Mandatory Schooling: Good Or Bad?

[Era Might]

[color=red]This thread began in another thread in the lame board. I moved the posts here, so excuse any references to the previous thread.[/color]

I'm actually disillusioned with school. I've been very influenced recently by an author who argues that schooling has become a sort of secular religion whose god is as useless as any idol. I honestly wouldn't even continue toward earning my degree, except that society is so devoted to the religion of schooling that it won't let you get ahead without being initiated into the religion [i.e., satisfying its requirements for a piece of paper]. I hate that I will have to spend thousands more dollars and waste a few more years of my life if I decide to get a Masters degree. I would much rather spend time studying what I want to study, and not what modern schooling limits me to.

[/rant]

[Sojourner]

I don't think my husband will let me go to school again for a while.


[quote name='Era Might' date='24 August 2009 - 06:54 PM' timestamp='1251154462' post='1955730']
I'm actually disillusioned with school. I've been very influenced recently by an author who argues that schooling has become a sort of secular religion whose god is as useless as any idol. I honestly wouldn't even continue toward earning my degree, except that society is so devoted to the religion of schooling that it won't let you get ahead without being initiated into the religion [i.e., satisfying its requirements for a piece of paper]. I hate that I will have to spend thousands more dollars and waste a few more years of my life if I decide to get a Masters degree. I would much rather spend time studying what I want to study, and not what modern schooling limits me to.

[/rant]
[/quote]
I felt like that somewhat in undergrad, but grad school was much better because you do get to study what you want. I am also getting an MA in Catholic Studies (one more paper to write!) and the classes I've taken through that program have been among the best classes I've taken in my entire schooling career. I think the right school also makes a big difference -- the disposition of the profs can make or break a class, so if you do go to grad school be sure to research the faculty carefully.

[Era Might]

[quote name='Terra Firma' date='24 August 2009 - 07:20 PM' timestamp='1251156001' post='1955739']I felt like that somewhat in undergrad, but grad school was much better because you do get to study what you want. I am also getting an MA in Catholic Studies (one more paper to write!) and the classes I've taken through that program have been among the best classes I've taken in my entire schooling career. I think the right school also makes a big difference -- the disposition of the profs can make or break a class, so if you do go to grad school be sure to research the faculty carefully.
[/quote]
You do get to study what you want, but it's all confined. Instead of being free to research whatever you want and go where your research/experiments lead you, you are given artificially constructed curriculum and assignments. That's implicit in the idea of "majors." I definitely agree about professors. I actually have some excellent professors in my department. One professor in particular has completely changed the way I look at the world. Ironically, he's the one who introduced me to the anti-schooling author I mentioned. This professor offered to be my adviser for my senior thesis, so I am actually looking forward to this year. He's going to meet with me once a week just to discuss ideas and whatever I'm researching. He's really a genius, yet he treats students like his intellectual equals. I'm actually nervous about our weekly meetings, because he's such a genius, lol. I just hope I can avoid looking like a fool.

If someone wants to go to a school, that is their choice. But it's the mandatory "system" or the "institution" of schooling that is the problem. Society believes that schooling is like a machine that turns a caterpillar into a butterfly. You go through 12 years of schooling, and (supposedly) you emerge a butterfly. But it doesn't work that way. Those twelve years just prepare you to enter a new machine. And then four years after that machine, another machine. And then there is so-called "continuing education" or "adult education." Society leads us to believe that schooling is necessary for learning. So the government spends millions of dollars to "fix" schooling, but things stay the same. Why? Because schooling is just a massive institution that will never be satisfied. Poor performance is addressed with more funding, and since poor performance never goes away, then funding just increases and increases and increases, keeping alive the myth that schooling is necessary for learning.

