This is exactly the kind of sensationalism that would have convinced me to embrace school. It says nothing of its character to have oily skin and a hollow skull devoid of moisture. I would be offended that the author tried to use such gimmicks on me.
In fact, if the author *really* wanted to make me think, they shouldn’t even portray the enemy as shiny like Ra (https://srconstantin.wordpress.com/2016/10/20/ra/). They would portray the enemy as normal. Relatable, in fact; someone you could be best friends with. It is of the greatest importance to this person not to be annoying; not to “cause problems for the sake of causing problems” (i.e. to invite debate about why things are the way they are). This is extremely persuasive to most people; they don’t want to be That Guy, whose badness is just to be taken for granted. Anyone with common sense understands. Be Skeet and not Jimmy.
There’s no way a newb could know better. It’s impossible that exposure and involvement could mislead a person.
This is exactly the kind of sensationalism that would have convinced me to embrace school.
It seems strange to dislike a rhetoric so much that because of the rhetoric alone you embrace a different position. Is there a reason you think the sensationalism pushes you so much?
In fact, if the author *really* wanted to make me think, they shouldn’t even portray the enemy as shiny like Ra (https://srconstantin.wordpress.com/2016/10/20/ra/). They would portray the enemy as normal. Relatable, in fact; someone you could be best friends with. It is of the greatest importance to this person not to be annoying; not to “cause problems for the sake of causing problems” (i.e. to invite debate about why things are the way they are). This is extremely persuasive to most people; they don’t want to be That Guy, whose badness is just to be taken for granted. Anyone with common sense understands. Be Skeet and not Jimmy.
I am having significant trouble parsing this. Could you try to say the same thing in different words?
I kinda feel the same way. There is a lot to be said about schools as concept and the way they are being run currently, and this piece brings up quite a few good points. But the style feels so sensationalized and propagandized, it sets off all kind of alarm bells in my brain and just makes me want to push back against the message:
Setting the thing you’re arguing against up as ‘the enemy’, fully with repulsive physical features, which is gleefully evil without any positive aspects or intentions will never feel as a fair characterization of anything.
There is a strong insistence on how useless and opposed to ‘freedom’ schooling is, without offering any alternative of how children could be raised in an obviously better and more ‘free’ way (hopefully without totally redesigning our society).
Characterizing the schooling experience as ‘intolerable suffering’ seems laughably hyperbolic to me. As someone who went through a full standard education (non-US, so YMMV), I don’t think I encountered many people who’s negative experience extended far beyond ‘slightly bored’.
Dear Newcom, An innocent prisoner has the right to say “Set me free!”. He does not need to analyze the effects of freedom on other prisoners. There is no excuse in your saying “I felt good as prisoner”. Imprisonment violates that rights of that particular person, and here it is all that matters!
Dear EpicNamer27098! The above text is a cry for freedom. Perceiving evil and writing about the feelings is no evil, and requires no prescription. Incarcerating the youth is evil. This should be said aloud and it vilifies no one in particular but the dumb system that, in industrialized world, does more damage than good. You are no evil. You just need to see the light
And it’s a good cry for freedom. I focused on the one thing about this post I didn’t like, but over all it’s a good post in my opinion. I should have been more positive; I’ll try to keep in mind my negativity bias in the future.
Let’s then agree even further about your claim that we need a relatable image of school that we plan to abolish. To convince the world that we are in a blind alley of compulsory schooling we need a plethora of voices. A rational voice of adults who understand the problem, and an emotional appeal of a young man who feels imprisoned. Both matter. As for me, I see the school system as a neoplasm on modern society and yet I cannot point to a single bad teacher with bad intent. This is an acme of evil to cannibalize good people to reinforce a destructive system. As much cancer can use and extend your own blood supply.
These are two distinct arguments, both of which are debatable, but should not be combined.
forced institutional schooling is immoral, and should be stopped regardless of consequences.
the dumb system does more harm than good. It should be stopped because of the consequences.
I disagree with #1 (I don’t think it’s comparable to forced labor or race-based enslavement—it’s temporary and fairly straightforward (though not easy) to make exceptions and opt out) for different reasons than I disagree with #2 (I think there are aspects which are harmful, but that the net result is neutral or better).
