|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
merely saying compulsory etc and attacking the form of the schooling system is not enough. the content matters way more than some states-rights level arcane discussion on how univeral education should be organized. that should be a matter of practical design. animus against the current content of k-12 education should not be misdirected at organized education in general.
if you want some kind of john dewey idealized education system that's ok (but you have to be a professor's kid lol good luck) but even then you should still be able to say fundie homeschooling should be prevented. rail against the machine and all, and there's a discussion to be had about the organizational inertia and reification of instrumental reason as some kind of natural necessity etc. but this issue is not really the right one to be picking up that debate on. really, when you look at the university level, privatization will lead to LESS humanities content, MORE test driven and outcome focused stuff, because the parents are not interested in this stuff.
let's say you want to be a bicycle repairman and write a book about it and criticize the education system that had held your spirit captive, perhaps you wanted to read more Montaigne or have philosophy and anthropology taught at the k-12 level. that's ok and good, and really necessary. but any value system that does not change ordering based on individual in question will still give you a unified curriculum for every kid, and so even if you make the curriculum as liberal as possible, that's still compulsory education.
and you should be all over that kind of compulsion. it's one of the best things to happen in history
|
On June 03 2014 11:10 Nyxisto wrote:
You're all acting like getting a high school diploma is like going trough Harvard business school. We're talking about the age of 6-16/17 here, which is the standard for compulsory education in almost every Western country that is not the US.
Allowing parents to keep their children away from even that very basic amount of education (I'm not talking about homeschoolers here which actually learn the same stuff, although that may be problematic for practical reasons) is simply abusive and impairs the intellectual development of the child. Sometimes I don't understand you , this isn't rocket science.
K-12 is compulsory in the US too. Our system may be different from Germany's, but most Western educational systems differ from each other. Education systems a touchy subjects and are heavily influenced by culture. As a diverse country its really hard to have an education system that is universally approved of. Some states heavily regulate homeschooling, others don't.
|
On June 03 2014 11:59 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
K-12 is compulsory in the US too.
Not, as xDaunt pointed out, if you're Amish.
|
The Seattle City Council has unanimously approved an ordinance Monday to phase in a $15 hourly minimum wage — the highest in the nation.
Drafted by an advisory group of labor, business and nonprofit representatives convened by Mayor Ed Murray, the ordinance phases in wage increases over three to seven years, depending on the size of the business and employee benefits.
After more than four months of discussion, the group presented its plan last month. Last week the Council delayed implementation by the few months and approved a sub-minimum wage for teenagers, a provision opposed by labor representatives.
The issue has dominated politics in the liberal municipality for months. Murray, who was elected last year, had promised in his campaign to raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour. A newly elected socialist City Council member, Kshama Sawant, had pushed the idea as well.
"This legislation sends a message heard around the world: Seattle wants to stop the race to the bottom in wages and that we deplore the growth in income inequality and the widening gap between the rich and the poor," Councilmember Tom Rasmussen said.
Meanwhile, a group called 15 Now, led by Sawant, is collecting signatures for a ballot measure that would create an immediate wage hike for large businesses and a three-year phase-in for small businesses.
Chants of "we're unstoppable, we made 15 possible" erupted from supporters of the higher minimum wage after the bill was passed.
Sawant was the most vocal of the councilmembers in calling for higher wages across the board.
Source
|
Canada11607 Posts
On June 03 2014 13:54 Mindcrime wrote:Not, as xDaunt pointed out, if you're Amish.
No, but they do go to grade 8 and then basically apprentice some sort of trade or business.
Compulsory education is good, but I don't really have a problem with the delivery, whether it be public, private, online and/or homeschool. I think it's reasonable to expect the delivery to meet state or provincial learning outcomes if they want a high school diploma at the end. But I don't think it is the government's job to force parents to bring their students to a brick and mortar school. I believe it is the parent's right to decide what is the best method of education for their child. But if you value brick and mortar schools because of what is taught there, then bring out the carrot, not the stick.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
well i think everyone was talking about curriculum and teaching content, rather than physical location of the schools.
|
On June 03 2014 16:07 oneofthem wrote:
well i think everyone was talking about curriculum and teaching content, rather than physical location of the schools.