Imagine if society put the emphasis on learning, not on schooling. That would threaten the massive institution of schooling (e.g., the jobs it supplies: teachers, textbook manufacturers, universities, etc). Society should not require people to go through schooling in order to get ahead. If a person who did not attend a school can do a job as good as someone else who did attend a school, why should the person who didn't attend a school have to spend thousands of dollars to get a piece of paper from an academic institution? Why does the government spend millions of dollars forcing people to learn when they don't want to learn? Learning should be freely sought, not imposed by the government. Mandatory public schooling is more or less just free babysitting. You don't need to send people to school for twelve years in order to teach them to read and write and do basic math. If they want to learn beyond reading and writing and basic math, then let them take that initiative, rather than creating a massive mandatory institution that will never deliver what it promises.

[rachael]

[quote name='Era Might' date='24 August 2009 - 06:54 PM' timestamp='1251154462' post='1955730']
I'm actually disillusioned with school. I've been very influenced recently by an author who argues that schooling has become a sort of secular religion whose god is as useless as any idol. I honestly wouldn't even continue toward earning my degree, except that society is so devoted to the religion of schooling that it won't let you get ahead without being initiated into the religion [i.e., satisfying its requirements for a piece of paper]. I hate that I will have to spend thousands more dollars and waste a few more years of my life if I decide to get a Masters degree. I would much rather spend time studying what I want to study, and not what modern schooling limits me to.

[/rant]
[/quote]


[quote name='Terra Firma' date='24 August 2009 - 07:20 PM' timestamp='1251156001' post='1955739']
I don't think my husband will let me go to school again for a while.



I felt like that somewhat in undergrad, but grad school was much better because you do get to study what you want. I am also getting an MA in Catholic Studies (one more paper to write!) and the classes I've taken through that program have been among the best classes I've taken in my entire schooling career. I think the right school also makes a big difference -- the disposition of the profs can make or break a class, so if you do go to grad school be sure to research the faculty carefully.
[/quote]
I couldn't agree with you more Terra.

And even in undergrad I took the time to do a little extra research in my classes, and I also took a few classes that I wanted to take. I never just stayed within the classroom.

If I go to grad school, I will choose carefully.

[Era Might]

[quote name='rachael' date='24 August 2009 - 08:04 PM' timestamp='1251158662' post='1955752']And even in undergrad I took the time to do a little extra research in my classes, and I also took a few classes that I wanted to take. I never just stayed within the classroom.[/quote]
School works best for a motivated person. But ironically, a motivated person is precisely the kind of person that generally doesn't need a school (and there's no sense in forcing unmotivated people to go to school). And schools generally do not inspire motivation; they form people to be unmotivated, to settle for satisfying the requirements of an institution, rather than to seek learning.

What does schooling provide that we couldn't have outside of the schooling system? All the positive benefits of schools (libraries, peers with whom to discuss things, etc) could be provided for without creating massive mandatory institutions.

To paraphrase Matt Damon in "Good Will Hunting," people pay thousands of dollars for something that they can get for a dollar in late charges at the public library.

[Sojourner]

[quote name='Era Might' date='24 August 2009 - 08:17 PM' timestamp='1251159435' post='1955762']
To paraphrase Matt Damon in "Good Will Hunting," people pay thousands of dollars for something that they can get for a dollar in late charges at the public library.
[/quote]
That's my husband's philosophy as well. I think that's true to a certain point, but school under a good prof can provide guidance and point you to sources you might not otherwise find. The same is true for interactions between fellow students. Conversations in class, as well as lectures, can lead to better understand things or to see things in a different light.

[quote name='CatherineM' date='24 August 2009 - 08:26 PM' timestamp='1251159989' post='1955768']
[url="http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/closures+sent+chill+through+bones/1922905/story.html"]Ed. Journal[/url]

Naturally it's under fuzzball's byline. No one really cares about my opinion on stuff, they ask him. Unfortunately his writing is like stereo instructions. They are cutting dang near all the psychiatric beds here in favor of community support, which isn't in place and won't be any time soon. He's giving an interview on local and national TV tomorrow. That's what happens when you are the poster child for schizophrenia.
[/quote]
Good thing he married someone who can write.