If system is good and is not immoral, why don’t adults impose compulsory education on themselves, or at least those who score highest on the dumb scale? Kids in Germany have no opt out (or even knowledge it exists). Slavery is inherently bad. Race or economics are just excuses for doing what’s convenient. Freedom of education is a basic human right. If you do not know it yet, it is because of school indoctrination who tells everyone that “school is good”. A century ago, a great deal of men were equally convinced that women are not smart enough to vote. Drop the shackles of the doctrine!
This is exactly the kind of sensationalism that would have convinced me to embrace school. It says nothing of its character to have oily skin and a hollow skull devoid of moisture. I would be offended that the author tried to use such gimmicks on me.
In fact, if the author *really* wanted to make me think, they shouldn’t even portray the enemy as shiny like Ra (https://srconstantin.wordpress.com/2016/10/20/ra/). They would portray the enemy as normal. Relatable, in fact; someone you could be best friends with. It is of the greatest importance to this person not to be annoying; not to “cause problems for the sake of causing problems” (i.e. to invite debate about why things are the way they are). This is extremely persuasive to most people; they don’t want to be That Guy, whose badness is just to be taken for granted. Anyone with common sense understands. Be Skeet and not Jimmy.
There’s no way a newb could know better. It’s impossible that exposure and involvement could mislead a person.
It seems strange to dislike a rhetoric so much that because of the rhetoric alone you embrace a different position. Is there a reason you think the sensationalism pushes you so much?
I am having significant trouble parsing this. Could you try to say the same thing in different words?
I kinda feel the same way. There is a lot to be said about schools as concept and the way they are being run currently, and this piece brings up quite a few good points. But the style feels so sensationalized and propagandized, it sets off all kind of alarm bells in my brain and just makes me want to push back against the message:
Setting the thing you’re arguing against up as ‘the enemy’, fully with repulsive physical features, which is gleefully evil without any positive aspects or intentions will never feel as a fair characterization of anything.
There is a strong insistence on how useless and opposed to ‘freedom’ schooling is, without offering any alternative of how children could be raised in an obviously better and more ‘free’ way (hopefully without totally redesigning our society).
Characterizing the schooling experience as ‘intolerable suffering’ seems laughably hyperbolic to me. As someone who went through a full standard education (non-US, so YMMV), I don’t think I encountered many people who’s negative experience extended far beyond ‘slightly bored’.
Just my first thoughts while reading.
Dear Newcom, An innocent prisoner has the right to say “Set me free!”. He does not need to analyze the effects of freedom on other prisoners. There is no excuse in your saying “I felt good as prisoner”. Imprisonment violates that rights of that particular person, and here it is all that matters!
Dear EpicNamer27098! The above text is a cry for freedom. Perceiving evil and writing about the feelings is no evil, and requires no prescription. Incarcerating the youth is evil. This should be said aloud and it vilifies no one in particular but the dumb system that, in industrialized world, does more damage than good. You are no evil. You just need to see the light
And it’s a good cry for freedom. I focused on the one thing about this post I didn’t like, but over all it’s a good post in my opinion. I should have been more positive; I’ll try to keep in mind my negativity bias in the future.
Let’s then agree even further about your claim that we need a relatable image of school that we plan to abolish. To convince the world that we are in a blind alley of compulsory schooling we need a plethora of voices. A rational voice of adults who understand the problem, and an emotional appeal of a young man who feels imprisoned. Both matter. As for me, I see the school system as a neoplasm on modern society and yet I cannot point to a single bad teacher with bad intent. This is an acme of evil to cannibalize good people to reinforce a destructive system. As much cancer can use and extend your own blood supply.
These are two distinct arguments, both of which are debatable, but should not be combined.
forced institutional schooling is immoral, and should be stopped regardless of consequences.
the dumb system does more harm than good. It should be stopped because of the consequences.
I disagree with #1 (I don’t think it’s comparable to forced labor or race-based enslavement—it’s temporary and fairly straightforward (though not easy) to make exceptions and opt out) for different reasons than I disagree with #2 (I think there are aspects which are harmful, but that the net result is neutral or better).
If system is good and is not immoral, why don’t adults impose compulsory education on themselves, or at least those who score highest on the dumb scale? Kids in Germany have no opt out (or even knowledge it exists). Slavery is inherently bad. Race or economics are just excuses for doing what’s convenient. Freedom of education is a basic human right. If you do not know it yet, it is because of school indoctrination who tells everyone that “school is good”. A century ago, a great deal of men were equally convinced that women are not smart enough to vote. Drop the shackles of the doctrine!