Yeah I brought it all up because of the several GOP state platforms calling for Creationism to be taught in public school classrooms as science strikes me as unacceptable.
Then Jonny compared Creationism to Feminism for some unexplained reason then pretended like none of that happened. Meanwhile, everyone else went off on various aspects of compulsory education.
To reiterate my concern is, how in the world is the patently incomprehensible idea of Creationism still a plank of GOP state platforms? Isn't there a responsibility for all Americans especially conservatives to help the people being duped into believing that specific non-sense?
More specifically, don't we all have a responsibility to prevent our children from being bamboozled into thinking Creationism is science just because 1 of 2 major statewide parties wants to teach it in PUBLIC classrooms as SCIENCE!?
I get freedom and all but come the hell on... Creationism as science in public schools being pushed by state GOP representatives (and plenty of national Republicans too)?! Creationism belongs in the science classroom about as much as phrenology and palm-reading...
There is no reason that Creationism being taught as Science in public schools shouldn't be considered as ridiculous and unacceptable as teaching China's cosmic egg story as science or Game of Thrones text as History...
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
|
On June 03 2014 06:25 aksfjh wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2014 05:18 Mindcrime wrote:On June 02 2014 21:01 Acrofales wrote:
In particular "vaccines cause autism" is a big one on the left hand of the political scale. Do you have the poll data to back up that assertion? What Mindcrime is saying. I live in a solid red, affluent part of Texas and I hear the anti-vaccine dumbasses all the time. Granted, I don't see the Venn diagram of anti-vaccine and creationists cross too much, but that doesn't mean one camp is "liberal" while the other is "conservative." Also, last time I checked, Michelle Bachmann was the last high-profile politician to speak out against vaccines.
There's two main reasons for being anti-vaccination: the religious one and the pseudoscientific one. The former is generally used by Christian fundamentalists, who tend to be conservative. The latter one is the one used by new age hippies, who tend to be liberals.
I unfortunately don't have the poll data. I thought that was the SciAm article I linked, but the right one must be older, or somewhere else entirely. Atm all I could find is Michael Shermer's blog, which doesn't mention vaccines.
Liberal anti-science:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-liberals-war-on-science/
He picks out nuclear power and GMO as two of the main points where liberals happily ignore all evidence and progress when it doesn't agree with their agenda.
|
On June 03 2014 20:34 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2014 06:25 aksfjh wrote:On June 03 2014 05:18 Mindcrime wrote:On June 02 2014 21:01 Acrofales wrote:
In particular "vaccines cause autism" is a big one on the left hand of the political scale. Do you have the poll data to back up that assertion? What Mindcrime is saying. I live in a solid red, affluent part of Texas and I hear the anti-vaccine dumbasses all the time. Granted, I don't see the Venn diagram of anti-vaccine and creationists cross too much, but that doesn't mean one camp is "liberal" while the other is "conservative." Also, last time I checked, Michelle Bachmann was the last high-profile politician to speak out against vaccines. There's two main reasons for being anti-vaccination: the religious one and the pseudoscientific one. The former is generally used by Christian fundamentalists, who tend to be conservative. The latter one is the one used by new age hippies, who tend to be liberals. I unfortunately don't have the poll data. I thought that was the SciAm article I linked, but the right one must be older, or somewhere else entirely. Atm all I could find is Michael Shermer's blog, which doesn't mention vaccines. Liberal anti-science: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-liberals-war-on-science/He picks out nuclear power and GMO as two of the main points where liberals happily ignore all evidence and progress when it doesn't agree with their agenda.
This seems relevant : Some interesting article about false beliefs
Basically all people ignore evidence if it about topic linked to their ideological position and contradicts it. (Of course to different degree).
As for homeschooling - school is not only for education. It is also for general development of social habits that society might deem worthwhile. Like meeting people who are different in one way or another.
