Is School Slavery With Benifits?

[Dakini]

So you want to know less about math and more about economics, a study of the economy... which involves numbers.


...right.

Of course, you'd also like to know less about how the world works because scientific illiteracy isn't already a huge problem.

I am interested in Austrian School economics, which typically dosn't involve as much mathematics as your other schools. I would probably still study geology to some degree, for commodities and my fascination with space.

The problem of scientific literacy does not really concern me. As somebody who values a free market of idea's and talents, I see knowledge as an extension of the division of labour. If you have a bunch of people who are "well rounded", they are not particularly intelligent in any one area of study. The division of labour in the realm of idea's and talents would be more efficient if it was comprised of many individuals with highly specialized knowledge in their fields contributing to one end goal.

It sort of depresses me that there can be any study of the economy that doesn't involve math. Although that does explain people who like the Austrian school a lot more.

I don't think that people who are well-rounded can't be very knowledgeable in one particular thing. I'm pretty well-rounded: I'm bilingual, multi-instrumental, decently well read, a little athletic, a decent amateur artist, I know a little about a few scientific fields, I did a minor in philosophy et c and I'm working on a PhD in astrophysics, which might not be super impressive, but whatever. I think it's incredibly important that everyone be a little well-rounded, that everyone know a little about something other than their specialization. I also think it's incredibly important in this day and age that people know some basics about biology and climate (for starters) as well as having at least a basic idea Newtonian physics and basic chemistry.

[Dazchan]

First of all, nearly everybody who has posted here on the side of school being imprisonment has agreed that school HELD THEM BACK.

And yet they don't make a very convincing case for it.

They spent time in a classroom learning structured lessons on things that did not interest them, were below their skill level or were just plain false.

So they were learning? And this was a bad thing?

If the work was below their skill level, they shouldn't have taken that class. In regards to things being "just plain false", I have my doubts. In regards to the lessons not interesting them, I say "Suck it up, Princess"

This time could have been spent more productively, on things of value to the individual.

Like when I was in school, and I took classes I valued, including vocational training, and spent my free time in the library doing private study to further my skills?

Nearly everybody on the "anti-public school" side have said that dissent in the classroom and free thought was silenced, or at the very least discouraged.

As a public school teacher, I call bullshit. Never seen a classroom where reasonable discussion was silenced.

I hope you and Bottle recognize that most likely the majority of the anti-public schoolers here are more hard working, driven and interested in learning than the people who are content sitting at a desk being spoon fed garbage.

Secondly, you can "opt out" of schooling. I guess suicide, running away and starving in the streets is an option.

So if dropping out. Apparently considering your options is one of those skills you didn't value and learn about in school.

[Bendira]

I am interested in Austrian School economics, which typically dosn't involve as much mathematics as your other schools. I would probably still study geology to some degree, for commodities and my fascination with space.

The problem of scientific literacy does not really concern me. As somebody who values a free market of idea's and talents, I see knowledge as an extension of the division of labour. If you have a bunch of people who are "well rounded", they are not particularly intelligent in any one area of study. The division of labour in the realm of idea's and talents would be more efficient if it was comprised of many individuals with highly specialized knowledge in their fields contributing to one end goal.

It sort of depresses me that there can be any study of the economy that doesn't involve math. Although that does explain people who like the Austrian school a lot more.

I don't think that people who are well-rounded can't be very knowledgeable in one particular thing. I'm pretty well-rounded: I'm bilingual, multi-instrumental, decently well read, a little athletic, a decent amateur artist, I know a little about a few scientific fields, I did a minor in philosophy et c and I'm working on a PhD in astrophysics, which might not be super impressive, but whatever. I think it's incredibly important that everyone be a little well-rounded, that everyone know a little about something other than their specialization. I also think it's incredibly important in this day and age that people know some basics about biology and climate (for starters) as well as having at least a basic idea Newtonian physics and basic chemistry.

The Austrian School rejects the notion that mathematics is all that useful in the field of economics.

