Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Deschooling Society (1970)

davidtinapple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 205 posts

Re: Deschooling Society (1970)

#151

Post by poulsbohemian »

ksdale wrote: post #73
afarrell wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But what is the real-life practical alternative? It is makes lovely and invigorating fiction to imagine men who have learned to competently conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, butcher a hog, set a bone, and program a 1973-era computer. But life is short and any art takes long to learn to sufficient depth that you can solve dynamic complex problems. How many more men would have died if Ei…

I think these are excellent things to keep in mind, but the vast majority of real life is not D-Day or crash landing in the Hudson. I'd go so far as to say that most people hardly ever even spend any time solving "dynamic complex problems." People being really, really good at stuff is important, but I don't think it follows that everyone should only do one thing. I have a hunch that Eisenhower himself was probably a…

> I have a hunch that Eisenhower himself was probably a person who could do most of the things on that list.

Further supporting your point, that is perhaps why they are called “Generals”, IE: they have mastered enough areas that they are now generalists able to approach many subject areas and problem sets.

Re: Deschooling Society (1970)

#152

Post by redbar0n »

marnett wrote: post #132
throwaw4y-plate wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's basically Marx in a nutshell. Great diagnosis, impractical cure.

Is there a particular “cure” that was recommended by Marx/Engels for addressing their observations on the relationship between capital and labor in mid-19th century industrialist England that you found specifically impractical for the time?

I think he was referring to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Communist_Manifesto Perhaps specifically: "In the last paragraph of the Manifesto, the authors call for a 'forcible overthrow of all existing social conditions', which served as a call for communist revolutions around the world." And we know how those went.

Re: Deschooling Society (1970)

#153

Post by supernova87a »

TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #117
supernova87a wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, I don't agree. In fact, I think I'm quite objectively estimating the effects of our institutions. I think you're the one stating drastic estimations. I would say that our education system is helping to free people to move across class and wealth lines far more than keeping people where they are. The amount of social mobility in the US ranks with the best of many countries. Of course, tons of studies show this…

Study after study has shown that the US actually has some of the lowest social mobility in the developed world, and its poor educational systems and strictly rationed access to high quality learning environments are a direct contributor to that. Part of the reason is because education is a political football. From school boards up to the presidency, everyone has an axe to grind. Ironically - because there's so little…

It's only relatively lower if you look at relative rank, and of course if all of Scandinavia is at the top of the list, we appear low. But on actual score, the difference is not as large as it seems.

And aside from that, are we willing to go the route of Scandinavia to achieve what they have? I doubt even a simple majority of us want that.

Re: Deschooling Society (1970)

#154

Post by pnathan »

wittyreference wrote: post #93
mikestew wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anyone ever figure out if even Heinlein himself accomplished those skills? Because, frankly, it makes a nice trope or whatever, but I question the literal seriousness Heinlein had when he wrote that. Perhaps as an early prototype of The World's Most Interesting Man, but not to be taken as a literal bucket list.

As an engineer and military officer that made a career of writing, was active in real estate and silver mining and politics, knowing not a single other thing about him, I assume (and I am, admittedly, erring a little on the side of generosity in my assumptions, but my goal is to aim for "is it plausible?" not "did he definitely?"): -to change a diaper -plan an invasion (navy officer) -butcher a hog -conn a ship (navy…

That list really irritates me.

> - to change a diaper

Ok? What if one never intends to have kids.

> -plan an invasion

For goodness' sake, why is that important outside of the military?

> -butcher a hog

Irrelevant to most people.

> -conn a ship

So? Are we in the navy or maritime service? A gent in Montana has no need of this,

> -design a building

Design, engineer, or build?

> -write a sonnet

Popular for schoolchildren. Says little. Interpretation of sonnets says more.

> -balance accounts

I'll give heinlein that.

> -build a wall

So?

> -set a bone

Useful enough, sure.

> -comfort the dying

Yeah, that's good.

> -take orders

Still not in the military

> -give orders

Still not in the military

> -cooperate

Sure!

-act alone

Sure!

-solve equations

What kind of equation? Arithmetic, algebra, calculus, analysis?

> -analyze a new problem

What kind of analysis? This is extremely specialized.

> -pitch manure

If manure matters in your life, otherwise: so what

> -program a computer

Useful to me, but not relevant to most people

> -cook a tasty meal

Sure.

> -fight efficiently

Still not in the military.

> -die gallantly

Baloney. The Great War should have cured him of this dream.

"Heinlein really likes the military" is my take away. Most of his vaunted list is deeply irrelevant to outright obnoxious to me. It's like reading a "bet you couldn't solve these problems 1850s kids had to solve" thing. Anchored in the past and a different priority system.

Should you be able to provide first aid, cook well, and work with others? Yes. Do reading, riting, and rithmatic? Yeah, sure. That's kind of what the point of the school system is for.

Honestly. No one will know everything, and no one should strive to be ignorant, misanthropic, and uncultured. I could size up my life and write a similar list, but it'd only be a reflection of my priorities in life.