EDIT: Homeschooling should be an option only due to physical inaccessibility of the school (disease, living in sparsely populated area).
|
On June 03 2014 21:38 mcc wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2014 20:34 Acrofales wrote:On June 03 2014 06:25 aksfjh wrote:On June 03 2014 05:18 Mindcrime wrote:On June 02 2014 21:01 Acrofales wrote:
In particular "vaccines cause autism" is a big one on the left hand of the political scale. Do you have the poll data to back up that assertion? What Mindcrime is saying. I live in a solid red, affluent part of Texas and I hear the anti-vaccine dumbasses all the time. Granted, I don't see the Venn diagram of anti-vaccine and creationists cross too much, but that doesn't mean one camp is "liberal" while the other is "conservative." Also, last time I checked, Michelle Bachmann was the last high-profile politician to speak out against vaccines. There's two main reasons for being anti-vaccination: the religious one and the pseudoscientific one. The former is generally used by Christian fundamentalists, who tend to be conservative. The latter one is the one used by new age hippies, who tend to be liberals. I unfortunately don't have the poll data. I thought that was the SciAm article I linked, but the right one must be older, or somewhere else entirely. Atm all I could find is Michael Shermer's blog, which doesn't mention vaccines. Liberal anti-science: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-liberals-war-on-science/He picks out nuclear power and GMO as two of the main points where liberals happily ignore all evidence and progress when it doesn't agree with their agenda. This seems relevant : Some interesting article about false beliefsBasically all people ignore evidence if it about topic linked to their ideological position and contradicts it. (Of course to different degree). As for homeschooling - school is not only for education. It is also for general development of social habits that society might deem worthwhile. Like meeting people who are different in one way or another. EDIT: Homeschooling should be an option only due to physical inaccessibility of the school (disease, living in sparsely populated area).
Schooling is also about indoctrination. History especially has a chauvinistic slant in most countries. There's a reason why countries like China and Japan have disputes over the contents of history books: (at least) one of them is lying to students.
The fact that children are responsible for learning and repeating those lies, and are punished if they fail to do so, even in liberal democracies, is an abomination.
|
On June 03 2014 22:34 hypercube wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2014 21:38 mcc wrote:On June 03 2014 20:34 Acrofales wrote:On June 03 2014 06:25 aksfjh wrote:On June 03 2014 05:18 Mindcrime wrote:On June 02 2014 21:01 Acrofales wrote:
In particular "vaccines cause autism" is a big one on the left hand of the political scale. Do you have the poll data to back up that assertion? What Mindcrime is saying. I live in a solid red, affluent part of Texas and I hear the anti-vaccine dumbasses all the time. Granted, I don't see the Venn diagram of anti-vaccine and creationists cross too much, but that doesn't mean one camp is "liberal" while the other is "conservative." Also, last time I checked, Michelle Bachmann was the last high-profile politician to speak out against vaccines. There's two main reasons for being anti-vaccination: the religious one and the pseudoscientific one. The former is generally used by Christian fundamentalists, who tend to be conservative. The latter one is the one used by new age hippies, who tend to be liberals. I unfortunately don't have the poll data. I thought that was the SciAm article I linked, but the right one must be older, or somewhere else entirely. Atm all I could find is Michael Shermer's blog, which doesn't mention vaccines. Liberal anti-science: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-liberals-war-on-science/He picks out nuclear power and GMO as two of the main points where liberals happily ignore all evidence and progress when it doesn't agree with their agenda. This seems relevant : Some interesting article about false beliefsBasically all people ignore evidence if it about topic linked to their ideological position and contradicts it. (Of course to different degree). As for homeschooling - school is not only for education. It is also for general development of social habits that society might deem worthwhile. Like meeting people who are different in one way or another. EDIT: Homeschooling should be an option only due to physical inaccessibility of the school (disease, living in sparsely populated area). Schooling is also about indoctrination. History especially has a chauvinistic slant in most countries. There's a reason why countries like China and Japan have disputes over the contents of history books: (at least) one of them is lying to students. The fact that children are responsible for learning and repeating those lies, and are punished if they fail to do so, even in liberal democracies, is an abomination.