It is certainly not BAD to be well rounded, but why is well rounded prefered to, say, highly specialized? Why do school's try to make us "well rounded"? And even if you agree with the idea that public education should make us well rounded, why should the state be able to dictate what is best for us to learn and what isn't? And as for biology and climate, I assume you are refering to global warming, in which case I would say that global warming is a good example of what ISN'T desireable making its way into the classroom .

[Dakini]

It sort of depresses me that there can be any study of the economy that doesn't involve math. Although that does explain people who like the Austrian school a lot more.

I don't think that people who are well-rounded can't be very knowledgeable in one particular thing. I'm pretty well-rounded: I'm bilingual, multi-instrumental, decently well read, a little athletic, a decent amateur artist, I know a little about a few scientific fields, I did a minor in philosophy et c and I'm working on a PhD in astrophysics, which might not be super impressive, but whatever. I think it's incredibly important that everyone be a little well-rounded, that everyone know a little about something other than their specialization. I also think it's incredibly important in this day and age that people know some basics about biology and climate (for starters) as well as having at least a basic idea Newtonian physics and basic chemistry.

The Austrian School rejects the notion that mathematics is all that useful in the field of economics.

Then the Austrian School is clearly stupid.

edit: Actually, it's stupid for other reasons. Like the fact that it apparently rejects observing the economy as a basis for its economic theories. How did something this horribly stupid get to be so popular? Wtf? No wonder you hate science: Your preferred school of economics is totally opposed to the scientific method and is total bullshit.

It is certainly not BAD to be well rounded, but why is well rounded prefered to, say, highly specialized? Why do school's try to make us "well rounded"? And even if you agree with the idea that public education should make us well rounded, why should the state be able to dictate what is best for us to learn and what isn't? And as for biology and climate, I assume you are refering to global warming, in which case I would say that global warming is a good example of what ISN'T desireable making its way into the classroom .

Highly specialized people who don't know anything outside their field are highly boring.

Since you're someone who has demonstrated that he doesn't give a fig about science, I'll take your opinions about scientific observations with a mountain of salt. You have about as much credibility and knowledge in this area as you do about proper pluralization of nouns (and spelling).

[Wikkiwallana]

It sort of depresses me that there can be any study of the economy that doesn't involve math. Although that does explain people who like the Austrian school a lot more.

I don't think that people who are well-rounded can't be very knowledgeable in one particular thing. I'm pretty well-rounded: I'm bilingual, multi-instrumental, decently well read, a little athletic, a decent amateur artist, I know a little about a few scientific fields, I did a minor in philosophy et c and I'm working on a PhD in astrophysics, which might not be super impressive, but whatever. I think it's incredibly important that everyone be a little well-rounded, that everyone know a little about something other than their specialization. I also think it's incredibly important in this day and age that people know some basics about biology and climate (for starters) as well as having at least a basic idea Newtonian physics and basic chemistry.

The Austrian School rejects the notion that mathematics is all that useful in the field of economics.

It is certainly not BAD to be well rounded, but why is well rounded prefered to, say, highly specialized? Why do school's try to make us "well rounded"? And even if you agree with the idea that public education should make us well rounded, why should the state be able to dictate what is best for us to learn and what isn't? And as for biology and climate, I assume you are refering to global warming, in which case I would say that global warming is a good example of what ISN'T desireable making its way into the classroom .

Because a firm grounding in multiple areas tends to prevent the Dunning-Kruger effect.

As for climate change: http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?p=4789542#p4789542

Edit: why is the url tag not working? I can't see what I did wrong.

[Bottle]

Not seeing much else in the way of explanation, honestly.

I left home when I was still a minor. Hell, I was HOMELESS while I was a minor. I can assure everyone here, from personal experience, that it is not only possible for an American minor to stop attending public school, but it's actually depressingly easy. It was very difficult for me to keep going to school, and I worked my ass off to manage it.