[Era Might]

[quote name='Terra Firma' date='24 August 2009 - 11:04 PM' timestamp='1251169463' post='1955883']
That's my husband's philosophy as well. I think that's true to a certain point, but school under a good prof can provide guidance and point you to sources you might not otherwise find. The same is true for interactions between fellow students. Conversations in class, as well as lectures, can lead to better understand things or to see things in a different light. [/quote]
I definitely agree that interactions with others, both peers and wise leaders, is important. I just don't think you need to pay thousands of dollars to achieve that. I hope someday ordinary people will just get together and organize those kinds of things. That would also open up such interactions to anyone in the community. The way modern schooling functions leads people to believe that learning is some sacred ritual that takes place in schools. By getting rid of the school system, society could construct better models that reconnect learning with real life. Instead of restricting learning to professional students in self-enclosed schools, the search for wisdom could be made as relevant to a janitor as to a scientist, and both could have a voice in the community of ideas.

[Era Might]

By the way, sorry for hijacking your thread with my anti-schooling rants. It's just a subject that I'm prone to rant about.

[Sojourner]

[quote name='Era Might' date='24 August 2009 - 11:19 PM' timestamp='1251170367' post='1955895']
I definitely agree that interactions with others, both peers and wise leaders, is important. I just don't think you need to pay thousands of dollars to achieve that. I hope someday ordinary people will just get together and organize those kinds of things. That would also open up such interactions to anyone in the community. The way modern schooling functions leads people to believe that learning is some sacred ritual that takes place in schools. By getting rid of the school system, society could construct better models that reconnect learning with real life. Instead of restricting learning to professional students in self-enclosed schools, the search for wisdom could be made as relevant to a janitor as to a scientist, and both could have a voice in the community of ideas.
[/quote]
In my (albeit limited) experience, such interactions in a typical community are extremely difficult to create. People get busy with kids, jobs, bills, and television, and learning for the sake of learning is just not on most people's list. For a while, I was part of a church bible study group (not Catholic) where people were genuinely interested in learning, but that relatively short-lived. I find it is hard just to get people together for, say, a book club.

School may seem overly expensive, and probably it is -- I think it is ridiculous that school expenses routinely increase faster than the cost of living. But, school does accomplish a number of important functions. First, it ensures that people involved have some level of commitment to what they're doing. They are, after all, making a significant expenditure and investment in their future. I found this was most true in grad school, and there most true in my Catholic Studies classes, because people weren't taking those classes because they increased their money-making potential.

Second, school ensures that people in a given class are at a similar level of learning. This makes the time spent in corporate learning more productive for all involved. Granted, you sometimes get people like Rachel who are far beyond the average, and who are bored with what's happening in school. And, you sometimes get people who are just not interested. But by and large people are at the same place.

Third, I don't think it's a bad thing to note that time is money. I don't think paying someone for sharing the expertise they've taken years to build is a bad thing. Information is a valuable commodity. We can dicker over how much it is worth, but I have a hard time buying that it should be given away for free.

Fourth, while this doesn't always happen perfectly (and sometimes far less than perfectly), schools do serve as a gatekeeper to ensure that a certain quality of information is imparted in a way optimally designed to assist a student in learning.

[Era Might]

[quote name='Terra Firma' date='24 August 2009 - 11:49 PM' timestamp='1251172159' post='1955914']
In my (albeit limited) experience, such interactions in a typical community are extremely difficult to create. People get busy with kids, jobs, bills, and television, and learning for the sake of learning is just not on most people's list. For a while, I was part of a church bible study group (not Catholic) where people were genuinely interested in learning, but that relatively short-lived. I find it is hard just to get people together for, say, a book club.[/quote]
I think part of that is because we are conditioned by society to separate learning from real life. Ordinary people could once fix a car or build a house. Today, we don't do anything for ourselves. Everything has been institutionalized. We no longer bury ourselves; we rely on professional funeral people. We no longer build our own houses; we rely on professional house builders. We no longer even teach ourselves; we are dependent on schools and teachers to "teach us." Schooling is just one of many institutions that dominate society and foster unthinking dependence. How can any kind of civic and intellectual life flourish in society today, when institutions claim to do everything for us? There are countless people in any area to engage with intellectually. But everyone thinks that the proper place for that kind of thing is school, so we don't interact outside of the school system.

