Live data from Hacker News

Unschooling: The Case for Setting Your Kids Into the Wild

outsideonline.com

191–200 of 202 posts

Re: Unschooling: The Case for Setting Your Kids Into the Wild

#191
post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Withholding school from children (in a developing country) in a long term experiment is completely unethical. Yes, I agree, and that is why the required science cannot be done -- the science you think exists in psychology. > I think you should really research ADHD more thoroughly. I have researched it, I know this topic much better than you do, and at present ADHD is firmly in the pseudoscience category. This is no…

>I have researched it, I know this topic much better than you do, and at present ADHD is firmly in the pseudoscience category. You refuse all the decades and heaps of evidence by some summary hand-waving over what science is supposed to be. The idea, that double blind trials are required to call anything science is ridiculous, and you prove it by not admitting any double-blind trials as evidence in favor of the exist…

> You refuse all the decades and heaps of evidence by some summary hand-waving over what science is supposed to be.

Yes -- myself and the NIMH. We're on the same wavelength. You need to learn this topic, find out what's going on in your own field. Your ignorance is embarrassing. And there is no "science is supposed to be" trope -- science has been clearly defined in the law, laws meant to keep Creationism out of public school classrooms, laws with requirements psychology cannot meet.

> Your rant about the DSM is completely off topic.

Say what? The DSM is the source for information about ADHD. NO DSM, no ADHD. This was true about Asperger's as well, until it became too embarrassing and was removed from the new edition of the DSM. Asperger's has recently been discarded by being removed from the DSM.

> I just can't explain why you want to prove the non-existence of ADHD ...

What the fuck are you talking about? I never said ADHD is not real, I said it's not science, and until it is, the NIMH will refuse to accept it or allow funds to be disseminated to study it. Those are the facts.

Prove me wrong -- locate where I claimed that ADHD isn't real. In other words, imitate a scientist and locate some evidence for your false claims.

It's not as though ADHD information is difficult to locate:

Link: http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/adhd/problems-overdiagnosis-...

Title: "Problems of Overdiagnosis and Overprescribing in ADHD"

Quote: "Doubt and confusion as to where this disorder fits into the general spectrum of illness further feeds the general perception that ADHD is a socially constructed disorder rather than a valid neurobiological disorder. -- With the production of more stimulants every year, worries about the increased availability of stimulants for abuse and diversion rise as well. Rising production rates are cited as proof of stimulant overprescribing by physicians and indirect evidence of the overdiagnosis of ADHD among children."

I emphasize the above doesn't constitute science evidence for or against anything, only that your claim that ADHD is a solidly established disorder backed by reliable research is, simply put, a lie.

> If you were inclined to listen to scientific evidence ...

There is no scientific evidence, and it's time for your to learn something about science. This is why the NIMH has decided to reject the DSM -- it's become an embarrassment.

> ... you will probably find some reason, why this evidence is not clear enough to draw conclusions you donb't like.

AS does the NIMH, and for excellent reasons -- scientifically clueless people like you who take positions out of ignorance.

Prove me wrong. Name the property that all scientific findings and theories must possess to be regarded as science (a property included in the laws that define science). It can be expressed in a single word, and it's something psychological research lacks in droves.

> "DSM contains conditions which don't have physical/physiological manifestations" is not proof for ADHD not existing.

And? I never claimed anywhere that ADHD doesn't exist. I do say that, until we know what it is, we cannot meaningfully treat it. And the above quotation from the literature fully supports my position.

Now stop lying. ADHD is neither true nor false, it's in limbo because there is no science being done.

> For one thing, because these physical and physiological features have been well studied...

So your claim is that if something is well studied, then ipso facto it must be real. If that were true, it would make astrology real -- it's certainly been well studied.

Learn science -- stop embarrassing yourself.

Re: Unschooling: The Case for Setting Your Kids Into the Wild

#192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you know how the DSM ("diagnostic manual") is edited, http://www.dsm4tr.com ?

I know about the problems around the DSM. That doesn't make ADHD less of a "thing" though. Turns out that a questionnaire can diagnose ADHD. This diagnosis predicts anatomical, physiological and psychological differences, and on top of that certain negative consequences and suffering on the part of the patient. Treatment reduces that suffering. What more do you need?

Questionnaires are cheap but less reliable than brain (PET, fMRI) scanning or quantitative attentional testing. What is the impact of a false positive diagnosis on a still-developing young brain?

Adults are a different story - they can make their own decisions.