Re: Deschooling Society (1970)

#155

Post by kiba »

guidoism wrote: post #40
mola wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. And it's such an easy target. Everybody hate schools. But the fact of the matter is that public schools were one of the prominent factors in reducing poverty around the world. As in any institution, it may calcify and be corrupted. But that's just how systems are, injecting the right amount of innovation usually takes care of that. No need to throw the baby with the water, and rethink the whole paradigm. I t…

It's actually a pretty good time to rethink everything. The modern school was designed when most adults were illiterate, books were expensive, and we needed to train the population to work in our factories or join the military. Schools did a good job at that. But times are different. 1. Most adults are literate — When kids have questions about letters or words while they are teaching themselves to read they have a hu…

It's actually a pretty good time to rethink everything. The modern school was designed when most adults were illiterate, books were expensive, and we needed to train the population to work in our factories or join the military. Schools did a good job at that.

Is this a historical reality that schools are built for factory style education? Citation is needed.

Re: Deschooling Society (1970)

#156

Post by ksdale »

vharuck wrote: post #139
tmaly wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think if we had enough effort put into it like we mobilized with the Manhattan project, we could create some amazing supplemental online material. We have incredible technology and a good understanding of psychology. Why could we not apply some Hollywood approach to creating amazing lessons that are engaging and fun to watch?

I hate to be that guy, but who would pay for it? The barebones and dull textbooks we have now came about because their publishers chase government money. I'm even less hopeful there's a profit from selling to individuals or homeschool groups.

The U.S. spends upwards of half a trillion dollars per year on K-12 education (an average of $215,000 per 30 students). That doesn't include college or what parents spend out of pocket on private schools, homeschooling, tutoring, etc. I think there's plenty of money to be made by someone with a great idea and high quality execution.

Re: Deschooling Society (1970)

#157

Post by jariel »

kweinber wrote: post #91

This is an instance of having very compelling writing that describes a problem eloquently.... and then proposes solutions that are disastrous and make things even worse. Educating humanity is difficult. Every solution has its flaws. Giving up on it is worse than every flawed solution, however.

Making a bunch of casual statements that are neither necessarily scientific, nor factual, nor founded - but in an elegant manner, does not make them true.

There are 3 or so Billion people living in civilisation, oddly enough, have somewhat similar education systems.

With some degree of variation, there doesn't seem to be any magic, other than the things we know are going to work.

And yes, we know a good chunk of it is just daycare and that's ok too.

Re: Deschooling Society (1970)

#158

Post by carapace »

yongjik wrote: post #75
rednerrus wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.” ~ Robert Anson Hein…

Yeah, I call BS. I don't know any insect with more than half a dozen specialized roles. Mankind surpassed that before we built pyramids. Just think about how many unique professions are required before your daily job even starts to make sense. Someone is being paid to monitor a tank of fluorine compound so that it can be used to etch silicon wafers.

That's the whole point though: you don't need "to monitor a tank of fluorine compound so that it can be used to etch silicon wafers" if you're computing with clockwork or fluidics. (I'm not knocking silicon, just pointing out that there are alternatives.)

Also, humans are the only species that can run a marathon, swim a lake, and climb a tree. We are generalists.

Re: Deschooling Society (1970)

#159

Post by JoBrad »

guidoism wrote: post #40
mola wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. And it's such an easy target. Everybody hate schools. But the fact of the matter is that public schools were one of the prominent factors in reducing poverty around the world. As in any institution, it may calcify and be corrupted. But that's just how systems are, injecting the right amount of innovation usually takes care of that. No need to throw the baby with the water, and rethink the whole paradigm. I t…

It's actually a pretty good time to rethink everything. The modern school was designed when most adults were illiterate, books were expensive, and we needed to train the population to work in our factories or join the military. Schools did a good job at that. But times are different. 1. Most adults are literate — When kids have questions about letters or words while they are teaching themselves to read they have a hu…

Not sure to what extent we need to rethink primary education, vs refining it. Your points 1 and 2 are true _because_ the education system has excelled at increasing the knowledge of the average person.

Re: Deschooling Society (1970)

#160

Post by mieses »

danans wrote: post #150
mieses wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Abolition (abolishing something) can be an improvement, except when it's not. From one point of view, those reasonable anarchists and marxists are only seeking to "improve" the US. From the other point of view they are trying to abolish it. You're forced to pick a side. Jacobin calls for revolution demand binary outcomes. It's exactly analogous to Illych proposing that education can only be improved by abolishing edu…

> Abolition (abolishing something) can be an improvement, except when it's not. You're shifting your argument. Both AOC and Omar are Democratic Socialists (in same vein as the traditionally dominant parties of Northern Europe), not anarchists or marxists. Neither is calling for the abolishment of the US or its governmental institutions, but rather for its growing wealth and income inequality to be addressed. If anyth…

I'm sticking to the issue of consistency and honesty which you introduced and I'm avoiding all substance and value judgements in keeping with the dialectical style of the forum. The analogy was intended to help you understand why Illych is not somehow inconsistent or hypocritical.

It's not inconsistent of Illych to try to dismantle a system that (you claim) he benefited from. The Jacobin progressives in the US are not inconsistent to try to dismantle the foundations of their host system through the procedures of that system. You would have to limit your observations to prima facie statements to argue that they are not intellectually dishonest crypto-marxists (BLM excluded). Illych and BLM are perhaps more intellectually honest than AOC and Omar. ++good for them.

and Northern European Democratic socialist parties are neither traditional or dominant unless you only look at the very immediate past and future.

Post reply on HN