[quote]School may seem overly expensive, and probably it is -- I think it is ridiculous that school expenses routinely increase faster than the cost of living. But, school does accomplish a number of important functions. First, it ensures that people involved have some level of commitment to what they're doing. They are, after all, making a significant expenditure and investment in their future. I found this was most true in grad school, and there most true in my Catholic Studies classes, because people weren't taking those classes because they increased their money-making potential.[/quote]
True, there is some level of commitment (at least in college). But part of the problem with schooling is precisely that idea of "making a significant expenditure and investment in their future." Schooling is the gateway into society. Without schooling, society deems you unfit to enter. I would say that very few people go to college solely for the sake of embarking on a life of learning. They go because it is the only way they will be accepted into society.

[quote]Second, school ensures that people in a given class are at a similar level of learning. This makes the time spent in corporate learning more productive for all involved. Granted, you sometimes get people like Rachel who are far beyond the average, and who are bored with what's happening in school. And, you sometimes get people who are just not interested. But by and large people are at the same place.[/quote]
Consider, however, that friendship is more important than intellectual equality. I mentioned my professor in a previous post. His students are not his intellectual equals, but he interacts with them as equals. He takes their ideas seriously. He is genuinely interested in what they have to say, and he is willing to learn from them. And in turn, he challenges them with his own ideas. That, I think, is the model we need. In interactions outside of a school system, not everyone has to be on an intellectually equal level. There has to be friendship and respect for one another, willingness to learn from one another. And I think that this attitude of friendship will draw people of all kinds. Those at a higher intellectual level will be gathered together with their peers as well as people at lower intellectual levels. But they will all share friendship, and the engagement of ideas that flows from friendship.

[quote]Third, I don't think it's a bad thing to note that time is money. I don't think paying someone for sharing the expertise they've taken years to build is a bad thing. Information is a valuable commodity. We can dicker over how much it is worth, but I have a hard time buying that it should be given away for free.[/quote]
You don't need mandatory school systems in order for people to share their knowledge. There are other possible models. For example, apprenticeship. People could also work as private skill-teachers, either for financial remuneration, or for other benefits (e.g., the more you teach skills to others, the more free access you are given to people who will teach skills to you).

Also, I disagree that information can be paid for. What is paid for is not information, but a person's services. Teachers do not own information. That is what the schooling system leads us to believe, that knowledge is restricted to teachers in schools, and if we want knowledge, we have to go to these schools. The role of teachers is not to reveal some secret knowledge which only they own, but rather, the role of teachers is to lead us in the right direction on a self-directed search for wisdom.

[quote]Fourth, while this doesn't always happen perfectly (and sometimes far less than perfectly), schools do serve as a gatekeeper to ensure that a certain quality of information is imparted in a way optimally designed to assist a student in learning.[/quote]
I think peer review is sufficient for what you're referring to. Instead of submitting meaningless papers to a professor, we could be writing things in the real world. When you look at famous thinkers from the past, they weren't writing for a professor. They were writing in the real world. Your intellectual peers will be able to judge the information or arguments that you set forth.

The idea of a school as a "gatekeeper" is at the heart of the problem. It may try to be a gatekeeper for reliable information, but it just becomes a gatekeeper of people. It is not a school's job to keep me in any gate. The school's job should be to merely facilitate my own wanderings.

[Sojourner]

[quote name='Era Might' date='24 August 2009 - 11:36 PM' timestamp='1251171394' post='1955904']
By the way, sorry for hijacking your thread with my anti-schooling rants. It's just a subject that I'm prone to rant about.
[/quote]
Apparently I was in the mood for a bit of debate.

