Undoubtedly your opinion that education is not a right is true within the philosophical frame you, orion and lifticus, so eagerly push. But it is not a holder of universal truth, it’s just one system among numerous others.
The sky is not green, well for most of us, but the colour of the sky is really not comparable to a philosophical argument.
So, to repeat my point, the argument that education is not a right is not universally true. Obviously it not universally false, either.
[quote]orion wrote:
If you read through the “rights” in your constitution you will find that they contradict themselves.
[/quote]
I have no problem with contradictions. I like them.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
The argument I am trying to make is
I will state for the record that the first and foremost needs of any child to progress in school is a solid foundation of reading, writing, and arithmetic. [/quote]
emphasis mine.
Really? Incapable on any level? They’ve completely failed by every definition of the word? C’mon.
[quote]Most children vary in aptitude in regard to all of these skills. I happened to be much better suited to math and needed tutors for the other two when I got to high-school because I was sort of left behind in the system.
During grade school my parents were of the opinion that the teachers knew better than they did how to educate so they never questioned the system. To them, I was doing bad because I neither cared nor wanted to make an effort, etc.
Had my parents been directly paying for my education maybe they would have started asking questions to the school why I was doing so poorly. In public schools it is always either the parents or the child who is to blame because teachers are “incapable” of being horrible at their jobs.[/quote]
You sucked at reading and writing? And this is the system’s fault? And you assume that whatever block prevented your parents from communicating with your teachers would be eliminated if they were directly paying it, instead of indirectly through property taxes?
Wait a minute. How do you know you wouldn’t just have been declared one of those children of lesser ability and just not been taught reading and writing at all, because your potential had been judged exceedingly low? Under the essayists views, you would have been raised deficient (by your own standard) of educational progress.
[quote]
Furthermore, public school curriculum is geared toward making good little citizens who are incapable of questioning the system. For example, when we become adults we see the injustices of government and we silently complain, shaking our fists on our way to the polls but we are incapable of conceiving any other way society could possibly organize itself. This is, in part, thanks to mandated civics courses. [/quote]
This is bullshit. If public education created [quote]good little citizens who are incapable of questioning the system[/quote] you wouldn’t be having a rational conversation on this forum with any sufferer of public education.
I also don’t necessarily see a lot of silent political fist-shaking on this forum.
You missed the best part of the quote.
“It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried.”
-Sir Winston Churchill
[quote]kaaleppi wrote:
orion wrote:
If you read through the “rights” in your constitution you will find that they contradict themselves.
I have no problem with contradictions. I like them.[/quote]
Well in this case those contradictions mean that other people can vote on your life, your liberty and anything you need to sustain both.
What do you like about that?
And then, words have a meaning. You can call a donkey a lion and yet it remains and ass.
You can also call “education” a right and yet it remains an entitlement.
There is a reason why this is important. The welfare state has no philosophical foundation that would be acceptable to most people and therefore people pushing that agenda use the language of the natural rights movement even though they destroy the very idea of natural rights.
They cannot have it both ways.
If, however, you blatantly state that yes, you have a right to make me work for your goals at least we both know were we stand.
Surprisingly, I never heard a social democrat say that, why is it that they cannot accept the necessary implications of their ideas and yet continue to push them?
[quote]Otep wrote:
This is bullshit. If public education created good little citizens who are incapable of questioning the system you wouldn’t be having a rational conversation on this forum with any sufferer of public education.[/quote]
Uhhh…I don’t know about you but I have spent that last 20 years unlearning everthing I “learned” in 13 years of public school.
[quote]
I also don’t necessarily see a lot of silent political fist-shaking on this forum.[/quote]
Technically, it is all silent fist shaking on the interwebs. I bet you are not so quick to voice your opinion in public.
[quote]Gael wrote:
zephead4747 wrote:
belligerent wrote:
I never learned a damn thing in 15 years of school. I just don’t belong in a classroom. I’m convinced that I would be far better off today if I had gotten a job at 14 instead of having attended high school.
x2.
Not a damn thing. My peers as a whole are a group of slack jawed, stary eyed morons.
Translation: You think you’re a loser, your peers hate you, and you find comfort in wanting to overhaul the whole educational system.[/quote]
except I’m not a loser. My peers love me. And I don’t necesarilly want to overhall the whole system, but it needs review.
I don’t think that leaving the masses to be ignorant is really the way we want to go.
People that aren’t educated are going to have trouble getting reasonable jobs. They are going to end up resorting to “alternatives” such as crime… ending up costing the country more than the price of education.
Where do you people get this shit? Get beyond the ideology a bit. It’s not necessary that people be forced into a single one size fits all education like we have now… but giving up education is not an option.