Listening to spoilt little suburban kids bitch about how mean their teachers are is hilarious to me, in a sick and twisted sort of way, because they'll never know how easy they've got it. They'll never know how much their education is worth, and how many other kids have to fight and scrape their whole lives to just get a taste of that kind of opportunity. I suppose I should be glad that there are children who have been so pampered, that there are kids who can be that soft and sheltered, because that's a sign of how well-off some corners of this world are.

You are generalizing people who have an ideological disagreement with you about the nature of public schooling as "spoilt little suburban kids".

No, I'm saying quite clearly that little kids who say that public school is zomg totally slavery are no different than little kids who say that they are zomg totally starving when dinner is late by 15 minutes.

[ZombieRothbard]

The Austrian School rejects the notion that mathematics is all that useful in the field of economics.

Then the Austrian School is clearly stupid.

edit: Actually, it's stupid for other reasons. Like the fact that it apparently rejects observing the economy as a basis for its economic theories. How did something this horribly stupid get to be so popular? Wtf? No wonder you hate science: Your preferred school of economics is totally opposed to the scientific method and is total bullshit.

It is certainly not BAD to be well rounded, but why is well rounded prefered to, say, highly specialized? Why do school's try to make us "well rounded"? And even if you agree with the idea that public education should make us well rounded, why should the state be able to dictate what is best for us to learn and what isn't? And as for biology and climate, I assume you are refering to global warming, in which case I would say that global warming is a good example of what ISN'T desireable making its way into the classroom .

Highly specialized people who don't know anything outside their field are highly boring.

Since you're someone who has demonstrated that he doesn't give a fig about science, I'll take your opinions about scientific observations with a mountain of salt. You have about as much credibility and knowledge in this area as you do about proper pluralization of nouns (and spelling).

Whether they are boring of not shouldn't be of concern. It is not other peoples reponsibility to be interesting. I do care about science, but find it pointless for me to learn about certain aspects of science when I have no interest in it, nor would be knowing them benefit me economically or socially.

And yes, my grammar skills are poor, or atleast below others grammar skills who post here.

[Dakini]

Then the Austrian School is clearly stupid.

edit: Actually, it's stupid for other reasons. Like the fact that it apparently rejects observing the economy as a basis for its economic theories. How did something this horribly stupid get to be so popular? Wtf? No wonder you hate science: Your preferred school of economics is totally opposed to the scientific method and is total bullshit.


Highly specialized people who don't know anything outside their field are highly boring.

Since you're someone who has demonstrated that he doesn't give a fig about science, I'll take your opinions about scientific observations with a mountain of salt. You have about as much credibility and knowledge in this area as you do about proper pluralization of nouns (and spelling).

Whether they are boring of not shouldn't be of concern. It is not other peoples reponsibility to be interesting. I do care about science, but find it pointless for me to learn about certain aspects of science when I have no interest in it, nor would be knowing them benefit me economically or socially.

And yes, my grammar skills are poor, or atleast below others grammar skills who post here.

Learning about the Austrian School of economics will not benefit anybody either. Since it's utter garbage.

Further, it's not clear to me how knowing maths and a little about science doesn't benefit you. It can help you make informed decisions about your health, the food you should eat (e.g. is "organic" produce worth it)? It can help you understand basic things about the world around you which are likely to come in handy.

[Grave_n_idle]

By 'most likely', I wonder what exactly you mean.

Making calculations about alternate realities is hard enough. Your calculation seems to hinge on you being more successful because you know less... which seems counter-intuitive, at the least.

How would I know less? I may "know less" of what the state dictates I know, and I will "know more" about what I as an individual WANT to know and think will benefit me most.

If you are given less information, you'll know less.

See kids, this is why you should stay in school...


Seriously, though - there's nothing stopping you 'knowing more about' what YOU want to know, whether or not you're at school. School doesn't actually take information back away from you that you obtain on your own timer.

[Bottle]

No, she's generalizing about people that could opt out of schooling, by actually doing something... but would rather complain.

That's not about ideology.

