I think if my kid had the ability to read on there own at a young age it would make me think more of there future education. Visions of Stanford or Berkley would run in my head.
All kids go through spells where they don't want to go to school. Its part of the immaturity that goes with growing up. Hell I'm 27 and I'm just now getting mature enough where I feel I make good decisions for my future.
And if you think public schooling is helping create this society of yesmen and sheep then home school your kids. Just make sure they get an education is all.
10/31/2000 (****)
6/7/2003 (***1/2)
7/9/2006 (****1/2)
7/13/2006 (**** )
4/10/2008 EV Solo (****1/2)
6/25/2008 MSG II (*****)
10/1/2009 LA II (****)
10/6/2009 LA III (***** Cornell!!!)
Maybe it would help your case if you would explain what you have in mind here. Being intentionally vague isn't helping us understand your point of view.
everybody wants the most they can possibly get
for the least they could possibly do
Maybe it would help your case if you would explain what you have in mind here. Being intentionally vague isn't helping us understand your point of view.
I'm not sure I understand your question. Today, you have laws stating that kids must go to school. I'm suggesting you remove that law.
I think if my kid had the ability to read on there own at a young age it would make me think more of there future education.
In my case, my daughter was taught to read by my brother. He also taught another neice to read. Both children ended up advanced readers through school.
Visions of Stanford or Berkley would run in my head.
Why would you want to limit your children in any way??
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
Ok, so what's the next step. Kids are no longer forced to go to school. Then what? Where or how do they receive education (if they crave it)? What do they do with all the time they're free and their parents are working? Please fill us in on the details.
I'm not sure I understand your question. Today, you have laws stating that kids must go to school. I'm suggesting you remove that law.
CONservative governMENt
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
I'm not sure I understand your question. Today, you have laws stating that kids must go to school. I'm suggesting you remove that law.
Are you advocating a return to the Middle Ages? When education was the preserve of a few? (while the masses slaved away in menial jobs and suppression)
Do you know why historically universal compulsory education was introduced?
LOL...I'm not sure how you're equating non-compulsory education to a system wherein kids automatically get to play Wii and watch Sponge Bob.
Because if you give a kid the choice between watching cartoons and going to school to learn something boring like grammar they are probably going to pick cartoons, because they don't know any better and they aren't smart enough to know why school is important (or will be important in the future).
Albeit I agree with your premise, this doesn't match with the real world. It's a utopian vision of "education" and not practical in reality.
I've both healed myself and educated myself. What I speak of is purely practical. The thing is, until people understand by practical experience self-education and self-healing, they .... don't know what they are taking about. They are saying the symbol to the dynamic is the same as the dynamic itself. And therefore have cut their own awareness short on the subject.
In both healing and education, given a formal external lack of both, from within numerous concepts revealed themselves to me. For example, I've had an ungodly amount of philosophical principles reveal themselves to me from within. And I'm constantly surprised to find that what I've conceived of myself are well known views held by prominant philosophers. Therefore, when I actually read the philosopher version, I understand it FARRRRRRRRRRRr more than those who are taught via information, externally, and who take the pale representation to be the truth. I know these abilities can be honed and expanded upon and developed by anyone, because I constantly develop and expand upon this in myself.
Beware of terms that are designed to limit possibilities...ie: utopian
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
But because one person has success as for you or your smart child, doesn't make it a basis for all... which is what the education system caters too. You can't make the exception, the rule.
I've both healed myself and educated myself. What I speak of is purely practical. The thing is, until people understand by practical experience self-education and self-healing, they .... don't know what they are taking about. They are saying the symbol to the dynamic is the same as the dynamic itself. And therefore have cut their own awareness short on the subject.
In both healing and education, given a formal external lack of both, from within numerous concepts revealed themselves to me. For example, I've had an ungodly amount of philosophical principles reveal themselves to me from within. And I'm constantly surprised to find that what I've conceived of myself are well known views held by prominant philosophers. Therefore, when I actually read the philosopher version, I understand it FARRRRRRRRRRRr more than those who are taught via information, externally, and who take the pale representation to be the truth. I know these abilities can be honed and expanded upon and developed by anyone, because I constantly develop and expand upon this in myself.