Re: Unschooling: The Case for Setting Your Kids Into the Wild

#193
post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> someone who's educational experience is walking around the woods unsupervised? That would be "whose". Nobody cares about education before degree level, so I suspect they'll be fine.

> Nobody cares about education before degree level, so I suspect they'll be fine. That would be, "Nobody cares about 'your' education before the 'university' level.." Hard to imagine a decent university that would accept kids that can't do high school math, unless they learned algebra in the woods...

No, I meant what I wrote. Your inability to understand context is not a sign of intelligence or education (especially when the context is from your own post).

Oh, and lighten up. Did you not think it was funny that you made a grammatical error in a post deriding others' education?

Re: Unschooling: The Case for Setting Your Kids Into the Wild

#194
post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I have researched it, I know this topic much better than you do, and at present ADHD is firmly in the pseudoscience category. You refuse all the decades and heaps of evidence by some summary hand-waving over what science is supposed to be. The idea, that double blind trials are required to call anything science is ridiculous, and you prove it by not admitting any double-blind trials as evidence in favor of the exist…

> You refuse all the decades and heaps of evidence by some summary hand-waving over what science is supposed to be. Yes -- myself and the NIMH. We're on the same wavelength. You need to learn this topic, find out what's going on in your own field. Your ignorance is embarrassing. And there is no "science is supposed to be" trope -- science has been clearly defined in the law, laws meant to keep Creationism out of publ…

I think I have to give up on you. You are refusing double-blind studies as evidence. You are misrepresenting NIMH's stance on DSM because you don't know the difference between diagnostics and research. You are quoting minority opinions as proven fact, without actual proof, of course.

> Doubt and confusion as to where this disorder fits into the general spectrum of illness further feeds the general perception that ADHD is a socially constructed disorder rather than a valid neurobiological disorder.

This is actually exactly what I am talking about. The article worries not about ADHD overdiagnosis, but about the public perception of overdiagnosis - while the author is pretty clear that it is a valid neurobiological disorder, and that there is no evidence for overprescription.

Are you a scientist? I sure hope not...

Re: Unschooling: The Case for Setting Your Kids Into the Wild

#195
post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You refuse all the decades and heaps of evidence by some summary hand-waving over what science is supposed to be. Yes -- myself and the NIMH. We're on the same wavelength. You need to learn this topic, find out what's going on in your own field. Your ignorance is embarrassing. And there is no "science is supposed to be" trope -- science has been clearly defined in the law, laws meant to keep Creationism out of publ…

I think I have to give up on you. You are refusing double-blind studies as evidence. You are misrepresenting NIMH's stance on DSM because you don't know the difference between diagnostics and research. You are quoting minority opinions as proven fact, without actual proof, of course. > Doubt and confusion as to where this disorder fits into the general spectrum of illness further feeds the general perception that ADH…

I'm sure ADHD can be diagnosed, and that it has a genetic component, and that it can be mitigated with drugs. But I've got to believe that calling it a 'disorder' is socially constructed. Is red hair a disorder?

ADHD has plusses and minuses, especially in milder forms. It can be harnessed for good. In our school systems ADHD can be dysfunctional. But an alternative to drug therapy is to school differently.

Re: Unschooling: The Case for Setting Your Kids Into the Wild

#196
post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You refuse all the decades and heaps of evidence by some summary hand-waving over what science is supposed to be. Yes -- myself and the NIMH. We're on the same wavelength. You need to learn this topic, find out what's going on in your own field. Your ignorance is embarrassing. And there is no "science is supposed to be" trope -- science has been clearly defined in the law, laws meant to keep Creationism out of publ…

I think I have to give up on you. You are refusing double-blind studies as evidence. You are misrepresenting NIMH's stance on DSM because you don't know the difference between diagnostics and research. You are quoting minority opinions as proven fact, without actual proof, of course. > Doubt and confusion as to where this disorder fits into the general spectrum of illness further feeds the general perception that ADH…

> You are refusing double-blind studies as evidence.

You are lying -- there are no double-blind scientific studies of ADHD, one, because they would be unethical as you pointed out earlier, and two, without knowing the cause of ADHD, no such studies are even possible.

> You are misrepresenting NIMH's stance on DSM

YOU ARE LYING. I quoted the NIMH directly and linked to their decision. The DSM will no longer be accepted as the basis for scientific research, because it only lists symptoms, not causes -- required for science. Read it again:

http://www.nimh.nih.gov/about/director/2013/transforming-dia...

> You are quoting minority opinions ...