First of all, nearly everybody who has posted here on the side of school being imprisonment has agreed that school HELD THEM BACK. They spent time in a classroom learning structured lessons on things that did not interest them, were below their skill level or were just plain false. This time could have been spent more productively, on things of value to the individual.

True, all the kids who hate school do seem to be in agreement that they're all far too smart for the stupid teachers.

Secondly, you can "opt out" of schooling. I guess suicide, running away and starving in the streets is an option.

You claim that school was "holding you back," but it sounds like the only thing holding you back was either your lack of ability or your lack of motivation.

So school sucks for you?

Test out of it. A kid in my graduating class was 13, because he tested out so many grades. At 13 he was done with public school for life. Public schools LOVE to test out kids that way. Saves em boatloads of money and makes the district look good.

Or just drop out. My buddy Joe dropped out at 14. He's got his masters now. And he did a really, really lot of drugs. If he could do it, why couldn't you?

Or you can just go to class when you feel like it. You know how I used to "opt out" of my boring high school classes? By not going. Like, instead of showing up and sitting in the classroom, I...didn't. I didn't have to commit seppuku or anything! I just...didn't go. And in college, you know how I "opted out" of my boring lectures? You guessed it, by not going! No suicide, no starvation, just sleeping in and occasionally playing some Tony Hawk. That was my diabolical super genius strategy for skipping over all the boring busywork that seems to have your boxers in a bunch.

But thats not how I want to live? I don't want to live in a system where you have to be a god damn fugitive to have freedom to learn and educate yourself.

Who the fuck is stopping you from learning? If your classes suck, drop the classes. If your college sucks, transfer. If your program sucks, get a new major. If college sucks for you in general, drop out. Learn whatever the fuck you want. Who do you think cares enough about you to try to stop you? Do you really think anybody else in the world will give a rat's ass if you drop Econ 101?

[Grave_n_idle]

Or just drop out. My buddy Joe dropped out at 14. He's got his masters now. And he did a really, really lot of drugs. If he could do it, why couldn't you?

9 times out of 10, I'd assume it's because school is being used as an excuse for failings that otherwise have to lay at the person's own door.

But then, I'm cynical like that.

[Grave_n_idle]

It is certainly not BAD to be well rounded, but why is well rounded prefered to, say, highly specialized?

As a general rule, yes, absolutely.

We're not ants - and that's a good thing. Being adaptable (as we are) gives us species (and cultural) survivability,

[Bottle]

First of all, nearly everybody who has posted here on the side of school being imprisonment has agreed that school HELD THEM BACK.

Most of the people complaining about school seem to be still in school.

School can't hold you back - unless you're claiming no personal responsibility, so I've no time for such complaining.

I just have no patience for the kids who sit there claiming that school is comparable to SLAVERY...but their actions prove them to be completely full of crap.

If they actually thought school was that bad, they wouldn't go. Tons of kids do that. ONE THIRD of my high school class (approximately 100 students) didn't graduate because they dropped out before senior year.

Don't anybody try to tell me that you "can't" drop out. The fuck you can't. It's easier to drop out than to stay in.

[Norstal]

People hating math.

People like that are hurting my feelings.

[ZombieRothbard]

Whether they are boring of not shouldn't be of concern. It is not other peoples reponsibility to be interesting. I do care about science, but find it pointless for me to learn about certain aspects of science when I have no interest in it, nor would be knowing them benefit me economically or socially.

And yes, my grammar skills are poor, or atleast below others grammar skills who post here.

Learning about the Austrian School of economics will not benefit anybody either. Since it's utter garbage.

Further, it's not clear to me how knowing maths and a little about science doesn't benefit you. It can help you make informed decisions about your health, the food you should eat (e.g. is "organic" produce worth it)? It can help you understand basic things about the world around you which are likely to come in handy.

I think it should be up to me to decide what economic school is utter garbage or not, which is another reason why i find public education to be oppressive. It is essentially whatever the state feels is correct. Keynesian economics finds its way into macro classes it seems, with little to no mention of other schools.