Homeschooling does not solve it really, it just makes it possible also in countries where the school system is working properly and parents actually want the child indoctrinated.
EDIT: And of course not all indoctrination is bad as I pointed out in the post you reacted to.
|
On June 03 2014 22:34 hypercube wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2014 21:38 mcc wrote:On June 03 2014 20:34 Acrofales wrote:On June 03 2014 06:25 aksfjh wrote:On June 03 2014 05:18 Mindcrime wrote:On June 02 2014 21:01 Acrofales wrote:
In particular "vaccines cause autism" is a big one on the left hand of the political scale. Do you have the poll data to back up that assertion? What Mindcrime is saying. I live in a solid red, affluent part of Texas and I hear the anti-vaccine dumbasses all the time. Granted, I don't see the Venn diagram of anti-vaccine and creationists cross too much, but that doesn't mean one camp is "liberal" while the other is "conservative." Also, last time I checked, Michelle Bachmann was the last high-profile politician to speak out against vaccines. There's two main reasons for being anti-vaccination: the religious one and the pseudoscientific one. The former is generally used by Christian fundamentalists, who tend to be conservative. The latter one is the one used by new age hippies, who tend to be liberals. I unfortunately don't have the poll data. I thought that was the SciAm article I linked, but the right one must be older, or somewhere else entirely. Atm all I could find is Michael Shermer's blog, which doesn't mention vaccines. Liberal anti-science: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-liberals-war-on-science/He picks out nuclear power and GMO as two of the main points where liberals happily ignore all evidence and progress when it doesn't agree with their agenda. This seems relevant : Some interesting article about false beliefsBasically all people ignore evidence if it about topic linked to their ideological position and contradicts it. (Of course to different degree). As for homeschooling - school is not only for education. It is also for general development of social habits that society might deem worthwhile. Like meeting people who are different in one way or another. EDIT: Homeschooling should be an option only due to physical inaccessibility of the school (disease, living in sparsely populated area). Schooling is also about indoctrination. History especially has a chauvinistic slant in most countries. There's a reason why countries like China and Japan have disputes over the contents of history books: (at least) one of them is lying to students. The fact that children are responsible for learning and repeating those lies, and are punished if they fail to do so, even in liberal democracies, is an abomination.
So someone who grows up in a group of religious fundamentalists (remember,the homeschooling criticism was not primarily directed at people who just want to give their kids the best education) are less indoctrinated than people who go to a public school? Honestly?
I simply fail do see how depriving children of reasonable education just because the parents want it is in the "American spirit". Parents don't own their kids, that kind of attitude is something you would expect out of a Islamist country that has been stuck in the middle ages for too long.
edit: I don't know what schools you've been to but I'm pretty sure I have not been indoctrinated.
|
On June 03 2014 22:37 mcc wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2014 22:34 hypercube wrote:On June 03 2014 21:38 mcc wrote:On June 03 2014 20:34 Acrofales wrote:On June 03 2014 06:25 aksfjh wrote:On June 03 2014 05:18 Mindcrime wrote:On June 02 2014 21:01 Acrofales wrote:
In particular "vaccines cause autism" is a big one on the left hand of the political scale. Do you have the poll data to back up that assertion? What Mindcrime is saying. I live in a solid red, affluent part of Texas and I hear the anti-vaccine dumbasses all the time. Granted, I don't see the Venn diagram of anti-vaccine and creationists cross too much, but that doesn't mean one camp is "liberal" while the other is "conservative." Also, last time I checked, Michelle Bachmann was the last high-profile politician to speak out against vaccines. There's two main reasons for being anti-vaccination: the religious one and the pseudoscientific one. The former is generally used by Christian fundamentalists, who tend to be conservative. The latter one is the one used by new age hippies, who tend to be liberals. I unfortunately don't have the poll data. I thought that was the SciAm article I linked, but the right one must be older, or somewhere else entirely. Atm all I could find is Michael Shermer's blog, which doesn't mention vaccines. Liberal anti-science: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-liberals-war-on-science/He picks out nuclear power and GMO as two of the main points where liberals happily ignore all evidence and progress when it doesn't agree with their agenda. This seems relevant : Some interesting article about false beliefsBasically all people ignore evidence if it about topic linked to their ideological position and contradicts it. (Of course to different degree). As for homeschooling - school is not only for education. It is also for general development of social habits that society might deem worthwhile. Like meeting people who are different in one way or another. EDIT: Homeschooling should be an option only due to physical inaccessibility of the school (disease, living in sparsely populated area). Schooling is also about indoctrination. History especially has a chauvinistic slant in most countries. There's a reason why countries like China and Japan have disputes over the contents of history books: (at least) one of them is lying to students. The fact that children are responsible for learning and repeating those lies, and are punished if they fail to do so, even in liberal democracies, is an abomination. Homeschooling does not solve it really, it just makes it possible also in countries where the school system is working properly and parents actually want the child indoctrinated. EDIT: And of course not all indoctrination is bad as I pointed out in the post you reacted to.