[quote name='Era Might' date='25 August 2009 - 12:31 AM' timestamp='1251174706' post='1955934']
I think part of that is because we are conditioned by society to separate learning from real life. Ordinary people could once fix a car or build a house. Today, we don't do anything for ourselves. Everything has been institutionalized. We no longer bury ourselves; we rely on professional funeral people. We no longer build our own houses; we rely on professional house builders. We no longer even teach ourselves; we are dependent on schools and teachers to "teach us." Schooling is just one of many institutions that dominate society and foster unthinking dependence. How can any kind of civic and intellectual life flourish in society today, when institutions claim to do everything for us? There are countless people in any area to engage with intellectually. But everyone thinks that the proper place for that kind of thing is school, so we don't interact outside of the school system.
[/quote]
In no other time in history has humanity had access to the amount of knowledge/information that we have today. Not only do we have more books than any generation before us, we have information readily at our fingertips on almost any subject. And, with the technologies available to us we have more free time available to us than people did in the past.

But we don't take advantage of it. I am sure the reason for the lack of engagement is due in large part to social conditioning, but I am not convinced that the problem is social conditioning that school is the only place to engage intellectually. I think there's more to it than that, although I can't put my finger on exactly what the issue is. I'll have to think on it more.

As for the examples you cited ... there are good reasons for us to have professionals bury our dead and to have professionals build our homes. I think there are also good reasons to have professional scholars.

[quote name='Era Might' date='25 August 2009 - 12:31 AM' timestamp='1251174706' post='1955934']
True, there is some level of commitment (at least in college). But part of the problem with schooling is precisely that idea of "making a significant expenditure and investment in their future." Schooling is the gateway into society. Without schooling, society deems you unfit to enter. I would say that very few people go to college solely for the sake of embarking on a life of learning. They go because it is the only way they will be accepted into society.
[/quote]
Even learning has to have a higher purpose, and learning for the sake of investing in the future is not a completely ignoble purpose. I do agree that most people go to college to be accepted into society (i.e., to get a better job). I don't think schooling is the only way to enter society, but I do think it is one of the easiest ways to do so. I know several people, though, who do not have college degrees, but have done quite well for themselves and their families, and are well established in society. Experience, personality, money, and family connections can make a big difference.

[quote name='Era Might' date='25 August 2009 - 12:31 AM' timestamp='1251174706' post='1955934']
You don't need mandatory school systems in order for people to share their knowledge. There are other possible models. For example, apprenticeship. People could also work as private skill-teachers, either for financial remuneration, or for other benefits (e.g., the more you teach skills to others, the more free access you are given to people who will teach skills to you).
[/quote]
There are still a few fields that do apprenticeships; plumbing and electricians come to mind immediately and I'm sure there are others. My own chosen field, law, used to rely on apprenticeships but as more and more people have entered the field this is no longer practical. The profession decided that a standard of knowledge is necessary, and so now almost every state mandates attending an accredited law school. California is a notable exception. Practicality drives much of the move toward institutionalization, I think.

[quote name='Era Might' date='24 August 2009 - 11:36 PM' timestamp='1251171394' post='1955904']
I think peer review is sufficient for what you're referring to. Instead of submitting meaningless papers to a professor, we could be writing things in the real world. When you look at famous thinkers from the past, they weren't writing for a professor. They were writing in the real world. Your intellectual peers will be able to judge the information or arguments that you set forth.[/quote]
To whom are you referring? Since the advent of universities in the 13th century, there have been a number of wonderful thinkers who have done remarkable work while associated with universities. I think, for example, of Thomas Aquinas and many other Scholastics. Universities of the time were somewhat different from what we have today, but they were still centers to foster the development of knowledge in a communal setting. I bet even Aquinas had to write some worthless papers before he got good enough for the Summa.

