No, I'm arguing that forced schooling in general is an unethical act, on par with communist indoctrination, and there should be no government run schools at all
It is not arguing for elliminating educations. It is arguing that we don't need force every one education. It is arguing that a forced education is not a really a good education.
You can make similar assertions about anything of a forced nature like that. Public schools, prisons, etc. Because some do prisons or public schools are done badly, it is not an argument against them in general, because you can point to many other cases where they were done properly.
I am. But you dont make sense. All Americans have a right to K-12 education, it's funded by the government. How is that different from all Americans having a right to healthcare, being funded by the government? If someone doesn't wanna be in healthcare anymore they can still switch to whatever they want to. They're not forced labor any more than teachers are.
I wouldn't say I'm advocating for private school,or even lack of govt in school matters.
I guess my primary point surrounds censorship, especially when it comes to dictating what teachers can say or teach (in addition to, in the context of, not necessarily in place of the cariculum)
Forced curriculum on students, at all, is no different than re-education camps; state sponsored indoctrination that both political parties (currently) support.
That's not exactly my position. I don't think authoritarian schools as we know them today should exist. I'd like to see lower cost, higher quality, and much more variety, innovation, and experimentation in education. Government involvement hinders all of those things.
That is an oxymoron given how "education" is currently defined in the US. The only way this could be achieved is if the whole system is torn down to absolute zero and rebuilt as something entirely different. That is, of course, not possible.
When the government deliberately keeps people uneducated, then I agree with you -- it's unethical to force people into that rut and then take advantage of them for being there.
But the government in the US is trying to get everyone educated -- not always effectively, though. I know some schools suck, I went to a public school in the middle of a ghetto. Many of the students came from impoverished families, and would routinely bite the hand that feeds them when it came to education -- by disrupting class, (very proudly) not doing their homework, and whatnot. Watching that kind of behavior day-after-day took away any sympathy I might have for the consequences of their actions.
I see this talk as an argument against "traditional" schooling. The alternative to traditional schooling is anything not traditional. In the US, that would be homeschooling or private school like Montessori. The political takeaway is that government schooling (which necessarily places emphasis on uniformity and conformity) is harmful and that private alternatives should be encouraged.
I don't think calling names helps the argument. You can't just say "well, that's a little to extreme, so you're wrong". I simply pointed out that it happens so that most kids are educated in public schools. Would it be such a stretch to propose that those children are educated according to what government believes is important? Surely no one doubted this happened in the Soviet Union. How is the US, or for that matter, almost any other country different? Soviet children were taught to believe in communism, american children are taught to believe in democracy. Haven't you ever tried to question it at least a little bit? That maybe, only maybe, if something (and especially a political ideology) is taught in every public school as a universal good, it really may not be one?
If you don't see why anyone would disagree with making state schooling a compulsory activity, then your understanding is far too narrow to engage in a discussion of this nature.
If that is implemented, coming generations would be well civilized and well behaved as it eliminates many societal problems.
Oh boy. Not even wrong.
See: Deschooling Society by Ivan Illich, Compulsory Miseducation by Paul Goodman, anything written by John Taylor Gatto, John Holt and A.S. Neill.
It's also trivially disprovable by mere observation.
I'm not against public schooling in principle but its current form is baffling. We expect kids to spend 1/4 of their entire life in an authoritarian system where they have no autonomy and then we throw them to the wolves when they become adults.
The state is negatively positioned; it has poor-to-no feedback with regard to the personal outcomes of its implementations. Parents and students do, on an ongoing and daily basis. The idea that I "pretended" that this was anyone else's argument but my own seems completely absurd.
While I'm glad you're able to infer implications, it would be wonderful if you could take it a step further to find that an argument cannot be true if a necessary premises is false. That's not bad faith, that's logic.
reply