I agree that theoretically, if somebody knows a lot about each subject or discipline, they have the potential to make better informed decisions in mutiple areas. However, I still would say a division of labour in both knowledge and talents would make society run far more efficiently. People who are passionate and extremely knowledgeable in their field of study tend to be the most apt. Also, it goes without saying the more knowledge you have the better off you are, in all area's. However, who is to say that time I spent studying physics couldn't have been spent researching commodities, which could result in massive profits from day trading? Isn't it more beneficial for me to receive large quantities of wealth, than to MAYBE be able to use all that time I spent studying the sciences to make better informed food choices? This is assuming I cannot research food choices on my own, and it isn't general/common knowledge that food can be bad for you.

[Grave_n_idle]

I think it should be up to me to decide what economic school is utter garbage or not, which is another reason why i find public education to be oppressive.

Damn straight.

I also think we should be able to decide for ourselves if 1 + 1 is actually 2, or a Zionist plot.

Fight the power, Brother!

*nods*

[Norstal]

No offense, though, but you seem to be propagating the stereotype of the "angsty immature anarchist kid" (or as The Grand World Order calls them, "Anarkids!").

Eh, I don't mind. Idealists generally ARE regarded as angsty immature kids. Until they bring about revolutionary change for the benefit of society.

You, an idealist? You can't even do math or make your own decision. Hell, you didn't even do civil disobedience and walk off from school. You love freedom so much? Then why won't you endanger your life for it?

[Hegstoria]

Umm... no... I'm pretty sure Uncle Tom wasn't doing Pre-Calc in that cabin of his.

[Norstal]

I think it should be up to me to decide what economic school is utter garbage or not, which is another reason why i find public education to be oppressive. It is essentially whatever the state feels is correct. Keynesian economics finds its way into macro classes it seems, with little to no mention of other schools.

Bullshit. If I were to introduce a new Unified Field Theory to the Physics department with no mathematical proof, I will be a fucking laughingstock. The same thing with Austrian School. It doesn't have math in it, therefore it's fake.

This is like the evolution/creationism debate. One is a valid biology theory, the other is just bullshit.

[Wamitoria]

Umm... no... I'm pretty sure Uncle Tom wasn't doing Pre-Calc in that cabin of his.

Oh he was. His ever graceful master allowed him to learn anything he wanted. Unfortunately, under the influence of Yankee propaganda, and tempted by the prospect of marrying a white woman, he ran away from his kind master to work with the evil devil-eyed Yankees.

[Dakini]

Learning about the Austrian School of economics will not benefit anybody either. Since it's utter garbage.

Further, it's not clear to me how knowing maths and a little about science doesn't benefit you. It can help you make informed decisions about your health, the food you should eat (e.g. is "organic" produce worth it)? It can help you understand basic things about the world around you which are likely to come in handy.

I think it should be up to me to decide what economic school is utter garbage or not, which is another reason why i find public education to be oppressive. It is essentially whatever the state feels is correct. Keynesian economics finds its way into macro classes it seems, with little to no mention of other schools.

I agree that theoretically, if somebody knows a lot about each subject or discipline, they have the potential to make better informed decisions in mutiple areas. However, I still would say a division of labour in both knowledge and talents would make society run far more efficiently. People who are passionate and extremely knowledgeable in their field of study tend to be the most apt. Also, it goes without saying the more knowledge you have the better off you are, in all area's. However, who is to say that time I spent studying physics couldn't have been spent researching commodities, which could result in massive profits from day trading? Isn't it more beneficial for me to receive large quantities of wealth, than to MAYBE be able to use all that time I spent studying the sciences to make better informed food choices? This is assuming I cannot research food choices on my own, and it isn't general/common knowledge that food can be bad for you.

Look, I don't study any schools of economics. I don't know everything and until recently I only had vague ideas about these things.

However, the fact that the Austrian School of economics is opposed to the use of empirical evidence tells me that it is bullshit. It is nothing more than a logical exercise with absolutely no real applications. Additionally, minimal research shows that many of its conclusions and theories seem to be completely false based on empirical evidence (which might be why they're not big fans of it). This tells me that it's utterly worthless to pursue except as an intellectual exercise.

Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against purely intellectual exercises. However, if you're looking for applications, this seems minimum at best. *

Further, it obviously isn't general knowledge that food can be bad for you. Look at the obesity crisis. Look at the fact that so many people are wasting money on organic produce that doesn't actually involve any benefits (not that there are never issues with chemicals in foods, but some foods have little to no chemicals and aren't worth buying organic since you're getting essentially the same product). Look at the anti-vaccination movement. Scientific literacy is in dire need.


*By the way, these deductions brought about by years of training my critical thinking and problem solving skills. I'm not sure whether to give more credit to the physics, the philosophy or just generally picked up somewhere in my well-rounded and wonderful education, but there they are.

[Hegstoria]

Umm... no... I'm pretty sure Uncle Tom wasn't doing Pre-Calc in that cabin of his.

Oh he was. His ever graceful master allowed him to learn anything he wanted. Unfortunately, under the influence of Yankee propaganda, and tempted by the prospect of marrying a white woman, he ran away from his kind master to work with the evil devil-eyed Yankees.

Of course! I was in the bathroom during that part!

[Greto]

I don't see how it could be seen as slavery more as forced learning and brainwashing the youth by the Government. I would compare public schools more to a form of juvenile prison then slavery, considering that I have heard of a school in the area I live in were students must walk through metal detectors and are not allowed to bring in pencils.(I consider this a lie or otherwise it is possible that some adults out there now believe that pencils are harmful weapons)

[Bottle]

Eh, I don't mind. Idealists generally ARE regarded as angsty immature kids. Until they bring about revolutionary change for the benefit of society.

You, an idealist? You can't even do math or make your own decision. Hell, you didn't even do civil disobedience and walk off from school. You love freedom so much? Then why won't you endanger your life for it?

Apparently I did more to uphold his "ideals" than he ever has, because I skipped way more school and refused to do way more homework.

[Wikkiwallana]

I think it should be up to me to decide what economic school is utter garbage or not, which is another reason why i find public education to be oppressive. It is essentially whatever the state feels is correct. Keynesian economics finds its way into macro classes it seems, with little to no mention of other schools.

I agree that theoretically, if somebody knows a lot about each subject or discipline, they have the potential to make better informed decisions in mutiple areas. However, I still would say a division of labour in both knowledge and talents would make society run far more efficiently. People who are passionate and extremely knowledgeable in their field of study tend to be the most apt. Also, it goes without saying the more knowledge you have the better off you are, in all area's. However, who is to say that time I spent studying physics couldn't have been spent researching commodities, which could result in massive profits from day trading? Isn't it more beneficial for me to receive large quantities of wealth, than to MAYBE be able to use all that time I spent studying the sciences to make better informed food choices? This is assuming I cannot research food choices on my own, and it isn't general/common knowledge that food can be bad for you.

Look, I don't study any schools of economics. I don't know everything and until recently I only had vague ideas about these things.

However, the fact that the Austrian School of economics is opposed to the use of empirical evidence tells me that it is bullshit. It is nothing more than a logical exercise with absolutely no real applications. Additionally, minimal research shows that many of its conclusions and theories seem to be completely false based on empirical evidence (which might be why they're not big fans of it). This tells me that it's utterly worthless to pursue except as an intellectual exercise.

Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against purely intellectual exercises. However, if you're looking for applications, this seems minimum at best.

Further, it obviously isn't general knowledge that food can be bad for you. Look at the obesity crisis. Look at the fact that so many people are wasting money on organic produce that doesn't actually involve any benefits (not that there are never issues with chemicals in foods, but some foods have little to no chemicals and aren't worth buying organic since you're getting essentially the same product). Look at the anti-vaccination movement. Scientific literacy is in dire need.

Bendira's already profeesed a personal disbelief of climate change, arguing the pro-science position isn't going to get you very far, I'm afraid.