to recognize the names of the oceans and continents.
Recognize the names of a wide variety of authors. One should know the difference between Danielle Steel and Dickens.
Be able to name at least three current world leaders.

One should also be proficient in at least one subject. The only thing that really bothers me are people who don't seem to have one area of interest or expertise.

[Tamerlane]

lolagranola: This is not a dig at you in the slightest ( At the very least I consider Physics and Math to be two separate things ;) ). But what I can't stand are people who have only one area of interest. I find overly focused/narrowly educated people incredibly tedious. Doesn't necessarily mean someone should have multiple academic degrees( though I think that's laudable ). But people should have more than one passion.

I've had the misfortune to run across some incredibly competent people who seemed to be interested only in their one little specialty. And having conversations with those folks is about as enjoyable as having one's fingernails slowly pulled out :( .

- Tamerlane

[labdude]

I think this is what you are looking for....

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0345391373/o/qid=978389069/sr=2-1/105-0253788-7998370

and this

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0394758439/qid=978389150/sr=1-1/105-0253788-7998370

[Phobos]

Originally posted by IJGrieve
As a student at the science end of the sciences <-> arts spectrum, I feel that Phobos's list (pg 1) is the most applicable,

:D
IJGrieve is obviously an educated person!
:D

[Shirley Ujest]

Regarding 1066

Besides all the above intelligent and thoughtful posts on this particular subject, it was explained to me a long time ago that the most significant event of the Battle of Hastings was that it was the last successful land invasion of England. ( until, naturally, the advent of the Tourist.)

Misc Stuff

1. Learn how to fold a map.
2. Learn how to give directions by North, South, East & West.
3. Learn how to properly pack for a trip. ( You, yeah, you take too much crap.)
4. Learn how to write a letter & thank you notes.
5. Learn the basics of wine and liquor knowledge.

[lno]

Originally posted by Dinsdale
But, if you hear some people talking about Goddard and Fellini, you should know they are discussing film
When I hear Goddard, I think of Robert Goddard, a pioneer in rocketry. I can't tell if that means I'm not educated, or if I'm too educated.

[minor hijack]
This list is something that I've thought about for a long time, especially in regards to voting rights. Sometimes it bothers me that people who have no idea who we fought against in WW2 have a voice in our government, and that there should be some basic exam. Then I remember those oh-so-happy days of literacy requirements to vote, and how well those turned out. There's gotta be a happy medium.
[/minor hijack]

I'm rather pessimistic about the level of education in the country, so I'll just reduce it to this-- I don't care if you don't know the answer, but as long as you know where to LOOK for it, and can FIND it, then you're edjumacated. (Yes, I worked in a library for two years.)