[quote]vroom wrote:
I don’t think that leaving the masses to be ignorant is really the way we want to go.[/quote]
You assume that the government doesn’t impart its own ignorance on students
[quote]
People that aren’t educated are going to have trouble getting reasonable jobs. They are going to end up resorting to “alternatives” such as crime… ending up costing the country more than the price of education.[/quote]
Who are you to tell someone what a reasonable job is? You don’t like having your garbage picked up? You don’t like having restrooms cleaned? You have some very negative elitist issues to work out.
The vast majority of people will live in ignorance despite how much money is thrown at education departments. The cream always rises to the top and the sediment sinks to the bottom. In fact, the current system always ensures that the uneducated in effect are paying the tuition of everyone else.
It is a reality that only a very few people will ever attain the heights of intellectualism. Let’s not pretend that every child who steps foot in a school needs to be there.
…but please feel free to donate as much of your own money as you want trying to fit square pegs in round holes.
[quote]
It’s not necessary that people be forced into a single one size fits all education like we have now… but giving up education is not an option.[/quote]
I do not intend to ever give up on education. In fact education is so important to human life that government should keep its hands off of it.
Let’s also not pretend that government schools contribute at all to education. Education is a life long active pursuit. The activities that take place in most government mandated classrooms can hardly be called an education. It is mostly learning by rote – unthinking memorization.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
You assume that the government doesn’t impart its own ignorance on students [/quote]
I’m not saying people shouldn’t be able to opt for private education. I’m not saying public education is perfect. However, assuming someone applies themselves minimally they will get a hell of a lot out of public education compared to no education.
Does the government education carry a nation-building message in terms of patriotism and so on? Possibly.
LOL. Not at all. However, there are only so many jobs available for these positions. On a different note, I think you are absolutely out of your mind if you think the entire nation should be composed of janitors.
Why not allow people to earn enough to pay plenty of tax, creating some measure of wealth for themselves and the nation.
Live in ignorance? Really? You have a very strange view of society.
I don’t have any illusions. However, aspiring for a janitorial job for the majority of the population has you assuming that the vast majority of people are functional morons. Who’s the elitist here?
It is a “sin” to allow people with ability, or a gift, to not be recognized, to not recognize it themselves, and to function well below their capacity and deny the human race the fruits of their abilities.
What a dark little world you live in.
[quote]I do not intend to ever give up on education. In fact education is so important to human life that government should keep its hands off of it.
Let’s also not pretend that government schools contribute at all to education. Education is a life long active pursuit. The activities that take place in most government mandated classrooms can hardly be called an education. It is mostly learning by rote – unthinking memorization.[/quote]
Perhaps you were stupid enough to go through a government education without applying yourself, but the truth is that you will get out of the public educational system a measure of what you put into it.
If you put enough into it, you’ll be prepared to educate yourself futher, perhaps through college, and pursue a career field of your choice.
Your ideology is pushing you way out on a weak limb on this one.
[quote]zephead4747 wrote:
Gael wrote:
zephead4747 wrote:
belligerent wrote:
I never learned a damn thing in 15 years of school. I just don’t belong in a classroom. I’m convinced that I would be far better off today if I had gotten a job at 14 instead of having attended high school.
x2.
Not a damn thing. My peers as a whole are a group of slack jawed, stary eyed morons.
Translation: You think you’re a loser, your peers hate you, and you find comfort in wanting to overhaul the whole educational system.
except I’m not a loser. My peers love me. And I don’t necesarilly want to overhall the whole system, but it needs review.[/quote]
Then why talk everyone else down?
[quote]Gael wrote:
zephead4747 wrote:
Gael wrote:
zephead4747 wrote:
belligerent wrote:
I never learned a damn thing in 15 years of school. I just don’t belong in a classroom. I’m convinced that I would be far better off today if I had gotten a job at 14 instead of having attended high school.
x2.
Not a damn thing. My peers as a whole are a group of slack jawed, stary eyed morons.
Translation: You think you’re a loser, your peers hate you, and you find comfort in wanting to overhaul the whole educational system.
except I’m not a loser. My peers love me. And I don’t necesarilly want to overhall the whole system, but it needs review.
Then why talk everyone else down?
[/quote]
Walk into a public place sometime. There are many intelligent people, absolutely worthy of respect. Then, there are other people who like to yap and yap and yap but say nothing of substance. Egocentrism is also a near universal trait in highschoolers, it gets annoying.
Typically people are drawn to me. I’m the guy who is the life of the party and intelligent enough for people to actually respect. People dig that and want to be around me.
now, let’s stop before I come of as even more narcistic.
[quote]vroom wrote:
I don’t think that leaving the masses to be ignorant is really the way we want to go.
People that aren’t educated are going to have trouble getting reasonable jobs. They are going to end up resorting to “alternatives” such as crime… ending up costing the country more than the price of education.