I agree that not all indoctrination bad. However, I think you agree that the example I gave is. I mean it fosters group solidarity (which is good) but at the price of resentment towards people from other countries.
The point is that society is just plain wrong sometimes. Which is why in liberal democracies society is often discouraged from meddling in the life of the individual. In the sphere of ideas the individual is considered to be almost completely free, at least as an adult.
Children don't have the same freedom, neither from their parents nor from society. That's unavoidable to some extent but I do think that most societies (and very many parents) go way too far in trying to mold them.
Homeschooling can be a tool to let parents indoctrinate more effectively, when they are unhappy with the type indoctrination schools do. But it could also let children develop more freely, away from some of the negative influences that are perpetuated through the public education systems.
|
On June 03 2014 22:55 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2014 22:34 hypercube wrote:On June 03 2014 21:38 mcc wrote:On June 03 2014 20:34 Acrofales wrote:On June 03 2014 06:25 aksfjh wrote:On June 03 2014 05:18 Mindcrime wrote:On June 02 2014 21:01 Acrofales wrote:
In particular "vaccines cause autism" is a big one on the left hand of the political scale. Do you have the poll data to back up that assertion? What Mindcrime is saying. I live in a solid red, affluent part of Texas and I hear the anti-vaccine dumbasses all the time. Granted, I don't see the Venn diagram of anti-vaccine and creationists cross too much, but that doesn't mean one camp is "liberal" while the other is "conservative." Also, last time I checked, Michelle Bachmann was the last high-profile politician to speak out against vaccines. There's two main reasons for being anti-vaccination: the religious one and the pseudoscientific one. The former is generally used by Christian fundamentalists, who tend to be conservative. The latter one is the one used by new age hippies, who tend to be liberals. I unfortunately don't have the poll data. I thought that was the SciAm article I linked, but the right one must be older, or somewhere else entirely. Atm all I could find is Michael Shermer's blog, which doesn't mention vaccines. Liberal anti-science: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-liberals-war-on-science/He picks out nuclear power and GMO as two of the main points where liberals happily ignore all evidence and progress when it doesn't agree with their agenda. This seems relevant : Some interesting article about false beliefsBasically all people ignore evidence if it about topic linked to their ideological position and contradicts it. (Of course to different degree). As for homeschooling - school is not only for education. It is also for general development of social habits that society might deem worthwhile. Like meeting people who are different in one way or another. EDIT: Homeschooling should be an option only due to physical inaccessibility of the school (disease, living in sparsely populated area). Schooling is also about indoctrination. History especially has a chauvinistic slant in most countries. There's a reason why countries like China and Japan have disputes over the contents of history books: (at least) one of them is lying to students. The fact that children are responsible for learning and repeating those lies, and are punished if they fail to do so, even in liberal democracies, is an abomination. So someone who grows up in a group of religious fundamentalists (remember,the homeschooling criticism was not primarily directed at people who just want to give their kids the best education) are less indoctrinated than people who go to a public school? Honestly?
