Re: [Gnu-arch-users] OT: trained dependency

[Zenaan Harkness]

On Mon, 2004-11-08 at 22:15, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> >>>>> "Zenaan" == Zenaan Harkness <address@hidden> writes:
> 
>     Zenaan> Obviously you don't agree with the thesis,
> 
> I agree with some parts of the thesis, in particular that (1) the
> current system does a poor job of educating, as opposed to schooling;
> (2) we know how to do significantly better on a small scale; and (3)
> there are some vested interests that oppose reform because it would
> harm them.  But, yes, I disagree with (4) all opposition to those
> actual reform proposals we've seen (Gatto apparently doesn't have one)

"A Free Market in education expenditure - putting the teacher/education
purchasing power back into the hands of parents." I thought I'd already
described that.

> is motivated by venial self-interest,

Gatto is not, in my estimation, motivated by Venial self interest.

>  (5) it is obvious how to achieve systematic improvements, (6) it is
> straightforward and inexpensive to
> scale the successful examples, and therefore with

I actually might agree with you, at least partially, on 5) and 6).

> (7) we need to scrap
> the current system before we know what will replace it.

"Free market" I am confident is up to the task - the reason being, I
believe in the ability of parents and even children (once they reach a
certain level of education) to 1) be able to determine (over the medium
to long term) what works and 2) be self interested enough to ensure this
actually happens.

>     Zenaan> and equally obviously, I can't put into email format what
>     Zenaan> I guess (given my poor performance) you could only get by
>     Zenaan> reading the books.
> 
> You might also conclude that you ... have swallowed a specious
> argument whole.

As they say, anything's possible. But before that could be true, I'd
have to say I already believed in the thesis before starting to read
John Taylor Gatto's books, which is why I "resonate" with them so
much... that is a more likely possibility to me.

> But it's possible.  Can you admit the same, and take an honest
> look at what we've both written?

All I can feel is frustrated in my inability to present as Gatto did to
me. I suspect that is a combination of 1) my strong pre-disposition in
agreement with his thesis 2) there's no "magic bullet" of evil or good
here and 3) my inability to summarise in a way that could do justice in
the space and time available to me.

>  Then come back and address the
> points where we differ, instead of getting all crazy about points
> where we're in violent agreement?

:)

I don't think I'll be devoting days to improving my presentation. I
_may_ come back with quotes that will astound some people (they did me).
So when I do, please don't repeat "can all you do is spout someone
else's ideas" or whatever it was you already said.

cheers
zen