The purpose of school.

[futurebird]

There were not as many responses to the 2nd post as the first. But, I think that something is starting to develop.

(Purpose.) What's wrong with the way public schools are used?

The first thing to fix about schools is the PERCEPTION of the value of schools, whether the kids think they can REALLY be successful, and to take it seriously. If you dont

Comments

[underlankers]

Public schools were simply a means to a specific end. They were never intended to actually teach anything useful.

[paft]

A means to what specific end?

[meus_ovatio]

Economic suitability.

[paft]

Creating suitable workers, you mean?

What do you think would be the result if public education were eliminated?

[meus_ovatio]

A free society guided by its ethical principles, where justice remains the chief pursuit of governance and economics is relegated to the dust-bin of Babylon.

[paft]

How would a sharp rise in illiteracy result in this?

[meus_ovatio]

Doesn't follow. Literacy can arise in many contexts and in many ways. The idea that we have to have schools to learn how to read is just indicative of our enslavement to Babylon.

[paft]

How would you expect the children of the poor to become literate (which by the way, goes beyond merely learning how to read and do basic math) if they did not have access to publicly funded education?

[meus_ovatio]

I'm not concerned about poor or rich people being literate. Literacy is simply one example of our economic deceit- that human freedom is stipulated through economic liberty. This is why we have class warfare. The education system does nothing to alleviate the symptomatic abuses of Babylon. It is its chief ally and recruiter. It is the excuse we give ourselves. Widespread literacy is required for a technological society dedicated to the maintenance of economic superstructures which propagate inequality in their day-to-day operation, cf: Jesus.

Jesus did not say "teach the poor how to read". Jesus said, "give the poor some food and clothing."

But we say, "Teach the poor how to read, so that they can get food and clothing."

Lawd-'ave-mer-cy.

[paft]

mo: I'm not concerned about poor or rich people being literate.

So you think being unable to read or write and having no grasp of history and logic is no big deal?

[meus_ovatio]

Doesn't follow. Understanding history and logic is not contingent upon public education. In fact, the generally liberal and universal style of education passed on in nativistic or "primitive" societies far outstrips modern society in its dissemination of knowledge and ability. Primitive societies cultivate multi-faceted and multi-capable individuals who are not solely limited to their immediate means of work, and display an impressive measure of cultural and historical understanding amongst all the people.

Today, even as we discuss why modern citizens are so historically illiterate, we carry on as if this isn't supposed to happen. When you make history a subject, you deny its proper role in society through tradition and common knowledge

[futurebird]

Doesn't follow. Understanding history and logic is not contingent upon public education.

I don't really know about what else it is you're talking about (at all... Babylon? Really?) but this is true.It might be time for one of my critical thinking rants.

[meus_ovatio]

What don't you understand about Babylon? It seems centrally crucial to understanding anything in, say, the Bible for instance.

[futurebird]

It's that what Rastas call the west? I don't think the history of education is a single story.

[meus_ovatio]

It's what God calls the world.

[futurebird]

It just sounds very dramatic in political debate.