I was trying to make the distinction that homeschooling can be great. Obviously it can be bad too. I'm kinda agnostic on the debate on whether kids should be indoctrinated by their parents or by society. I think both is wrong.
I simply fail do see how depriving children of reasonable education just because the parents want it is in the "American spirit". Parents don't own their kids, that kind of attitude is something you would expect out of a Islamist country that has been stuck in the middle ages for too long.
Agreed, I just think the same is partly true for society. Society does not own kids and the purpose of education is not to create people who can serve it. It's to help kids to develop as individuals and as an aside to teach them how to function within a wider social context. However the main focus should be the needs and interests of the individual not that of society as a whole. That's the 19th century view where we educated people so that they could serve in the army and die for their country more effectively.
|
On June 03 2014 23:10 hypercube wrote:
However the main focus should be the needs and interests of the individual not that of society as a whole. That's the 19th century view where we educated people so that they could serve in the army and die for their country more effectively.
Yes, but that's a weird caricature of public education that probably isn't even happening in China anymore, yet alone France, the UK or Australia. It's tilting at windmills. No one here in Germany is being indoctrinated in school or taught wrong history.
This isn't Prussia, no ones trying to build a country of obedient super educated state loyal soldiers.
|
On June 03 2014 22:55 Nyxisto wrote:
edit: I don't know what schools you've been to but I'm pretty sure I have not been indoctrinated.
Let's just say I've had the privilege of learning about the same historical events in different countries.
|
On June 03 2014 22:57 hypercube wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2014 22:37 mcc wrote:On June 03 2014 22:34 hypercube wrote:On June 03 2014 21:38 mcc wrote:On June 03 2014 20:34 Acrofales wrote:On June 03 2014 06:25 aksfjh wrote:On June 03 2014 05:18 Mindcrime wrote:On June 02 2014 21:01 Acrofales wrote:
In particular "vaccines cause autism" is a big one on the left hand of the political scale. Do you have the poll data to back up that assertion? What Mindcrime is saying. I live in a solid red, affluent part of Texas and I hear the anti-vaccine dumbasses all the time. Granted, I don't see the Venn diagram of anti-vaccine and creationists cross too much, but that doesn't mean one camp is "liberal" while the other is "conservative." Also, last time I checked, Michelle Bachmann was the last high-profile politician to speak out against vaccines. There's two main reasons for being anti-vaccination: the religious one and the pseudoscientific one. The former is generally used by Christian fundamentalists, who tend to be conservative. The latter one is the one used by new age hippies, who tend to be liberals. I unfortunately don't have the poll data. I thought that was the SciAm article I linked, but the right one must be older, or somewhere else entirely. Atm all I could find is Michael Shermer's blog, which doesn't mention vaccines. Liberal anti-science: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-liberals-war-on-science/He picks out nuclear power and GMO as two of the main points where liberals happily ignore all evidence and progress when it doesn't agree with their agenda. This seems relevant : Some interesting article about false beliefsBasically all people ignore evidence if it about topic linked to their ideological position and contradicts it. (Of course to different degree). As for homeschooling - school is not only for education. It is also for general development of social habits that society might deem worthwhile. Like meeting people who are different in one way or another. EDIT: Homeschooling should be an option only due to physical inaccessibility of the school (disease, living in sparsely populated area). Schooling is also about indoctrination. History especially has a chauvinistic slant in most countries. There's a reason why countries like China and Japan have disputes over the contents of history books: (at least) one of them is lying to students. The fact that children are responsible for learning and repeating those lies, and are punished if they fail to do so, even in liberal democracies, is an abomination. Homeschooling does not solve it really, it just makes it possible also in countries where the school system is working properly and parents actually want the child indoctrinated. EDIT: And of course not all indoctrination is bad as I pointed out in the post you reacted to. I agree that not all indoctrination bad. However, I think you agree that the example I gave is. I mean it fosters group solidarity (which is good) but at the price of resentment towards people from other countries. The point is that society is just plain wrong sometimes. Which is why in liberal democracies society is often discouraged from meddling in the life of the individual. In the sphere of ideas the individual is considered to be almost completely free, at least as an adult. Children don't have the same freedom, neither from their parents nor from society. That's unavoidable to some extent but I do think that most societies (and very many parents) go way too far in trying to mold them. Homeschooling can be a tool to let parents indoctrinate more effectively, when they are unhappy with the type indoctrination schools do. But it could also let children develop more freely, away from some of the negative influences that are perpetuated through the public education systems.