Where do you people get this shit? Get beyond the ideology a bit. It’s not necessary that people be forced into a single one size fits all education like we have now… but giving up education is not an option.[/quote]
And, again, Bastiat:
http://bastiat.org/en/the_law.html
Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all.
We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain.
[quote]orion wrote:
And, again, Bastiat:
http://bastiat.org/en/the_law.html
Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all.
We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain. [/quote]
Hey, look, the socialism canard!
[quote]orion wrote:
kaaleppi wrote:
orion wrote:
If you read through the “rights” in your constitution you will find that they contradict themselves.
I have no problem with contradictions. I like them.
Well in this case those contradictions mean that other people can vote on your life, your liberty and anything you need to sustain both.
What do you like about that?
And then, words have a meaning. You can call a donkey a lion and yet it remains and ass.
You can also call “education” a right and yet it remains an entitlement.
There is a reason why this is important. The welfare state has no philosophical foundation that would be acceptable to most people and therefore people pushing that agenda use the language of the natural rights movement even though they destroy the very idea of natural rights.
They cannot have it both ways.
If, however, you blatantly state that yes, you have a right to make me work for your goals at least we both know were we stand.
Surprisingly, I never heard a social democrat say that, why is it that they cannot accept the necessary implications of their ideas and yet continue to push them?
[/quote]
Why must a welfare state, or any state, have a philosophical foundation? I mean, it is not an on/off -state machine, you can’t reduce it to that. Just like in the evolution of species, it’s the output that matters.
F.ex. seeing education as a right is an important part of the process that has made Nordic countries what they are today. To tell you the truth, the results have been outstanding.
You seem to hold the position, that if the constitution and legislation are logically consistent things would function without friction. This kind of thinking seems to appeal to mathematically inclined people like HH and Lifticus. Thats why I said that the argument that education is not a right is not universally true.
Only man made machines are logically consistent.
[quote]vroom wrote:
orion wrote:
And, again, Bastiat:
http://bastiat.org/en/the_law.html
Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all.
We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain.
Hey, look, the socialism canard![/quote]
This is your exact post:
If the shoe fits? Bastiat has you number…
[quote]vroom wrote:
orion wrote:
And, again, Bastiat:
http://bastiat.org/en/the_law.html
Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all.
We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain.
Hey, look, the socialism canard![/quote]
Hey look, nothing of substance whatsoever!
But opinionated!
Get a talkshow!
[quote]kaaleppi wrote:
orion wrote:
kaaleppi wrote:
orion wrote:
If you read through the “rights” in your constitution you will find that they contradict themselves.
I have no problem with contradictions. I like them.
Well in this case those contradictions mean that other people can vote on your life, your liberty and anything you need to sustain both.
What do you like about that?
And then, words have a meaning. You can call a donkey a lion and yet it remains and ass.
You can also call “education” a right and yet it remains an entitlement.
There is a reason why this is important. The welfare state has no philosophical foundation that would be acceptable to most people and therefore people pushing that agenda use the language of the natural rights movement even though they destroy the very idea of natural rights.
They cannot have it both ways.
If, however, you blatantly state that yes, you have a right to make me work for your goals at least we both know were we stand.
Surprisingly, I never heard a social democrat say that, why is it that they cannot accept the necessary implications of their ideas and yet continue to push them?
Why must a welfare state, or any state, have a philosophical foundation? I mean, it is not an on/off -state machine, you can’t reduce it to that. Just like in the evolution of species, it’s the output that matters.
F.ex. seeing education as a right is an important part of the process that has made Nordic countries what they are today. To tell you the truth, the results have been outstanding.
You seem to hold the position, that if the constitution and legislation are logically consistent things would function without friction. This kind of thinking seems to appeal to mathematically inclined people like HH and Lifticus. Thats why I said that the argument that education is not a right is not universally true.
Only man made machines are logically consistent.
[/quote]
I could answer that in detail, however let me ask you a question.
Why is it so hard for you, assuming that you believe in public education that that requires that you force other people at gunpoint to serve you?
[quote]zephead4747 wrote:
Typically people are drawn to me. I’m the guy who is the life of the party and intelligent enough for people to actually respect. People dig that and want to be around me.
[/quote]
Yup, I am feeling it right now!
Can we be e-pals?
It might help me get e-girls!
[quote]orion wrote:
I could answer that in detail, however let me ask you a question.
Why is it so hard for you, assuming that you believe in public education that that requires that you force other people at gunpoint to serve you?
[/quote]
Sorry, I’m not certain what you mean, but if you are saying that I deny the existence of use of force in society, I don’t. That’s one of the few things I’m convinced about. There will never be a society where people are not forced to comply to something.
[quote]orion wrote:
Bastiat has you number…[/quote]
Having a clever argument on a web site doesn’t mean a fuck of a lot. If it did, I’d be a king myself.