Superior/Inferior Cultures?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
13-04-2015, 07:38 AM
RE: Superior/Inferior Cultures?
(13-04-2015 07:18 AM)bbeljefe Wrote:  
(13-04-2015 07:08 AM)Chas Wrote:  There are a great many things that children do not want to do, but they need to do them. Your argument is childish.

My argument is and always has been supported with empirical evidence that could be found in less than one commercial break in the average television show.

Perhaps you'd care to provide an actual refutation? Or at least some attempt at justifying your claim that children need to be forced to do "things"?

Your example about diagramming sentences shows that you haven't actually thought that through or don't understand its point.

Diagramming sentences is a tool for understanding grammar.
Grammar is a tool to aid communication.
Good communication is useful to everyone.

We have schools for good and practical reasons. It's not a question of statism, it's a matter of good for the individual and for society.

We don't have the means to tailor education to each individual, so students in early education get the broad swath.
Besides, you don't know what they will or will not specifically need in the future.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-04-2015, 07:44 AM
RE: Superior/Inferior Cultures?
(13-04-2015 07:24 AM)bbeljefe Wrote:  It's pretty simple. Forced anything comes with the threat of violence. If it didn't, it wouldn't be forced.

Facepalm So I suppose any time a kid does *anything* contrary to what his parents think best e.g. patting the nice fierce doggy, and they tell him/her not to do that, or pick them up out of harm's way, they're *forcing* him/her with the threat of violence?

Violence is... generally a word employed to indicate traumatic levels of external force applied to someone against their will. Applying it to a situation such as this is nice and emotive for your argument, but pointless because I refuse to employ such a ludicrous redefinition.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like morondog's post
13-04-2015, 07:47 AM
RE: Superior/Inferior Cultures?
(13-04-2015 07:38 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(13-04-2015 07:18 AM)bbeljefe Wrote:  My argument is and always has been supported with empirical evidence that could be found in less than one commercial break in the average television show.

Perhaps you'd care to provide an actual refutation? Or at least some attempt at justifying your claim that children need to be forced to do "things"?

Your example about diagramming sentences shows that you haven't actually thought that through or don't understand its point.

Diagramming sentences is a tool for understanding grammar.
Grammar is a tool to aid communication.
Good communication is useful to everyone.

We have schools for good and practical reasons. It's not a question of statism, it's a matter of good for the individual and for society.

We don't have the means to tailor education to each individual, so students in early education get the broad swath.
Besides, you don't know what they will or will not specifically need in the future.

Diagramming sentences is an atrocious and largely ineffective means by which to teach grammar. It could very well be useful to a literature or journalism major but as I've said, coercing someone is also a horrible way to effect learning.

And "we" don't need the means to tailor education to each individual. Just as we don't need to tailor a diet to each individual or a regimen of entertainment. Those things are best tailored to the individual by the individual. And unschooling demonstrates beautifully that children are perfectly capable of choosing for themselves what to learn. If you don't understand how it works, I'm more than happy to explain it to you. All you have to do is want to know how and then... ask.

But I agree, we do not know what each individual needs or will need in the future. Which is precisely the reason why we shouldn't presume to know what they will need in the future, by way of compulsory education.

The beginning of wisdom is to call things by their right names. - Chinese Proverb
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-04-2015, 07:48 AM
RE: Superior/Inferior Cultures?
(13-04-2015 07:44 AM)morondog Wrote:  
(13-04-2015 07:24 AM)bbeljefe Wrote:  It's pretty simple. Forced anything comes with the threat of violence. If it didn't, it wouldn't be forced.

Facepalm So I suppose any time a kid does *anything* contrary to what his parents think best e.g. patting the nice fierce doggy, and they tell him/her not to do that, or pick them up out of harm's way, they're *forcing* him/her with the threat of violence?

Violence is... generally a word employed to indicate traumatic levels of external force applied to someone against their will. Applying it to a situation such as this is nice and emotive for your argument, but pointless because I refuse to employ such a ludicrous redefinition.