NIMH Director Insel is a "minority opinion"? Which planet are you visiting from? Insel and his predecessor Steven Hyman at the NIMH, and Allen Frances, editor of DSM-IV, and many others, all agree that psychiatry and psychology are in deep trouble with respect to the issue of science and evidence, and all agree that the DSM needs to be abandoned.

> while the author is pretty clear that it is a valid neurobiological disorder,

You just quoted an article that says the opposite. You are lying about the words in front of your face. Also, since the cause is unknown, anyone claiming that it's a valid disorder is contributing to folk tales instead of science.

Again, for the record, this is not to say there's no ADHD, only that there's no science for or against.

> Are you a scientist? I sure hope not...

The sure sign of someone who doesn't know how to participate in a debate about issues.

Re: Unschooling: The Case for Setting Your Kids Into the Wild

#197
post #9

There are a lot of things I like about this, but I am do see some issues. I think the boys are learning a lot of very interesting skills, but I think they would struggle a lot with becoming lawyers and doctors like the author claims. My biggest concern would be their reading skills, and later, their advanced math skills. He says they read fine, but reading is something that must be done almost every day for years to…

>He says they read fine, but reading is something that must be done almost every day for years to get to a highly literate point. Literacy and reading comprehension are essential skills to navigating the modern world. Almost all of my reading was done on my own time. School work was a detriment to the reading ability of me and my siblings. I read for fun, and by forcing me to spend time reading things I didn't want t…

Without doubt, school was an impediment to my reading.

My favorite class in high school was US History. I had an interest in the subject, so I already knew everything that was being taught in class... so I read a book instead. The teacher called on me repeatedly during the first week or two because he saw I wasn't paying attention. I asked him to repeat the question, then answered it correctly every time. Then, he stopped asking me questions and let me read my book in peace.

Then there was the time that my health teacher called my parents - and my girlfriend's parents - in for a conference. Turns out, when a 15-year-old boy knows the difference between a vagina and a urethra, he must be having sex in the janitor's closet or something. The fact that when I was curious about the mechanics of sex I went to the library and checked out anatomy textbooks apparently never crossed his mind.

Re: Unschooling: The Case for Setting Your Kids Into the Wild

#198
post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't understand how, on a site called "Hacker News," so many people seem oblivious to how damaging the primary educational system is to young peoples' minds and methods of thought. I don't understand how, on a site called "Hacker News," so many people seem happy to upvote mindless, sweeping, and ignorant statements about a specialist topic from people obviously largely ignorant on said topic.

Nearly everyone reading went to school. We know it sucked for us, why should we not believe it sucks now? I know far, far more about primary and secondary school than I do about almost any other industry, I spent thousands of hours in it

> Nearly everyone reading went to school. We know it sucked for us, why should we not believe it sucks now?

Vaccination clearly causes autism, because people who had their kids vaccinated have autistic children!

Or if you'd like a more industry-relevant example, "Boy, I spend a lot of hours playing computer games. I have some great ideas how to make a great game. I just need a programmer to do the easy bit."

Re: Unschooling: The Case for Setting Your Kids Into the Wild

#199
post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I did not imply anything about school systems outside the western world, You obviously don't know anything about the plethora of different systems inside the Western world, either.

Hey, thank you for this sharp and insightful one-liner. I am keenly aware of my own ignorance, and always looking for opportunities to learn. Care to enlighten me?

Start with Beeby in New Zealand.

Re: Unschooling: The Case for Setting Your Kids Into the Wild

#200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nearly everyone reading went to school. We know it sucked for us, why should we not believe it sucks now? I know far, far more about primary and secondary school than I do about almost any other industry, I spent thousands of hours in it

> Nearly everyone reading went to school. We know it sucked for us, why should we not believe it sucks now? Vaccination clearly causes autism, because people who had their kids vaccinated have autistic children! Or if you'd like a more industry-relevant example, "Boy, I spend a lot of hours playing computer games. I have some great ideas how to make a great game. I just need a programmer to do the easy bit."

>> Nearly everyone reading went to school. We know it sucked for us, why should we not believe it sucks now?

>Vaccination clearly causes autism, because people who had their kids vaccinated have autistic children!

I find it difficult to engage with your sarcasm because the stupidity of the statement you are paraphrasing from idiots hurts my brain.

If you would like a criticism of school written by an industry expert may I recommend John Taylor Gatto. He was named New York City Teacher of the Year in 1989, 1990, and 1991, and New York State Teacher of the Year in 1991.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Taylor_Gatto

http://the7lessonteacher.com/

http://www.newciv.org/whole/schoolteacher.txt

Post reply on HN