[quote name='Era Might' date='25 August 2009 - 12:31 AM' timestamp='1251174706' post='1955934']
The idea of a school as a "gatekeeper" is at the heart of the problem. It may try to be a gatekeeper for reliable information, but it just becomes a gatekeeper of people. It is not a school's job to keep me in any gate. The school's job should be to merely facilitate my own wanderings.
[/quote]
Wandering is great, but a map is useful, and I think schools are good at providing maps. I don't think schools are intended to be the sole centers of learning/knowledge, but they do provide a foundation of experience and training that can facilitate more directed wanderings in the future, if a student so chooses.

Edited August 25, 2009 by Terra Firma

[Era Might]

[quote name='Terra Firma' date='25 August 2009 - 02:06 AM' timestamp='1251180404' post='1955958']In no other time in history has humanity had access to the amount of knowledge/information that we have today. Not only do we have more books than any generation before us, we have information readily at our fingertips on almost any subject. And, with the technologies available to us we have more free time available to us than people did in the past.[/quote]
Yes, we have access to "information" and books, but we no longer appreciate them. Before the rise of universities, the search for wisdom was not restricted to professional academics. The search for wisdom was understood above all as the search for the person of Christ. It was not an "academic" search, it was a search undertaken by the entire person: body, mind, and soul. With the rise of universities, the life of the monastery was separated from the life of the university, and thus the spiritual and the academic were gradually seen as two distinct domains. This gave rise to professional academics for whom information in books had lost its roots in lectio divina. A book was no longer something to savor and wander in; books became merely disposable holders of "information." This problem is exacerbated today with modern "information technologies." We have all kinds of "information" floating around, but we no longer savor the wisdom of books as people were able to before universities became secular monasteries. This is important to the theory that schooling has become a sort of secular religion. Whereas monks once integrated learning into the their entire monastic life, today universities serve as secular monasteries; the "monks" in these universities are the students. Real monks searched for wisdom (that is, for the person of Christ); secular monks (i.e., students) search for knowledge, but they do so in a "monastery" (i.e., the university) that divides what should not be divided. Thus, for example, law and philosophy/theology are seen in the university as two separate disciplines, and the ancient monastic search for wisdom becomes the modern academic search for knowledge. Modern schooling treats "knowledge" as something that it gives to students, whereas wisdom was something that a monk entered into a life-long search for. So yes, today we have a lot of access to "information" and "knowledge," but instead of integrating that into a life-long search for wisdom, we go to schools so that they can fill our heads with "knowledge," and we thereby lose the freedom and independence of the search for wisdom. We see schools much as the monks saw God; schoolteachers supposedly "reveal" information to us the way God revealed wisdom to a monk. I could go on, but I think I made the basic point that schooling has become a secular religion. We spread the "gospel" of schooling around the world, and we think that if only we can bring schools to the third world, then we can save them. But that only makes the third world dependent on schooling institutions, and these institutions cannot even deliver what they promise in the United States, let alone in the third world. We think that better schooling institutions will save American ghettos. The ghettos don't need better institutions, they need a strong sense of independence. Mandatory schooling just makes the poor think that they have to pay for something that they could get for free. It's a waste of money, and it makes people rely on an institution rather than fostering their independence.

[quote name='Terra Firma' date='25 August 2009 - 02:06 AM' timestamp='1251180404' post='1955958']But we don't take advantage of it. I am sure the reason for the lack of engagement is due in large part to social conditioning, but I am not convinced that the problem is social conditioning that school is the only place to engage intellectually. I think there's more to it than that, although I can't put my finger on exactly what the issue is. I'll have to think on it more.

As for the examples you cited ... there are good reasons for us to have professionals bury our dead and to have professionals build our homes. I think there are also good reasons to have professional scholars.[/quote]
Whether or not there are good reasons to institutionalize those things is probably a separate discussion. But I think the destructive effects of institutionalization are evident. I have to spend thousands of dollars to have a wake and be buried. I have to pay a professional to build something that ordinary people built by themselves for thousands of years. I have to pay thousands of dollars for someone to give me knowledge, as though the great authors wrote their books for teachers, and not for students. If I ever write a famous book, I hope no teacher claims some special right to teach my book to other people. Let people read the book themselves. All this institutionalization has made us into mindless servants. It has made us believe that institutions do things better than we can.