Both can happen, one is just much more common (nearly exclusively so) in practice. And the whole distinction does not make much sense in liberal countries unless you are afraid that they are on brink of sliding towards nationalism and xenophobia on a great scale.
On June 03 2014 23:10 hypercube wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2014 22:55 Nyxisto wrote:On June 03 2014 22:34 hypercube wrote:On June 03 2014 21:38 mcc wrote:On June 03 2014 20:34 Acrofales wrote:On June 03 2014 06:25 aksfjh wrote:On June 03 2014 05:18 Mindcrime wrote:On June 02 2014 21:01 Acrofales wrote:
In particular "vaccines cause autism" is a big one on the left hand of the political scale. Do you have the poll data to back up that assertion? What Mindcrime is saying. I live in a solid red, affluent part of Texas and I hear the anti-vaccine dumbasses all the time. Granted, I don't see the Venn diagram of anti-vaccine and creationists cross too much, but that doesn't mean one camp is "liberal" while the other is "conservative." Also, last time I checked, Michelle Bachmann was the last high-profile politician to speak out against vaccines. There's two main reasons for being anti-vaccination: the religious one and the pseudoscientific one. The former is generally used by Christian fundamentalists, who tend to be conservative. The latter one is the one used by new age hippies, who tend to be liberals. I unfortunately don't have the poll data. I thought that was the SciAm article I linked, but the right one must be older, or somewhere else entirely. Atm all I could find is Michael Shermer's blog, which doesn't mention vaccines. Liberal anti-science: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-liberals-war-on-science/He picks out nuclear power and GMO as two of the main points where liberals happily ignore all evidence and progress when it doesn't agree with their agenda. This seems relevant : Some interesting article about false beliefsBasically all people ignore evidence if it about topic linked to their ideological position and contradicts it. (Of course to different degree). As for homeschooling - school is not only for education. It is also for general development of social habits that society might deem worthwhile. Like meeting people who are different in one way or another. EDIT: Homeschooling should be an option only due to physical inaccessibility of the school (disease, living in sparsely populated area). Schooling is also about indoctrination. History especially has a chauvinistic slant in most countries. There's a reason why countries like China and Japan have disputes over the contents of history books: (at least) one of them is lying to students. The fact that children are responsible for learning and repeating those lies, and are punished if they fail to do so, even in liberal democracies, is an abomination. So someone who grows up in a group of religious fundamentalists (remember,the homeschooling criticism was not primarily directed at people who just want to give their kids the best education) are less indoctrinated than people who go to a public school? Honestly? I was trying to make the distinction that homeschooling can be great. Obviously it can be bad too. I'm kinda agnostic on the debate on whether kids should be indoctrinated by their parents or by society. I think both is wrong.
In modern liberal countries one is statistically much better. When society is ok, the bigger problem are bad parents. When society is fucked up, bad parents are irrelevant problem. In countries we are talking about society is mostly ok or even good, and since school system is somewhat a mirror of society, it will be better than bad parents.
|
Indoctrination is impossible to avoid, so considering it "bad" is rather counterproductive. Even the brightest, most self-aware person on Earth still fits into a pointed system of knowledge. That's how learning and information work.
|
On June 03 2014 23:17 farvacola wrote:
Indoctrination is impossible to avoid, so considering it "bad" is rather counterproductive. Even the brightest, most self-aware person on Earth still fits into a pointed system of knowledge. That's how learning and information work.
By that definition everything is 'indoctrination', which renders the term completely useless.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