Beware of terms that are designed to limit possibilities...ie: utopian
CONservative governMENt
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
So if parents decide no education for their kids this is ok with you? No home schooling even. You know how many kids would turn their backs on education if it was left up to them?
LOL...I'm not sure how you're equating non-compulsory education to a system wherein kids automatically get to play Wii and watch Sponge Bob.
Well because I don't know what you think kids should do if they are not educating themselves. I hang with my little cousins all of the time and this is what kids like to do and would do it all day if they were allowed.
If I have an 8 year old who wants to eat pizza and mcdonalds every night, they're more than welcome to buy pizza and mcdonalds for themselves every night.
LOLOLOLOLOLOL. This is just awful to me. Why can't you say no to your kids? If your kids had there own money for whatever reason you would just let them eat all the junk they want. You do realize we have an obesity problem in this country.
Are you equating education with "discipline"? Yikes.
Yes. The discipline to show up everyday and participate in class. The discipline to respect your teachers and coaches even if you disagree. Education can teach kids many life lessons even if they don't "get" math or science.
I'm not talking about corporal punishment. I don't believe in smacking kids. My Mom taught me enough about respect that she never had to even spank me. And I will do the same with my kids.
10/31/2000 (****)
6/7/2003 (***1/2)
7/9/2006 (****1/2)
7/13/2006 (**** )
4/10/2008 EV Solo (****1/2)
6/25/2008 MSG II (*****)
10/1/2009 LA II (****)
10/6/2009 LA III (***** Cornell!!!)
Albeit I agree with your premise, this doesn't match with the real world. It's a utopian vision of "education" and not practical in reality.
And for the record, because I've not stated ways to educe, or beckon forth from our children, doesn't mean I don't suggest we find ways to do so. I merely say our current ways are so lacking to me in what is needed, plus they are way overboard in grooming children for 'objective' other-oriented training that our children are not honed to be in touch with their innate potential for their own benefit and to their greatest good. At huge cost to us all.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
But because one person has success as for you or your smart child, doesn't make it a basis for all... which is what the education system caters too. You can't make the exception, the rule.
You are not understanding my perspective if you think I intend for any view, least of all my own, to be the rule.
I'm at perfect peace knowing the rule is the rule. All the rest is human ideology...my view, yours, etc.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
When education was the preserve of a few? (while the masses slaved away in menial jobs and suppression)
:rolleyes:
Your suggestion here, that absent compulsory education only "a few" would be educated, is ridiculous. The major determinant of whether or not a child will be willingly educated is the economic modality of their family. Without compulsory education, the vast majority of those currently in school would remain in school.
Do you know why historically universal compulsory education was introduced?
Absolutely -- so churches could educate people as they thought was "proper", then so corporations could educate people as they thought was "proper", then so states could educate people as they thought was "proper".
I've both healed myself and educated myself. What I speak of is purely practical. The thing is, until people understand by practical experience self-education and self-healing, they .... don't know what they are taking about. They are saying the symbol to the dynamic is the same as the dynamic itself. And therefore have cut their own awareness short on the subject.
In both healing and education, given a formal external lack of both, from within numerous concepts revealed themselves to me. For example, I've had an ungodly amount of philosophical principles reveal themselves to me from within. And I'm constantly surprised to find that what I've conceived of myself are well known views held by prominant philosophers. Therefore, when I actually read the philosopher version, I understand it FARRRRRRRRRRRr more than those who are taught via information, externally, and who take the pale representation to be the truth. I know these abilities can be honed and expanded upon and developed by anyone, because I constantly develop and expand upon this in myself.
Beware of terms that are designed to limit possibilities...ie: utopian
But academia is by definition a community of scholars - an exchange and confrontation of ideas: some proved right, others disproven (in science the method is essential to further knowledge).
How can you validate your own ideas and viewpoints without confrontation, that is debate with others?
