Educational reform- Ideology, objectivity and free thought

the real slim DEEPy
the real slim DEEPy: Ideology, objectivity and free thought:
Preface:
Rule by representation is the basic principle of virtually every prominent government in the modern age. It discourages governmental oppression- allowing a greater degree of freedom than the traditional, imperialistic models, which dominated ancient and medieval society. It is this freedom of oppression which encourages science and reduces civil unrest. It is championed by the humanitarian, for it is said to protect the weak from the strong- yet, as of recent, it seems to be falling prey to these very evils to which it has historically been immune.
I propose that ideologies are the current enemies of the modern representative republic and democracy. I intend to expose the methods of the unethical in their attempt to limit free thought by robbing us of our objectivity. I furthermore shall explain my solution, which rests upon the premise that rote-memorization is the destroyer of free thought. I propose that we regain a balance between the natural and social sciences, and between mathematics and empirical logic. I propose a shift from specialization and towards a broader understanding of all things- the creation of a “New-Renaissance Man”. I propose that we give our children the tools they need to truly be capable of free thought, and encourage philosophy and debate, as did the inventors of the republic- the ancient Greeks.
13 years ago Report
1
the real slim DEEPy
the real slim DEEPy: Rise of the Republic:
The political models of the republic and the democracy, based upon the political traditions of the nation-states in ancient Greece, have gradually risen to provide the foundations for the majority of the governments throughout the modern world. The application of representative rule in the Greco/Roman world provided environments free of excessive adherence of tradition and propensity towards oppression. This both increased the overall happiness of its citizens and encouraged free thought- thus proving representative rule to be rather resistant to civil unrest, while being conducive to scientific progress. Representative rule has grown to be the preferred method of rule, and has been incorporated into monarchy, imperialism and even all forms of socialism: communism, fascism, progressivism, and the many “mixed” political/economic systems in between. Indeed, it seems as if, from its inception some 2500 years ago, it has become the de-facto mode of government. It has risen to become the foundation of virtually every new theory of law and economics proposed- the cornerstone of every ruling and regulating institution proposed by every social, economic and political theorist of the modern world.
“While all other sciences have advanced, that of government is at a standstill - little better understood, little better practiced now than three or four thousand years ago” - John Adams
Time and again, we have seen governments of all models rise and fall; thus, the representative model is not immune to failure. Still, though, the concept of “rule by representation” seem to be continually gaining in favor as time progresses- weighing the benefits and drawbacks of each form of government, “rule by representation” always seems to come out ahead in the mind of the objective realist. This, I believe, goes beyond considerations of keeping citizens content and beyond allowing science to be free to progress; for there is a largely unseen benefit of representative rule that can both explain the obvious benefits of representation, as well as persist beyond the limitations of law: that being- the encouragement of free thought. Free thought is the pre-requisite of objective reasoning and empirical logic- without which, we would become merely the slaves to the thoughts of others- the slaves of rulers and traditions. Self-governance of a nation begets self-governance of the individual- providing a benefit in times of governmental restructuring and in times of anarchy.
“Democracy is the worst form of government except for all those others that have been tried.”
- Winston Churchill
Seeing that all governments are prone to failure, one would prefer the government that provides the most benefit for all in the limited time allotted that government before it retreats from the limelight and into the pages of history. Not only does self-governance provide the greatest benefits to the majority in times of political stability, it provides social stability in times of political crisis- thus extending the benefits of a representative government beyond even the lifespan of that particular government.
13 years ago Report
0
the real slim DEEPy
the real slim DEEPy: The Enemy:
Ideology has risen to prominence among political circles. This ideology is the foundation for political parties. These political parties are merely the tools of politicians, allowing them to “divide and conquer” their citizens- forcing those citizens who are above ideology to compromise their own personal convictions and vote along party lines. They bar a “true” champion of the people from rising to prominence, by forcing politicians to either align themselves with the ideologies of a particular party or be squeezed out of the election process by the parties of prominence- allowing those who are already in power who retain their political power indefinitely.
The Denial of Objectivity:
Free thought is being lost in the modern world, due to our social conditioning. The powers-that –be have implemented many strategies to limit our free thought, in an effort to increase our chances of falling prey to the various ideologies of the party system. Emphasis is placed upon rote-memorization, and this is implemented into our educational systems. Rote-memorization undermines objectivity and empirical thinking- for the “facts” learned are subject to the perspectives and whims of the authors of textbooks, encyclopedias, dictionaries and all other “valid” sources. The over-emphasis on the natural sciences also re-enforces the assumed validity of the alleged “facts”- for the apparent is assumed to be true, as the effects of perspective are largely underplayed. The over-emphasis on mathematics lead one to believe that something is “proven” simply by running it through an algebraic formula- ignoring that fact that our system of mathematics (while largely accepted to be correct) was invented by man, as was the algebraic formula used. As man is not perfect, anything which he produces is subject to flaws, and should be considered such. I declare that all men, thus all penned “facts”, are fallible, for:
“If men were angels, no government would be necessary.”
- James Madison
13 years ago Report
0
the real slim DEEPy
the real slim DEEPy: Proper Verification and Objectivity:
Just because a system of mathematics or science seems to be valid from our perspective, this does not necessitate that, for example, when you move to the cosmological scale, miscalculations will not occur. Furthermore, the corollary also holds true: a correct formula can still be applied to an incorrect theory without exposing apparent errors from our perspective. For any “fact” to be properly verified, I propose that observational, experimental, mathematical and empirical evidence must all be confirmed. Our system currently leads citizens to believe that either experimental or mathematical verification alone is sufficient, thus it robs them from the ability to think freely and objectively by placing improperly verified “facts” into their heads, which they carry with them for the rest of their lives, and base all their decisions on, accordingly.
Einstein, refuting the validity of the “Big-Bang Theory”, said to its author: “…your mathematics are amazing, but your physics are abominable.” He agreed that the theory could be run through algebraic equations without any apparent contradictions, but he refuted that the theory could be made consistent with the universe as he saw it. Einstein did not agree to an expanding universe, as there was no clear evidence of its occurrence at the time. Since then, we have learned of “red-shift” which is claimed to be the evidence to which Einstein was unaware- and students are now taught of the expansion of the universe are if it were a proven and indisputable fact; however, I continue to dispute it . Allow me to digress for a minute, as I exercise objectivity and free thought as an example to show the fallacy of accepting someone else’s “fact” as your own.
Example of the Application of Objectivity and Free Thought:
“Red-shift” is an analog of the “Doppler effect”, which is explained as an apparent frequency shift, due to the observer’s relation to a moving source of a waveform. A waveform which is emitted from a moving source and viewed by a source which either stands still, moves at a similar vector, but at a different velocity or moves at an opposing vector, is said to either increase or decrease pitch at the point of view of the observer- depending upon whether the distance between the source and the observer is increased or decreased. “Red-shift” is, hence, known as the phenomena of the “stretching out” of light frequencies, when emitted from distant stars as they move farther away from earth.
The fact that the light waves are stretched can be proven by viewing spectrograph images of light from the stars. The spectrograph image, however, hardly proves an “expanding universe”- for I propose that “red-shift” is also inherent of a rotating universe around a galactic center. If the earth and distant stars are both moving in distant orbital paths around a common central point, with the earth in an inner path and the star observes in a distant path, the stars will naturally either fall behind in its path, if the orbital speeds are relatively the same (for more distant orbits take much longer time to complete than inner orbits, when the speed of all orbits is relatively constant) or the outer orbital paths would have to speed up dramatically to keep up with objects on inner orbital paths. Either way, the path that the light travels in between two rather parallel moving objects would necessarily curve, and thus, stretch- producing the “red-shift”, without the need for universal expansion.
13 years ago Report
0
the real slim DEEPy
the real slim DEEPy: I shall put forth an experiment, which can be re-enacted by anyone, to validate this claim. If you are driving, and an ice cream truck is driving towards you, you will hear the music at a higher frequency than normal, and if the ice cream truck is driving away from you, you will hear it lower in pitch. Next time you drive by an ice cream truck, see what happens when you drive parallel to it at alternating speeds. When you drive slower, and let the truck pass, you hear the shift; conversely, when you accelerate and pass the truck, you can hear the frequency change again. Yes, you are moving closer and further, but in parallel vectors. If you were to do the same thing on a circular race track, with you in the inside track, and the ice cream truck on the outside track, you would have the same effect. It is now quite obvious that the universe need not be expanding to exhibit “red-shift”; thus, “red-shift” is merely possible evidence of an expanding universe, but hardly indisputable proof.

The Solution:
Indeed, any “fact” or formula is subject to error- one should use every form of verification possible before he claims it to be “fact”. I propose that mathematics or experimentation alone should not be the exclusive methods of verification for anything claimed to be a “fact”; neither, should any “fact” be assumed to be true. Arguably, the failure of teachers to provide “disclaimers” at the introduction of any new topic should be considered unethical. I propose that, before any “theory” is taught, a proper disclaimer be given by the teacher; furthermore, a general disclaimer should be given on a regular basis as to the open nature of anything assumed to be “fact”.
Clear are the dangers of stressing rote-memorization, mathematics and the natural sciences over philosophy, empirical logic and the social sciences. I propose that we model our education after the society which first implemented the republic: ancient Greece. I propose that we study Greece and the great philosophers, and we learn to emulate them. I propose that we encourage students to all forms of verification on a consistent basis- that we do not expect our students to take any “fact” at face value. I propose that we stop over-emphasizing the mastery of a particular skill and promote a wider variety of skills to create well-rounded, self-governing citizens. I propose that we stop emphasizing some disciplines over others and expose our students to the widest range of subjects possible in a balanced manner.
I promote that we hold the same reverence for philosophers and polymaths that we do geniuses- for a genius can excel greatly in his field, but only a true polymath can reach the paradigm to be able to use what one field of the sciences has already conceptualized, and then apply it to another field which is lacking. I propose that the student be developed into a “New-Renaissance Man” of sorts, for a wider range of knowledge is the key to maximizing objectivity and free thinking, thus enabling our students to rise above ideology and rule themselves.
Conclusion:
This “New Renaissance Man”, I propose, can best rise above ideology and rule himself, for the paradigm akin to that of a polymath is necessary to understand the relationships of all things to all things and, thus maximize free thought and encourage innovation. Wrote memorization and specialization only allows those in power to stay in power by preserving the present system through discouraging innovation; thus discouraging competition. Additionally, the emergence of a generation of students who are well-versed in a variety of fields may be our only true hope for returning the republic to its original state; for, in a representative republic, where all vote and thus contribute to ruling the nation, one must be capable of ruling himself, or how is he capable of ruling the nation?
“The best government is that which teaches us to govern ourselves.”
- Johann Wolfgang Von Goethe
13 years ago Report
0
AussieOi
AussieOi: A ruler of a nation state has neither time nor inclination to gather and process 'representative thought'. Strong minorities are what influence decisions, rarely any broad concencus. Be it wealthy business lobbies or a communist party elite, the motives of policy are driven by a narrow band of narrow interest.
13 years ago Report
1
the real slim DEEPy
the real slim DEEPy: this is not meant for educators to impliment, this is for educators to impliment. this thesis marks the beginning of a new discipline- a shcool of educational ethics.
13 years ago Report
0
the real slim DEEPy
the real slim DEEPy: not politicians, i meant...
13 years ago Report
0
memberX
memberX: I don't know about that, weather the educational system should go under deep reforms or not, is it time or not yet...but there's one thing that I fear, and know for sure...

All that time spend in front of the computers and their e-phones...and staying late at the public libraries...sleeping there ... isolated from the rest real world...not talking to each other...

And one day, when they will finish their education...and go out in the concrete jungle...
...what's going to happen to them is failure.

Is the world as we know it, already dying.

Sad to see...the future.
13 years ago Report
1
the real slim DEEPy
13 years ago Report
0
the real slim DEEPy
the real slim DEEPy: Every man gets a narrower and narrower field of knowledge in which he must be an expert in order to compete with other people. The specialist knows more and more about less and less and finally knows everything about nothing.
13 years ago Report
1
MrSteveA67
MrSteveA67: I didn't read all of the posts, but I agree that many political problems appear to arise when social abstractions (i.e. various institutions or governing agencies etc.) are treated as entities with desires or rights in themselves.

It then turns around and the individual interests comprising it are often sacrificed for the sake of maintaining the abstraction (which is really just a mental construct).

Consider the Civil War in America. The major factor motivating it was simply (a military) "Unity" and not even that of people but instead of a national institution. Over half a million people died and many more suffered decades of hardship and many of the social, political and economic issues involved in it were never resolved and continue to cause grief today, though on larger scales.

"Nature", "Humanity", "The Earth" etc. are also concepts that appear to be easily abused and cause problems. Many social/government views appear to regard these concepts and people appear willing to fight each other for various ideals regarding these abstract entities.

Where does the value of anything really arise from? It's from oneself. Arsenic might be something entirely 'natural', but if it's causing sickness then I'd have to say the fact that it's 'natural' doesn't grant it much of any additional value.

Realistically, what is "humanity" or "The Earth" for individuals other than the immediate people and environment in day to day experiences as well as mental conceptions of what "the rest" might be.

What does the concept "Save the Earth" truly mean and what does it imply that individuals should do other than "save" whatever it is that's important in ones daily life? To attempt to interact on scales that go beyond immediately available experience is prone to cause problems. Someone might see a homeless person and feel like helping them. If this is done one-on-one the influences are more directly observable and understandable, but to act indirectly by various institutions adds many question marks.

There are many issues like this where social abstractions mask over the more important and immediate reality of ones own experiences and that's the foundation for the value of the rest. Self-sacrifice is a destructive concept, IMO, and there's no reason people shouldn't expect and work toward whatever they determine to be the best, and that's something that can only be determined by oneself. If everyone was expected to sacrificed their own well being for the sake of some ideal, it would seem much better to sacrifice the ideal instead and get rid of sacrificing people for its sake. (That's the mentality that appears to have caused lots of wars or religious conflict etc. over the years and is also one of the mechanisms by which fascism and other highly totalitarian social structures exist)
13 years ago Report
0
the real slim DEEPy
the real slim DEEPy: education is completed once you have forgotten everything you were taught in school- einstein
12 years ago Report
1
the real slim DEEPy
the real slim DEEPy: steve. i fully agree that charity should be on the personal level or through non-provits- it should be voluntary and individualized, not institutionalized. the government is inept to utelize our tax dollars; thus the mentally unstable homeless receive inadequate aid, while the more-stable project-dweller receives upwards of $2500 overall stipends and subsidies.

seeing that we have already done our part by paying taxes, the homeless are LESS likely to recieve adequate assistance- they require personal guidance and need, more than anything, someone to listen and to encourage them. the government cannot do this, they can only exchange completed forms for stipends- while the mentally-unstable homeless often lack the organization to keep up with such technicalities.

getting the government involved in envorinmentalism is positive in a way, but so much greater would be the impact of each one of us reducing our consumption voluntarily. the government may cut back industrial pollution by 3% of 3%, that is, industrial activity only accounts for 3% of global warming gasses, thus, 3% of 3% is o.o9%- while the socialization of enviornmentalism tells us that weve already done our part, and small, individual measures to reduce consumption, which could cut pollution so much more than 0.09% (arguable, closer to the full 3%, if some go so far as to shift diets away from red meat), are deemed redundant.

i disagree that self-sacrifice is destructive in all cases, but self-sacrifice for political gains is very sad indeed.

valuation arises from 2 fators, need and ease of aquisition. one who does not work for what they have does not value what they have as muchas they should. examples of such are: poor playing the lottery, food stamps leading to obesity, football players going bankrupt within 5 years of theircareer's end, despite a annual retirement income about equal to the current average annual income of african american families (from which many pro atheletes are born, thus it would be no different from their parents income, in many cases) i know im going to catch flack for this one, but the cost of living is on average higher particularly in the urban areas of union states. if union worker makes x$ at W work, and then the union negotiates a raise of y dollars regardless of job performance, then said worker sees x+y dollars as equal in value to x work, (x is a constant, since it is not a merit raise.) if x$=W, and x$+y$ is then earned with W, then total income is devalued in the amount of y$, and then y$ is spent on unnecesarry things, since it was free anyways... indstead of being saved for the day that the gm plant closes due to unsustainable labor-related costs.

did you know that the "2007 sub-prime collapse" actually started in detroit in the summer of '06? unstable gas prices reduced the demand for larger vehicles, if favor of fuel misers, faster than gm could alter their manufacturing. perhaps it is an exageration to say excess labor costs account soley for the lack in excess capital, but it is a farce to say that it did not contribute in some fashion. its also damn hard to save costs by closing an unneeded SUV plant, and also produce capital for a new compact car factory, when you have to pay EVERY HOURLY WORKER a full years severance+ benefits+cobra, and on top of that pay for the wages of the worke3rs at the NEW plant...

it would be delusional to insist that this extreme constraint on capital had no effect on their financial collapse...


what is unneeded loses value, only to appreciate when the demand rises. you can easily see this in the housing market. as this is economics 101 principle #1, no further extrapolation needed
12 years ago Report
0
the real slim DEEPy
12 years ago Report
0
the real slim DEEPy
the real slim DEEPy: well, we sure got off topic...
12 years ago Report
0
Gully
Gully: something that is given has no value, not even the greatest of masters can take even a single step for his student, focus determines reality, who we are is what we do with what we lear, and we choose what we learn, but it's not what we do that matters so much as what we learn from it.
12 years ago Report
0
Darling Buds of May
Darling Buds of May: Intellectuals are people who use personal intelligence and logical reasoning to acquire knowledge personally or professionally. Intellectuals are learned people with erudite ideas who propound new concepts and theories. People blessed with brains and those who are concerned with the production and dissemination of ideas are also considered to be intellectuals. Ray Conniff had once remarked, “Don't make art for other artists or for 'intellectuals', make art for people - and if you can touch just one person in a lifetime and make a difference - you have succeeded.” Society needs intellectuals to flourish and tread upon the path of success. Literate thinkers and people of renowned fame in cinema, music, dance, science and other fields of specialisation are also considered to be intellectuals. Albert Einstein had once said, “Intellectuals solve problems, while geniuses prevent them.”.. xP
12 years ago Report
1
the real slim DEEPy
the real slim DEEPy: albert einstein also said "education is complete once you forget everything you learned in school"

bertrand russell said "men are not born stupid, they are born ignorant. education makes them stupid."

and there was this quote from rockerfeller which has highly influenced modern education. something about how we need not more artists or philosophers, politicians, etc... ..."we should train children to do perfectly, what their parents did in an imperfect fashion."

basically, encouraging education to only seek to "perfect" the status quo way of things, to merely supply businesses with "new and improved" generations of labourers. i mean, if your in power, why would you desire ANY drastic improvement to the order of things... no, you just want better drones...
12 years ago Report
1
OCD_OCD
OCD_OCD: Personally, I believe that most educational outlets have interspersed their personal and political agenda with teaching and are now calling it "education". Education is learning and knowledge, not being fed propaganda under the guise of "education".

Facts are facts and will always be factual until someone massages them and makes them propaganda.
11 years ago Report
1
Serabi
Serabi:
@DD- what education do you suggest as an alternative?

11 years ago Report
0
the real slim DEEPy
the real slim DEEPy: focusing more on critical thought than rote memorization
10 years ago Report
1
OCD_OCD
OCD_OCD: In all honesty, there is a large percentage of lazy students who wouldn't bother to engage what brains they had in critical thought.
10 years ago Report
0
near50ohoh
near50ohoh: the first thing a dean of sociology taught us, his students, was the difference in types of thought. he said he was there to teach us HOW to think not what to think. in business, we were told by our class leader that as soon as we joined the work force, we would be retrained. no univ or college could promise it's students a pending income. but that seems like one hell of an investment for no real reward. doesn't it? in psychology, we were told there are @ 7 types of thought processes. supposing these profs' know what they were talking about, why does the institution not divide up it's teaching methods, not by subject or content but by the student's capability of thought and offer more mentoring programs? change is needed but as long as the revenue works out, no institution will change. just my profs' thinking and it's become mine. what's yours?
10 years ago Report
0