I’m also not sure what he’s suggesting, but I had a random thought of what it might be. I’d say it is not possible to educate or train up one for the random. Educating and instruction implies a system or method to be followed and that occurrence would ruin the inconsistency and irregularity found in randomness. Also, due to the genetic uniqueness of individuals, one would come into any distinctive condition in his own unique way. In other words, you cannot produce randomness through any patternized arrangement or plan.
There are cases that such an attempt would become improbable, yet possible. For most it would seem such learning to be ‘open ended’ too imprecise, and have no predictive value. But this may bee too narrow a definition within an overly defined normative set.
Outside the set, probibility may rise, to a possibility, since the normative content may be excluded from the set, making an assesment of less variables a
possibility.
Now that you mentioned it, I think that was what Artimas was talking about. I do agree with what you said; I don’t really think there can be true ‘randomness’ in learning things.
The random is life, the life is random. How can one think to educate anyone else for what life is to bring? when life is random. Having a child for example, the excuse for many is “I am not ready yet.” Well, when will you ever be ready? There is no such thing as ever being ready you see… the random happens all the time, miracles or shit-fests. There is no proper education in one subject for it, yet people want you to prepare for ‘life’.
What these people are meaning is, “I want you to prepare for this man made social constructed version of ‘life’” and not truly what is out there. Sometimes even in this social constructed world we built for ourselves, it is rigged to fail.
Perhaps this is why we need to teach people how to think rather than what to think, no one or systematic education can provide answers to/for the random. But a mind that can critically and quickly think for itself can find the answer for their unique situation. Rather than a dominant systematic one way, they could think for themselves of many ways.
Thank you for clarifying. I agree with you on how the current educational model is mainly molding a human being into simply a slave and conformist (feeling lie you have to ‘meet up’ to the standards of society in order to have merit). The way the system teaches oversimplifies the overall experience of life; reducing it to working and consuming, and whatever simple components that are included.
The schools now days don’t really teach anything of philosophy, or anything about logic and actual education overall. If that stuff was taught, people wouldn’t be so empty and dumbed-down as they are now. It’s all a bunch of Common Core bullshit designed to create human resources, for whatever utility the elites need.
Average every day man uses machines to make their lives better > Rich and the men on top use average every day man to make their lives better, also machines since the average man uses them as well.
If the schools taught logic and philosophy, people wouldn’t be working the mediocre jobs such as Mcdonalds and other minimum wage jobs. They wouldn’t be helping society go, because they would know how flawed society is from the beginning.
Schools are for teaching known information. They cannot be the parents. The parent must educate the child as well. Schools are supplemental to the parent.
What it seems that you all want is for schools aka government to take over parenting. Or blaming schools for the failure of not taking up a parental responsibility. A parent/guardian teaches how to think, schools are to teach known information.
If schools fail then it is the parents that fail their children. Unless you expect the government to be a parent role and parents just to be breeders.
Schools are not “the government”. And schools absolutely should teach critical thinking skills, insofar as they teach anything. Just as they teach mathematical skills, study skills, manual skills and sporting skills. Why should they just be reduced to cramming raw data into heads? And why shouldn’t the responsibilities be shared?
Schools are not government? ?? Really? ? Since when?
What entity decides kids must be schooled? What entity decides curriculum? What entity builds schools?
What entity prosecutes parents/guardians for not having their child registered or attending a school? What entity decides just how soon a child can opt out of the education system?
Parents are failing in monitoring that entity. Schools quite likely teach how to think, they once did. But, parents failed to care or pay attention to the entity that controls education.
The government has a say in a lot of things that aren’t government. So then, roads are government. Water supply is government. Food is government.
I agree with Artemis in spirit at least - I don’t think schools teach enough critical thinking. But they never really have, and not enough people have pushed for it - possibly because they never learnt the benefit.
Roads are government run.
Water and food, well think about all the rules and laws that control those industries and how much tax is given.
But, not like schools. The government/s design all aspects of children’s schools. College and Universities, not as much.
I too agree but, the government/s do not.
Intellectual people will rebel.
Food stamps, welfare, social security are not in place due to ethics or morality, they are there because empty bellies and no roofs for the many means rebellion. It is cheaper to throw food and shelter at the masses then it is to stop a massive revolt and then clean up afterward.
There shouldn’t be anyone having to pay for that anyways. Everything either belongs to everyone or no one. Not one with a simple social class or status.
Schools have never taught how to think, they teach what to think. They cram a head full of data expecting learning to be memorization without creativity. This is what I call a machine socially engineered mind. Some of the stuff they cram into the heads as memorization are not even true.
Well who’s fault is it for trying to go up against the task in the first place? If they can’t handle leading the people to what is right, then maybe they should have not run to lead then huh. It’s all dollar signs to them. From the beginning if we had leaders, would there be a reason to rebel? No.