Which philosophical principles have been revealed to you from within yourself? Which prominent philosophical views are you referring to?
But because one person has success as for you or your smart child, doesn't make it a basis for all... which is what the education system caters too. You can't make the exception, the rule.
The base study of human potential shows how rare human-potential-access is in our current cultures/societies. Such study knows what is optimal in accessing human potential, also. The information and potential is accessible by all, not just by smart people. Even though mart people may access this information faster than those less intellectually inclined. It's all equally implementable, should our systems seek to evolve in this direction.
And to be fair, imo the school systems generally do continually endeavor to implement this, at least in Canada, based on what I've seen. However there are so many already ingrained forces inherent to said systems that it's an ongoing, long-term uphill battle.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
In my case, my daughter was taught to read by my brother. He also taught another neice to read. Both children ended up advanced readers through school.
Why would you want to limit your children in any way??
Ultimately it will be up to my kids to pursue higher education. But if they are naturally gifted when it comes to school I would want them to go to a very respectable University.
College was where I received my most education for both my life experiences and school experiences and I would want my kids to experience this as well. If they don't want to go then I will put there college fund towards Daddy's new car. I will be disappointed it came to that but at least I would have a new toy.
10/31/2000 (****)
6/7/2003 (***1/2)
7/9/2006 (****1/2)
7/13/2006 (**** )
4/10/2008 EV Solo (****1/2)
6/25/2008 MSG II (*****)
10/1/2009 LA II (****)
10/6/2009 LA III (***** Cornell!!!)
So if parents decide no education for their kids this is ok with you? No home schooling even. You know how many kids would turn their backs on education if it was left up to them?
It would be ok with me. What right do I have to force them to do otherwise? And throwing drop-out rates at me is pretty silly given the high drop-out rates in the compulsory system coupled with the relative stupidity of even those who graduate.
Well because I don't know what you think kids should do if they are not educating themselves.
I don't know you, and I don't know your kids. Are you saying that without compulsory education you'd never get your kids to step foot in a school again?
I hang with my little cousins all of the time and this is what kids like to do and would do it all day if they were allowed.
Allowed by whom? The state?
LOLOLOLOLOLOL. This is just awful to me. Why can't you say no to your kids?
I could say no to my kids. In your analogy, I would have no need to.
If your kids had there own money for whatever reason you would just let them eat all the junk they want. You do realize we have an obesity problem in this country.
Kids eat all the junk they want because parents are dumb enough to give junk to their kids. You might want to reread my earlier statement.
Yes. The discipline to show up everyday and participate in class. The discipline to respect your teachers and coaches even if you disagree. Education can teach kids many life lessons even if they don't "get" math or science.
I'm not talking about corporal punishment. I don't believe in smacking kids. My Mom taught me enough about respect that she never had to even spank me. And I will do the same with my kids.
If you think schools are the proper place for children to learn "respect", I'd really like to visit the school your children go to. And yes, certainly children do learn many valuable skills from socializing with other children. However, compulsory education has no monopoly on socialization.
But academia is by definition a community of scholars - an exchange and confrontation of ideas: some proved right, others disproven (in science the method is essential to further knowledge).
How can you validate your own ideas and viewpoints without confrontation, that is debate with others?
Which philosophical principles have been revealed to you from within yourself? Which prominent philosophical views are you referring to?
People do not rise to the cream of the crop by ways of ease. Evolution remains evolution. Therefore, as I self-educate myself, I run across higher and higher levels of education around me "accidentally", by natural evolutionary principles at work at all times. I am therefore continually challenged to greater degree at all times.
So, the answer to how can I validate my own ideas and viewpoints without confrontation is a question that misunderstands my stance. I am confronted all the time. The things is, my natural education continually proves itself over and over upon this confrontation. And given my attunement with learning, I'm open to learn in exchanges with opposing views, amending as I go, which is part of true learning.
As for the philosophical views, I've been shown Truths within. Therefore, when I read most any classic perspective that has stood the test of time, I understand not only it's validity as a map describing a dynamic, but I have experienced the dynamic itself, holistically, which is beyond the individual teachings. This is true knowledge. And it's the birthright of us all.