It's the Libertardian definition.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
13-04-2015, 07:53 AM
RE: Superior/Inferior Cultures?
(13-04-2015 07:47 AM)bbeljefe Wrote:  
(13-04-2015 07:38 AM)Chas Wrote:  Your example about diagramming sentences shows that you haven't actually thought that through or don't understand its point.

Diagramming sentences is a tool for understanding grammar.
Grammar is a tool to aid communication.
Good communication is useful to everyone.

We have schools for good and practical reasons. It's not a question of statism, it's a matter of good for the individual and for society.

We don't have the means to tailor education to each individual, so students in early education get the broad swath.
Besides, you don't know what they will or will not specifically need in the future.

Diagramming sentences is an atrocious and largely ineffective means by which to teach grammar. It could very well be useful to a literature or journalism major but as I've said, coercing someone is also a horrible way to effect learning.

That is your unsupported opinion.

Quote:And "we" don't need the means to tailor education to each individual. Just as we don't need to tailor a diet to each individual or a regimen of entertainment. Those things are best tailored to the individual by the individual. And unschooling demonstrates beautifully that children are perfectly capable of choosing for themselves what to learn. If you don't understand how it works, I'm more than happy to explain it to you. All you have to do is want to know how and then... ask.

Seriously? What dream world do you live in? Unschooling is an unrealistic ideology.

Quote:But I agree, we do not know what each individual needs or will need in the future. Which is precisely the reason why we shouldn't presume to know what they will need in the future, by way of compulsory education.

You really miss the point. The individual rarely has any idea what the future holds nor do children possess the wisdom or knowledge to make those choices.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
13-04-2015, 07:59 AM
RE: Superior/Inferior Cultures?
(13-04-2015 07:44 AM)morondog Wrote:  
(13-04-2015 07:24 AM)bbeljefe Wrote:  It's pretty simple. Forced anything comes with the threat of violence. If it didn't, it wouldn't be forced.

Facepalm So I suppose any time a kid does *anything* contrary to what his parents think best e.g. patting the nice fierce doggy, and they tell him/her not to do that, or pick them up out of harm's way, they're *forcing* him/her with the threat of violence?

Violence is... generally a word employed to indicate traumatic levels of external force applied to someone against their will. Applying it to a situation such as this is nice and emotive for your argument, but pointless because I refuse to employ such a ludicrous redefinition.

I've already stated that life safety is an exception but I'll address your strawman. Removing a child (or anyone for that matter) from harm's way is not a threat of force, it's a reaction to an impending or immediate threat of harm. This strawman is usually constructed with boiling pots of water on a stove and the logical refutation is thus... why is your child close to the danger in the first place? Have you not, as a parent, been responsible enough to protect your child from these things? If not, why not? What sort of moron puts a child in front of a fierce dog?

Lastly, the fact that violence is not used in most instances does not negate the fact that there is an explicit threat of violence in compulsory education. This is logic at its simplest form. One can easily reason that if something is compulsory, refusing to comply must be enforced through some means. Ultimately, and especially where the state is concerned, violence is the logical end to that line of reasoning.

That's not emotive, it's factual. If that fact pisses you off, perhaps you need to explore the reason why instead of lobbing insults my way. ;-)

The beginning of wisdom is to call things by their right names. - Chinese Proverb
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-04-2015, 08:19 AM
RE: Superior/Inferior Cultures?
(13-04-2015 07:53 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(13-04-2015 07:47 AM)bbeljefe Wrote:  Diagramming sentences is an atrocious and largely ineffective means by which to teach grammar. It could very well be useful to a literature or journalism major but as I've said, coercing someone is also a horrible way to effect learning.

That is your unsupported opinion.

Quote:And "we" don't need the means to tailor education to each individual. Just as we don't need to tailor a diet to each individual or a regimen of entertainment. Those things are best tailored to the individual by the individual. And unschooling demonstrates beautifully that children are perfectly capable of choosing for themselves what to learn. If you don't understand how it works, I'm more than happy to explain it to you. All you have to do is want to know how and then... ask.