[quote]Even learning has to have a higher purpose, and learning for the sake of investing in the future is not a completely ignoble purpose. I do agree that most people go to college to be accepted into society (i.e., to get a better job). I don't think schooling is the only way to enter society, but I do think it is one of the easiest ways to do so. I know several people, though, who do not have college degrees, but have done quite well for themselves and their families, and are well established in society. Experience, personality, money, and family connections can make a big difference.[/quote]
Humans are amazing creatures, aren't they.

Think about those successful people who don't have college degrees. They are shining examples that we don't need institutions to guide us through life. We are perfectly capable of guiding ourselves. That doesn't mean we don't need help. But the help we need is from other people, not from massive mandatory schooling institutions.


[quote]There are still a few fields that do apprenticeships; plumbing and electricians come to mind immediately and I'm sure there are others. My own chosen field, law, used to rely on apprenticeships but as more and more people have entered the field this is no longer practical. The profession decided that a standard of knowledge is necessary, and so now almost every state mandates attending an accredited law school. California is a notable exception. Practicality drives much of the move toward institutionalization, I think.[/quote]
There have been people in history who taught themselves law. I'm not saying that there should be no "standard of knowledge." I'm just saying that you shouldn't be required to attend an institution to attain that standard. Society treats school graduates as though they are somehow set apart from everyone else, as though going through a school system somehow makes you competent.

[quote]To whom are you referring? Since the advent of universities in the 13th century, there have been a number of wonderful thinkers who have done remarkable work while associated with universities. I think, for example, of Thomas Aquinas and many other Scholastics. Universities of the time were somewhat different from what we have today, but they were still centers to foster the development of knowledge in a communal setting. I bet even Aquinas had to write some worthless papers before he got good enough for the Summa.

Wandering is great, but a map is useful, and I think schools are good at providing maps. I don't think schools are intended to be the sole centers of learning/knowledge, but they do provide a foundation of experience and training that can facilitate more directed wanderings in the future, if a student so chooses.
[/quote]
There are smart people at universities, who would do remarkable work whether they were at a university or not.

I think that whether or not schools can be beneficial to some people is a different discussion. My argument in this discussion is mainly with how society makes schools mandatory, and requires us to attend these massive mandatory institutions in order to be accepted into society. If someone wants to pay thousands of dollars to attend a school, because they think a school will provide them with a "map," then they have a right to do so. But society goes beyond that. Society says that schooling is necessary for everyone, and it wastes millions of dollars forcing everyone to go to school for twelve years. And all this is to prepare people to enter...yes, more schooling. I hate the high school culture where students have to rip and claw their way to the top, so that they can be deemed worthy to enter a "good" institution. It's all about institutions. Learning is secondary. We don't even have to learn because the institution will "teach us." And we wonder why many people entering college today can barely read and write. It's not because they're stupid. It's because they are products of the wonderful institution known as schooling.

[Lil Red]

+J.M.J.+
i think sometimes that it's sad that i know more about the Catholic faith than some people who went to school and majored in theology. but i do wish i knew more of the 'technical' stuff to theology.

[Lil Red]

[quote name='Era Might' date='24 August 2009 - 06:17 PM' timestamp='1251159435' post='1955762']
School works best for a motivated person. But ironically, a motivated person is precisely the kind of person that generally doesn't need a school (and there's no sense in forcing unmotivated people to go to school). And schools generally do not inspire motivation; they form people to be unmotivated, to settle for satisfying the requirements of an institution, rather than to seek learning.

What does schooling provide that we couldn't have outside of the schooling system? All the positive benefits of schools (libraries, peers with whom to discuss things, etc) could be provided for without creating massive mandatory institutions.

To paraphrase Matt Damon in "Good Will Hunting," people pay thousands of dollars for something that they can get for a dollar in late charges at the public library.
[/quote]
+J.M.J.+
agreed.

[Winchester]

So become a blue collar worker and a self-made man.