Edit: Plus, I'm a very, very well-read person. I have substantiated all of my inner visions with some of the most respected writings from the most respected minds.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
Ultimately it will be up to my kids to pursue higher education. But if they are naturally gifted when it comes to school I would want them to go to a very respectable University.
So you'd like to mold them into your preconception of success during their formative years?
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
Your suggestion here, that absent compulsory education only "a few" would be educated, is ridiculous. The major determinant of whether or not a child will be willingly educated is the economic modality of their family. Without compulsory education, the vast majority of those currently in school would remain in school.
Absolutely -- so churches could educate people as they thought was "proper", then so corporations could educate people as they thought was "proper", then so states could educate people as they thought was "proper".
By eliminating state compulsion to attend school you're leaving to the families to decide whether their kids should attend or not.
What do you mean by the economic modality of the family? Whether it makes economic sense for their kids to attend school?
How many do you think would go?
Wrong. Churches already educated the few (hence my reference to the Middle Ages when scholarly information was preserved by the work of monks )and Arab academics too). No need for compulsory universal education, indeed that had the opposite effect of threatening the stronghold of religious dogma (see the rise of modern Science and subsequently the Enlightement). So, no interest for the church to introduce it.
As far as I know corporations do not fund universal education only give grants.
As for the state, there is not a single line of thought that is imposed in schools. Unless you live in a totalitarian state, that is.
Absolutely -- so churches could educate people as they thought was "proper", then so corporations could educate people as they thought was "proper", then so states could educate people as they thought was "proper".
Not so much. Churches did not want to educate anybody, or they wouldn't have went with latin services for so long. Keeping your interlocutor ignorant was/is an easy way to establish your truth. Same goes for states and corporations, it's not a random event that generally compulsory education and "democracy" are found in the same countries (with the exception of communist regimes).
It's not random either that compulsory elementary education is part of the universal declaration of human rights. Article 1 states "All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights", being able to read, write and speak seems a basis to understand this article.
It would be ok with me. What right do I have to force them to do otherwise? And throwing drop-out rates at me is pretty silly given the high drop-out rates in the compulsory system coupled with the relative stupidity of even those who graduate.
I don't know you, and I don't know your kids. Are you saying that without compulsory education you'd never get your kids to step foot in a school again?
Allowed by whom? The state?
I could say no to my kids. In your analogy, I would have no need to.
Kids eat all the junk they want because parents are dumb enough to give junk to their kids. You might want to reread my earlier statement.
If you think schools are the proper place for children to learn "respect", I'd really like to visit the school your children go to. And yes, certainly children do learn many valuable skills from socializing with other children. However, compulsory education has no monopoly on socialization.
I don't have kids yet but I can't wait until I do. While you do make fair points I will never agree that if a kid doesn't want to go to school then the kid shouldn't go to school.
The main reason is that the kid is not mature enough to make such a life altering decision. If the kid makes it to 18 and is almost done with High School but decides that Education isn't right for them its one thing, but to give the same power to a 10 year old is ridiculous to me. Because if kids are allowed to make these kinds of decisions for themselves what is the job of the parents? To just provide food and clothing? And what would the kid do all day? You say its not your job to decide but I don't think you're grasping what would end up happening if kids had all this free time. This is how a lot of kids get on the path to drug abuse and gang banging.
And if you don't agree with what is taught at public and private schools then home school your kids. Just don't let them go uneducated is my only plea.
10/31/2000 (****)
6/7/2003 (***1/2)
7/9/2006 (****1/2)
7/13/2006 (**** )
4/10/2008 EV Solo (****1/2)
6/25/2008 MSG II (*****)
10/1/2009 LA II (****)
10/6/2009 LA III (***** Cornell!!!)
So you'd like to mold them into your preconception of success during their formative years?
HELLLLLLLLLL NOOO. I would want me kid to do whatever makes them happy in the long run. BUT while they live under my roof its my rules and they will be going to school. College will be up to them. I will not pay thousands and thousands of dollars for school if they don't want to go. That would be a huge waste of there time and my money.
If they are doing well in school and ask me what I think they should do next I will tell them they should go away to college. That they should be a minimum of 2 hours away so they get out of the nest. This will be my advice. Not a rule.
10/31/2000 (****)
6/7/2003 (***1/2)
7/9/2006 (****1/2)
7/13/2006 (**** )
4/10/2008 EV Solo (****1/2)
6/25/2008 MSG II (*****)
10/1/2009 LA II (****)
10/6/2009 LA III (***** Cornell!!!)
People do not rise to the cream of the crop by ways of ease. Evolution remains evolution. Therefore, as I self-educate myself, I run across higher and higher levels of education around me "accidentally", by natural evolutionary principles at work at all times. I am therefore continually challenged to greater degree at all times.
So, the answer to how can I validate my own ideas and viewpoints without confrontation is a question that misunderstands my stance. I am confronted all the time. The things is, my natural education continually proves itself over and over upon this confrontation. And given my attunement with learning, I'm open to learn in exchanges with opposing views, amending as I go, which is part of true learning.
As for the philosophical views, I've been shown Truths within. Therefore, when I read most any classic perspective that has stood the test of time, I understand not only it's validity as a map describing a dynamic, but I have experienced the dynamic itself, holistically, which is beyond the individual teachings. This is true knowledge. And it's the birthright of us all.
Edit: Plus, I'm a very, very well-read person. I have substantiated all of my inner visions with some of the most respected writings from the most respected minds.
Philosophical thought is very rigorous and any philosophical vision - to use your term - must still be proven in order to be valid. It is not enough to say I have read this and that, so I'm well educated. To be a scholar, you need to argue and validate your case.
Rather than education, it seems to me it is knowledge and wisdom that you are referring to. They are two different things.
Philosophers also do not really speak of "Truths".
What do you mean by the dynamics of the classic perspective that has stood the test of time?
HELLLLLLLLLL NOOO. I would want me kid to do whatever makes them happy in the long run. BUT while they live under my roof its my rules and they will be going to school. College will be up to them. I will not pay thousands and thousands of dollars for school if they don't want to go. That would be a huge waste of there time and my money.
If they are doing well in school and ask me what I think they should do next I will tell them they should go away to college. That they should be a minimum of 2 hours away so they get out of the nest. This will be my advice. Not a rule.
Ok cool. The thing is often when the parents get their mind set on a certain University for their 5 year old, that's not at all about the child or what is in their best interests. It's about some objectified idea of what is good, despite circumstances pertaining to the child, which aren't even close to having developed yet.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
Not so much. Churches did not want to educate anybody, or they wouldn't have went with latin services for so long. Keeping your interlocutor ignorant was/is an easy way to establish your truth. Same goes for states and corporations, it's not a random event that generally compulsory education and "democracy" are found in the same countries (with the exception of communist regimes).
It's not random either that compulsory elementary education is part of the universal declaration of human rights. Article 1 states "All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights", being able to read, write and speak seems a basis to understand this article.
Yes, I was also going to add about education as a basic universal right.
The spread of education to the masses is inextricably linked to the spread of democracy throughout history.
By eliminating state compulsion to attend school you're leaving to the families to decide whether their kids should attend or not.
Oh my god! No!!!!!
What do you mean by the economic modality of the family? Whether it makes economic sense for their kids to attend school?
Yes. For instance, when America was largely agricultural (and societies today that are primarily agricultural), many children did not go to school because they could play an economic role within the household or because parents simply cannot afford to send them.
How many do you think would go?
The vast majority, similar to today.
Wrong. Churches already educated the few (hence my reference to the Middle Ages when scholarly information was preserved by the work of monks )and Arab academics too). No need for compulsory universal education, indeed that had the opposite effect of threatening the stronghold of religious dogma (see the rise of modern Science and subsequently the Enlightement). So, no interest for the church to introduce it.
There has always been a strong movement for controlling education by dogmatic bodies, including the church. During the Middle Ages, the churches already had a large monopoly on education. Martin Luther pushed for one of the first modern system of compulsory education and realized it in Germany who instituted a Lutheran compulsory system in the 16th Century.
As far as I know corporations do not fund universal education only give grants.
Corporations pay billions in education taxes. Furthermore, corporations were among the primary proponents of compulsory education laws in the hopes of getting better trained workforces.
As for the state, there is not a single line of thought that is imposed in schools. Unless you live in a totalitarian state, that is.
Are you kidding? You have mountains of state-imposed curricula. Now, one may thankfully avoid this via the private or home school system, but to suggest that the state does not impose lines of thought upon the education system is a bit of a stretch.
Philosophical thought is very rigorous and any philosophical vision - to use your term - must still be proven in order to be valid. It is not enough to say I have read this and that, so I'm well educated. To be a scholar, you need to argue and validate your case.
Who said anything about aspiring to be a 'scholar'?
Rather than education, it seems to me it is knowledge and wisdom that you are referring to. They are two different things.
Actually, knowing is knowing. External education is something different.
The dictionary provides numerous definitions of "education".
Philosophers also do not really speak of "Truths".
From what you understand apparently.
What do you mean by the dynamics of the classic perspective that has stood the test of time?
I mean for example that Plato's view is continues to stand. As does Aristotle's. As do many other widely accepted schools of thought. Criticism cannot effectively negate such base views over time.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
HELLLLLLLLLL NOOO. I would want me kid to do whatever makes them happy in the long run. BUT while they live under my roof its my rules and they will be going to school.
I'm glad I read this. For most of this thread I would have sworn you didn't understand what would happen without compulsory education. In this post you sum up precisely what would happen.
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
Comments
All kids go through spells where they don't want to go to school. Its part of the immaturity that goes with growing up. Hell I'm 27 and I'm just now getting mature enough where I feel I make good decisions for my future.
And if you think public schooling is helping create this society of yesmen and sheep then home school your kids. Just make sure they get an education is all.
6/7/2003 (***1/2)
7/9/2006 (****1/2)
7/13/2006 (**** )
4/10/2008 EV Solo (****1/2)
6/25/2008 MSG II (*****)
10/1/2009 LA II (****)
10/6/2009 LA III (***** Cornell!!!)
Maybe it would help your case if you would explain what you have in mind here. Being intentionally vague isn't helping us understand your point of view.
for the least they could possibly do
I'm not sure I understand your question. Today, you have laws stating that kids must go to school. I'm suggesting you remove that law.
Why would you want to limit your children in any way??
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
Are you advocating a return to the Middle Ages? When education was the preserve of a few? (while the masses slaved away in menial jobs and suppression)
Do you know why historically universal compulsory education was introduced?
Because if you give a kid the choice between watching cartoons and going to school to learn something boring like grammar they are probably going to pick cartoons, because they don't know any better and they aren't smart enough to know why school is important (or will be important in the future).
In both healing and education, given a formal external lack of both, from within numerous concepts revealed themselves to me. For example, I've had an ungodly amount of philosophical principles reveal themselves to me from within. And I'm constantly surprised to find that what I've conceived of myself are well known views held by prominant philosophers. Therefore, when I actually read the philosopher version, I understand it FARRRRRRRRRRRr more than those who are taught via information, externally, and who take the pale representation to be the truth. I know these abilities can be honed and expanded upon and developed by anyone, because I constantly develop and expand upon this in myself.
Beware of terms that are designed to limit possibilities...ie: utopian
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
From schools, be them private, public, or a mixture of the two.
LOL...whatever they and their parents agree to. I'm in no position to say what everyone's kids should be doing with their free time.
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
So if parents decide no education for their kids this is ok with you? No home schooling even. You know how many kids would turn their backs on education if it was left up to them?
Well because I don't know what you think kids should do if they are not educating themselves. I hang with my little cousins all of the time and this is what kids like to do and would do it all day if they were allowed.
LOLOLOLOLOLOL. This is just awful to me. Why can't you say no to your kids? If your kids had there own money for whatever reason you would just let them eat all the junk they want. You do realize we have an obesity problem in this country.