Seriously? What dream world do you live in? Unschooling is an unrealistic ideology.

Quote:But I agree, we do not know what each individual needs or will need in the future. Which is precisely the reason why we shouldn't presume to know what they will need in the future, by way of compulsory education.

You really miss the point. The individual rarely has any idea what the future holds nor do children possess the wisdom or knowledge to make those choices.


Sentence diagramming is possibly the single most ridiculed activity in public schooling. But I'm not arguing against its efficacy in general, I'm arguing against its efficacy in duress. Again, people don't learn well when forced. They learn well when they are pursuing a personal goal. So if a child has the desire to become a writer, then sentence diagramming might well be invaluable. But if a child has designs on becoming an auto mechanic, it's not going to be of much use and forcing him to do it is going to result in a hollow victory for the teacher. This is very clearly evidenced by the disturbingly high rate of illiteracy among public school graduates.


Again, do you have an argument with supporting evidence or do you just have a sack of adjectives to hurl at unschooling? It's quite simple Chas.... read. You might actually learn something about a topic which you know little of nothing if you try it.

And once again, do you have supporting evidence that children have no ability to decide for themselves what they want to know? Do you have some evidence showing that children who don't attend school are somehow doomed to failure?

You seem fond of casting blanket assertions but the truth is that public school has an atrocious track record where financial and grammatical literacy are concerned. And I think we could agree that those two things are vastly more important for an adult than knowing what year Columbus is alleged to have discovered this utopia in which we live, can't we?

The beginning of wisdom is to call things by their right names. - Chinese Proverb
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-04-2015, 08:55 AM
RE: Superior/Inferior Cultures?
(12-04-2015 11:39 PM)bbeljefe Wrote:  That said, who needs to be gotten up to speed on lies about the virtue of the state? What possible good does it do little Johnny to be able to recite a prayer to a colored rag? What good does it do for little Johnny to be capable of diagramming sentences or to pick out verbs and adverbs in them? Especially if he has no interest in any profession that would require such skills?

That doesn't particularly sound like any real school I've ever heard of or attended.

(12-04-2015 11:39 PM)bbeljefe Wrote:  I've already explained what's not important in some generality but what IS important? Well, that depends on the person, their location and a variety of other factors that no group of bureaucrats can know. If little Johnny lives in the northern part of the US, he needs to know some things about how to move around and survive in the snow. If he's in the south, he needs to know how to avoid heat stroke. If he demonstrates an interest in working with his hands, he needs to learn how to use tools. If he's interested in numbers and computers, he needs to know calculus and logic.

What if someone doesn't want to learn anything?

Lazy and stubborn people exist, after all.

(12-04-2015 11:39 PM)bbeljefe Wrote:  And if he does not show an interest in sentence structure then no one anywhere should be forcing him to sit in a prison like room for any period of time any number of days per week, month or year learning how to diagram sentences. Why? For the same reasons why it is wrong to force children to learn about and pretend to worship gods. Namely, because they have not asked to be.

Children are not competent. Children cannot make their own decisions. Because they're children. What they want isn't necessarily what's best for them.

(12-04-2015 11:39 PM)bbeljefe Wrote:  And why do we even think we need to force children to learn? Children are quite naturally voracious learners any time their motivation is left unmolested by busy body adults who think they can decide for other human beings what they should know and what they should not know. Don't believe me? Try to stop a child from learning how to talk, how to walk, etc. Try to stop an older child from pursuing that which interests him or her. If you do, they will hide from you and do it anyway. Unless of course, you've successfully murdered their interest in learning by forcing them to sit, often sequestered from their friends, in a cold and boring room practicing rote memorization of things in which they have no interest.

That sounds like a big bucket of opinion.
(and it's pretty disingenuous to compare language acquisition to "wanting" to learn algebra or whatever)

(12-04-2015 11:39 PM)bbeljefe Wrote:  Not to mention, forcing people to do things which they do not want to do (life safety notwithstanding) is just fucking immoral and sadistic.

