chairman bill wrote:Indeed not, but it does undermine your general claim about higher education

True. But then I'm not seeing any evidence from your angle, only anecdote.
I don't doubt what you are saying, merely pointing out that you're not applying the same standard to yourself.

I'm with Sir hackenslash. Educating our kids to be sophisticated parrots is not a good state of affairs.

How do we get our kids to question science (or, its worth), question culture (the brainwashing thereof), question anything, if 'education' amounts to naught but memorising 'facts' and embracing one's culture?

This will go down like a lead balloon, here, but the only way we can get kids to think for themselves is to make philosophy as important as reading & writing (and maths) at school... even at a young age (say 10+).

Of course, this would piss most parents off, since most parents do equate intelligence with knowledge and sophistication with cultural compliance. But, fuck 'em.

Sendraks wrote:

chairman bill wrote:Indeed not, but it does undermine your general claim about higher education

True. But then I'm not seeing any evidence from your angle, only anecdote.
I don't doubt what you are saying, merely pointing out that you're not applying the same standard to yourself.

One black swan. You were the one making the positive claim to how things are.

I've been laboring through a rather stiffly rendered but deeply detailed biography of Einstein. The early years are a surprise. I had been led to believe, through urban legend and exaggeration, that A.E. was a generally poor student who achieved less than encouraging grades in mathematics. It turns out that these tales, intended to encourage persistence in the face of setbacks, are false (probably not news to many of you here).

The truth is that Einstein did in fact experience problems in his educational development, but these were due not to any lack of ability. Einstein, it turns out, was almost genetically aware--meaning almost from the beginning of his school days--that in the pursuit of knowledge there are no authorities except in the most general sense of the word. His conflicts in school were a result of his teachers' unwillingness to tolerate his challenging of accepted dogmas, and of a self-confidence he displayed in his own independent ideas that his instructors perceived as arrogance.

Perhaps there should be an effort to identify very special children whose capabilities should be allowed more free reign, and separate them from children who would actually benefit more from conventional instruction. The first group could in effect "lead the way" by rejecting the idea of authorities and releasing inventive energies. The second (presumably larger) group, might be simply "taught what is known" in the pursuit of a professional career, much in the way they are currently taught. I suppose that sounds Huxley-esque. It would be a brave new world that had such people in it.

Some good responses, some of which have touched on points I had wanted to raise in the OP. I have quite severe sciatica at the moment, which makes sitting at the computer for time periods sufficiently extended for the typing of long posts problematic, hence the brevity of the OP (I'm currently lying on my back posting on a smart phone, which is not conducive to long posts). I will try to knock up a response soon.

I would look at the best system in the world and take it from there.

For most Brits that is an impossibility.

The world doesn't currently contain a good enough system, even as a starting point.

hackenslash wrote:The world doesn't currently contain a good enough system, even as a starting point.

No?

Finland.

Nope. It's certainly a good system under the current paradigm, but it's the paradigm that's faulty.

hackenslash wrote:Nope. It's certainly a good system under the current paradigm, but it's the paradigm that's faulty.

If every country could achieve what Finland achieves it would be a great start.

Well done. You missed the point entirely.

hackenslash wrote:Well done. You missed the point entirely.

Maybe you are trying to create a point that does not exist.

Or maybe you aren't ready for the point, which was made in the OP, and which apparently sailed over your head.

Leave the grown-ups to talk now, there's a good chap.

hackenslash wrote:Or maybe you aren't ready for the point, which was made in the OP, and which apparently sailed over your head.

Leave the grown-ups to talk now, there's a good chap.

What the point that you was trying to make? That anyone should notice that would really amazing. A point of nothing. From a standpoint of nothing.

The British education system is one big mess but that is valid for a lot of things in Britain so why change a habit of a life time.

Read the fucking OP, genius. It's all there. If you don't understand it, kindly wait for the thread to develop, as opposed to providing a practical demonstration of what I'm talking about.

hackenslash wrote:Read the fucking OP, genius. It's all there. If you don't understand it, kindly wait for the thread to develop, as opposed to providing a practical demonstration of what I'm talking about.

So what's new?

Come up with an original thought? The British education system is a mess and you think by changing one aspect is going to make it any better. Well sorry think again.

It really doesn't get any more ignorant than that, Scot, so I'll leave you to your amusement. Have a nice life.

Scot, the point being made is that education in this country is lacking in an important area - namely formal training introduced at an early age in how to properly assess claims and undertake logical analysis, and further that this lack could be what is causing a lot of the problems we see around us in society. The question is then asked whether it is a pipe dream to think that the introduction of formal education for children in this area will mean these problems might be alleviated as a result. All perfectly clear from the OP.

Fallible wrote:Scot, the point being made is that education in this country is lacking in an important area - namely formal training introduced at an early age in how to properly assess claims and undertake logical analysis, and further that this lack could be what is causing a lot of the problems we see around us in society. The question is then asked whether it is a pipe dream to think that the introduction of formal education for children in this area will mean these problems might be alleviated as a result. All perfectly clear from the OP.

You mean children are not taught that in Britain? Oh that explains it.

Nor in Finland...