Yes. The discipline to show up everyday and participate in class. The discipline to respect your teachers and coaches even if you disagree. Education can teach kids many life lessons even if they don't "get" math or science.
I'm not talking about corporal punishment. I don't believe in smacking kids. My Mom taught me enough about respect that she never had to even spank me. And I will do the same with my kids.
6/7/2003 (***1/2)
7/9/2006 (****1/2)
7/13/2006 (**** )
4/10/2008 EV Solo (****1/2)
6/25/2008 MSG II (*****)
10/1/2009 LA II (****)
10/6/2009 LA III (***** Cornell!!!)
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
I'm at perfect peace knowing the rule is the rule. All the rest is human ideology...my view, yours, etc.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
LOL...no.
:rolleyes:
Your suggestion here, that absent compulsory education only "a few" would be educated, is ridiculous. The major determinant of whether or not a child will be willingly educated is the economic modality of their family. Without compulsory education, the vast majority of those currently in school would remain in school.
Absolutely -- so churches could educate people as they thought was "proper", then so corporations could educate people as they thought was "proper", then so states could educate people as they thought was "proper".
But academia is by definition a community of scholars - an exchange and confrontation of ideas: some proved right, others disproven (in science the method is essential to further knowledge).
How can you validate your own ideas and viewpoints without confrontation, that is debate with others?
Which philosophical principles have been revealed to you from within yourself? Which prominent philosophical views are you referring to?
And to be fair, imo the school systems generally do continually endeavor to implement this, at least in Canada, based on what I've seen. However there are so many already ingrained forces inherent to said systems that it's an ongoing, long-term uphill battle.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
Ultimately it will be up to my kids to pursue higher education. But if they are naturally gifted when it comes to school I would want them to go to a very respectable University.
College was where I received my most education for both my life experiences and school experiences and I would want my kids to experience this as well. If they don't want to go then I will put there college fund towards Daddy's new car. I will be disappointed it came to that but at least I would have a new toy.
6/7/2003 (***1/2)
7/9/2006 (****1/2)
7/13/2006 (**** )
4/10/2008 EV Solo (****1/2)
6/25/2008 MSG II (*****)
10/1/2009 LA II (****)
10/6/2009 LA III (***** Cornell!!!)
It would be ok with me. What right do I have to force them to do otherwise? And throwing drop-out rates at me is pretty silly given the high drop-out rates in the compulsory system coupled with the relative stupidity of even those who graduate.
I don't know you, and I don't know your kids. Are you saying that without compulsory education you'd never get your kids to step foot in a school again?
Allowed by whom? The state?
I could say no to my kids. In your analogy, I would have no need to.
Kids eat all the junk they want because parents are dumb enough to give junk to their kids. You might want to reread my earlier statement.
If you think schools are the proper place for children to learn "respect", I'd really like to visit the school your children go to. And yes, certainly children do learn many valuable skills from socializing with other children. However, compulsory education has no monopoly on socialization.
So, the answer to how can I validate my own ideas and viewpoints without confrontation is a question that misunderstands my stance. I am confronted all the time. The things is, my natural education continually proves itself over and over upon this confrontation. And given my attunement with learning, I'm open to learn in exchanges with opposing views, amending as I go, which is part of true learning.
As for the philosophical views, I've been shown Truths within. Therefore, when I read most any classic perspective that has stood the test of time, I understand not only it's validity as a map describing a dynamic, but I have experienced the dynamic itself, holistically, which is beyond the individual teachings. This is true knowledge. And it's the birthright of us all.
Edit: Plus, I'm a very, very well-read person. I have substantiated all of my inner visions with some of the most respected writings from the most respected minds.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
By eliminating state compulsion to attend school you're leaving to the families to decide whether their kids should attend or not.
What do you mean by the economic modality of the family? Whether it makes economic sense for their kids to attend school?
How many do you think would go?
Wrong. Churches already educated the few (hence my reference to the Middle Ages when scholarly information was preserved by the work of monks )and Arab academics too). No need for compulsory universal education, indeed that had the opposite effect of threatening the stronghold of religious dogma (see the rise of modern Science and subsequently the Enlightement). So, no interest for the church to introduce it.
As far as I know corporations do not fund universal education only give grants.
As for the state, there is not a single line of thought that is imposed in schools. Unless you live in a totalitarian state, that is.
It's not random either that compulsory elementary education is part of the universal declaration of human rights. Article 1 states "All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights", being able to read, write and speak seems a basis to understand this article.
I don't have kids yet but I can't wait until I do. While you do make fair points I will never agree that if a kid doesn't want to go to school then the kid shouldn't go to school.
The main reason is that the kid is not mature enough to make such a life altering decision. If the kid makes it to 18 and is almost done with High School but decides that Education isn't right for them its one thing, but to give the same power to a 10 year old is ridiculous to me. Because if kids are allowed to make these kinds of decisions for themselves what is the job of the parents? To just provide food and clothing? And what would the kid do all day? You say its not your job to decide but I don't think you're grasping what would end up happening if kids had all this free time. This is how a lot of kids get on the path to drug abuse and gang banging.
And if you don't agree with what is taught at public and private schools then home school your kids. Just don't let them go uneducated is my only plea.
6/7/2003 (***1/2)
7/9/2006 (****1/2)
7/13/2006 (**** )
4/10/2008 EV Solo (****1/2)
6/25/2008 MSG II (*****)
10/1/2009 LA II (****)
10/6/2009 LA III (***** Cornell!!!)
HELLLLLLLLLL NOOO. I would want me kid to do whatever makes them happy in the long run. BUT while they live under my roof its my rules and they will be going to school. College will be up to them. I will not pay thousands and thousands of dollars for school if they don't want to go. That would be a huge waste of there time and my money.
If they are doing well in school and ask me what I think they should do next I will tell them they should go away to college. That they should be a minimum of 2 hours away so they get out of the nest. This will be my advice. Not a rule.
6/7/2003 (***1/2)
7/9/2006 (****1/2)
7/13/2006 (**** )
4/10/2008 EV Solo (****1/2)
6/25/2008 MSG II (*****)
10/1/2009 LA II (****)
10/6/2009 LA III (***** Cornell!!!)
Philosophical thought is very rigorous and any philosophical vision - to use your term - must still be proven in order to be valid. It is not enough to say I have read this and that, so I'm well educated. To be a scholar, you need to argue and validate your case.
Rather than education, it seems to me it is knowledge and wisdom that you are referring to. They are two different things.
Philosophers also do not really speak of "Truths".
What do you mean by the dynamics of the classic perspective that has stood the test of time?
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
Yes, I was also going to add about education as a basic universal right.
The spread of education to the masses is inextricably linked to the spread of democracy throughout history.
Oh my god! No!!!!!
Yes. For instance, when America was largely agricultural (and societies today that are primarily agricultural), many children did not go to school because they could play an economic role within the household or because parents simply cannot afford to send them.
The vast majority, similar to today.
There has always been a strong movement for controlling education by dogmatic bodies, including the church. During the Middle Ages, the churches already had a large monopoly on education. Martin Luther pushed for one of the first modern system of compulsory education and realized it in Germany who instituted a Lutheran compulsory system in the 16th Century.
Corporations pay billions in education taxes. Furthermore, corporations were among the primary proponents of compulsory education laws in the hopes of getting better trained workforces.
Are you kidding? You have mountains of state-imposed curricula. Now, one may thankfully avoid this via the private or home school system, but to suggest that the state does not impose lines of thought upon the education system is a bit of a stretch.
Actually, knowing is knowing. External education is something different.
The dictionary provides numerous definitions of "education".
From what you understand apparently.
I mean for example that Plato's view is continues to stand. As does Aristotle's. As do many other widely accepted schools of thought. Criticism cannot effectively negate such base views over time.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
I'm glad I read this. For most of this thread I would have sworn you didn't understand what would happen without compulsory education. In this post you sum up precisely what would happen.