But it's also the definition of society - limits on individual freedom of action for collective benefit. If no one wanted to break laws then we wouldn't need laws in the first place. As such, everything is a matter of weighing cost and benefit.

Bonus question: is forcing people to be vaccinated immoral and sadistic? Why or why not?

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like cjlr's post
13-04-2015, 09:31 AM
RE: Superior/Inferior Cultures?
(13-04-2015 08:55 AM)cjlr Wrote:  
(12-04-2015 11:39 PM)bbeljefe Wrote:  That said, who needs to be gotten up to speed on lies about the virtue of the state? What possible good does it do little Johnny to be able to recite a prayer to a colored rag? What good does it do for little Johnny to be capable of diagramming sentences or to pick out verbs and adverbs in them? Especially if he has no interest in any profession that would require such skills?

That doesn't particularly sound like any real school I've ever heard of or attended.

(12-04-2015 11:39 PM)bbeljefe Wrote:  I've already explained what's not important in some generality but what IS important? Well, that depends on the person, their location and a variety of other factors that no group of bureaucrats can know. If little Johnny lives in the northern part of the US, he needs to know some things about how to move around and survive in the snow. If he's in the south, he needs to know how to avoid heat stroke. If he demonstrates an interest in working with his hands, he needs to learn how to use tools. If he's interested in numbers and computers, he needs to know calculus and logic.

What if someone doesn't want to learn anything?

Lazy and stubborn people exist, after all.

(12-04-2015 11:39 PM)bbeljefe Wrote:  And if he does not show an interest in sentence structure then no one anywhere should be forcing him to sit in a prison like room for any period of time any number of days per week, month or year learning how to diagram sentences. Why? For the same reasons why it is wrong to force children to learn about and pretend to worship gods. Namely, because they have not asked to be.

Children are not competent. Children cannot make their own decisions. Because they're children. What they want isn't necessarily what's best for them.

(12-04-2015 11:39 PM)bbeljefe Wrote:  And why do we even think we need to force children to learn? Children are quite naturally voracious learners any time their motivation is left unmolested by busy body adults who think they can decide for other human beings what they should know and what they should not know. Don't believe me? Try to stop a child from learning how to talk, how to walk, etc. Try to stop an older child from pursuing that which interests him or her. If you do, they will hide from you and do it anyway. Unless of course, you've successfully murdered their interest in learning by forcing them to sit, often sequestered from their friends, in a cold and boring room practicing rote memorization of things in which they have no interest.

That sounds like a big bucket of opinion.
(and it's pretty disingenuous to compare language acquisition to "wanting" to learn algebra or whatever)

(12-04-2015 11:39 PM)bbeljefe Wrote:  Not to mention, forcing people to do things which they do not want to do (life safety notwithstanding) is just fucking immoral and sadistic.

But it's also the definition of society - limits on individual freedom of action for collective benefit. If no one wanted to break laws then we wouldn't need laws in the first place. As such, everything is a matter of weighing cost and benefit.

Bonus question: is forcing people to be vaccinated immoral and sadistic? Why or why not?

I like that question.. Don't know what my answer would be but it's keeping me entertained for the next hour. So many angles to look at, eek I wish I had that question as an essay.

Saints live in flames; wise men, next to them.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-04-2015, 10:45 AM (This post was last modified: 13-04-2015 10:48 AM by Dom.)
RE: Superior/Inferior Cultures?
All animals train their offspring in survival skills.

If you ever watch other species, you may have seen a cat swat a kitten, pick it up by the scruff of the neck and throw it back in the nest.

You may have seen mama bird walk around and point out edibles to the flock of chicks behind her. They then peck at it and taste it.

You may have seen a duck pinch a duckling who has strayed and is in danger of getting lost.

There are countless examples of offspring being taught survival skills, social behavior and so forth.

Humans are no different, they need to learn as much as possibly possible about the world they will have to live in.

The big drawback here is that useless things like religion continue to be taught generation after generation after generation...

[Image: dobie.png]Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: