Networks vs. Communities, and the effects of formal schooling.

[Jesin]

I decided this article was worth making a thread about:
http://www.spinninglobe.net/lesschool.htm

(I think that to many of us (me included), this forum qualifies as a community.)

 

[Dissident]

Thanks a lot for the link Jesin.
That is a big part of what is wrong with the world today, but I'm afraid that for the factory of machine parts to be stopped the world first has to realize that the machine itself is no good. As long as the goal doesn't change, the only means considered will be those who most efficiently lead to such goal.

 

[Ermine]

Good article. As a generalization, the state of the US's public education is it's main domestic problem.

However, I find it unsettling and wrong how public school is portrayed as an insurmountable part of destiny and other media for mass-schooling are unavoidable. There is the option of home school, and even if parents can't do that, they can discuss what their kids are "learning" at school. Parents can control TV watching time, or even decide if there will be a TV at all. All mass schooling institutions can be joined or avoided with discretion.

I also don't like how it assumes that all people who participate in public schooling will have the same outcome. We are not robots that can't help our programming. I have gone through the American public school system, and I am not stupid, superstitious, or the same as everybody else. I have only viewed school as a resource. I have teachers who I consult for data (in any subject), researching resources, computer programs, and a space which I devote for taking learning into my own hands. I can easily realize when my teachers are stating truths or opinions. I realize that I'm fairly unique, but it certainly isn't impossible to avoid mass schooling because it's mainly a mentality, not an actual force.

 

[Kuu]

I agree on the points brought up by Ermine. We're not robots...

Also I totally despise the word choice of "Networks". It's a petty thing, but god its like putting a cheese grater to my brain. It just seems so arbitrary, and completely unnecesary, making it an us vs them thing by glorifying "Communities" with their family values and demonizing the impersonal, unhuman, evil, kitten-murdering... ehh, uhh what should we call it...... oh I know, "networks!". It's such a nonstandard use of the word, and the very particular nuance that is given to it isn't even clearly defined at all! (Neither is communities) As if communities weren't networks! AHHHH!!!

*Turns around, glares at first living creature on sight, instantly sucking all the life force out of it*

... not that I disagree with the points of the article though. Its more about if the network is a natural one or a forced one. Artificial integration, as it says.





... which brings me to my next ranting about how the myth of the "family" as the core of society that this article leans heavily on. Most families are dysfunctional, unnecessary social hierarchies that beat a kid's individuality into a pulp on an equal if not worse level than "formal education". Sometimes they work out, but I think that is the minority of cases, not the mayority.

I mean, formal education unlike family (mostly) does not force religions and values down your throat since your very conception. They do not use totalitarian control to coerce you, abuse you physically or psychologically, rape you, or treat you as a commodity by selling you, arranging marriages, or through forced labor... and worst of all, you are forced into that sick dependent relationship because you are born helpless into it... and society indeed provides no alternative because of this stupid tradition of child rearing that is so widespread. "How ungrateful of you to say that!" say the people who begot you without asking, due to their own greed or carelessness, who are truly strangers to you, who don't care about your opinion, and who probably only maintain you because of peer pressure or some twisted concept of love that is more akin to emotional possessiveness, where the relationship is not mutually beneficial, but one sided.

Did they want to bring a wholesome individual into the world, that might or might not love them or care about them, and have its own opinions and values.... or did they just want "a baby", a human pet, an emotional slave? Pets and children are emotional slaves...

Family love is stockholm syndrome where both parents and children are simultaneously captives and hostages, bound by social expectations, not by genetics or anything else.

/super tangential rant (I should make a thread about it...)





Oh and gothic cathedrals built happily by people? Bad example. Most were conceived by greedy merchants working together with greedy religious leaders to fill their coffers with the money of pilgrims that came to see the fabricated relics. And most were built with money gathered by obscene religious taxations, making whole communities nearly starve, enforced by confiscation, the earthly threats of violence or the metaphysical ones of eternal damnation...

And the medieval stonemason guilds, with the skills necessary for construction, were not precisely the epitome of open source sharing of information or selfless humanitarian benefactors...

That kind of glorification of the gothic society has been disproved and belongs to the 19th century...





But I digress.

I think the most important point brought up in the article: What, after all this time, is the purpose of mass-schooling supposed to be?

And by extension... the purpose of a nation, of a society?

(Basically, what Dissident said)

Humanity needs goals, but seems to have none. We're just a global consumerist society with no purpose, working incessantly only to maintain the status quo for the rich...

Of course these things must come from bottom - up, not the other way around. The only compulsory education I would accept would be literacy and basic logic. Once you can read, write and think straight enough, the rest is voluntary. The people that have personal goals, those that have an interest in particular subjects (and we all do) will seek them out. People will become more self sufficient, and happy because they are learning about stuff that they actually care about...




But nevermind what I say, I'm an INTP with no authority on healthy relationships...

 

[loveofreason]

You've said pretty much everything I would say, and been braver in your ranting too. I've resisted starting a thread about how I despise the toxic family unit on which society is based - the fact that it is the pattern keeping humanity from it's greatest potential... 'family' equates to 'prison cell' in my mind... to captivity... to death.

Perhaps it's time that thread was started...

 

[Ermine]

While family can be the worst thing that can happen to you, it could also be the best. While a bad family can mold who you are for the worst, this is half of the story. I have a good family and they have helped me for the better.

 

[loveofreason]

I think you're fortunate to be able to say that, because I suspect for the majority it is not the case. And even if we grow up OK on the outside and help keep the wheels of society turning... is it necessarily a good thing?

How much greater could humanity be?

 

[Ermine]

what do you propose instead?

 

[loveofreason]

I wish I had the answers!

All I have is a deep sense that what we have now needs to change - I see the same toxic pattern based on emotional possession - slavery where ever I look from individuals to the total human zeitgeist, and it comes down to an inability to perceive and respect boundaries. A lack of self-possession that is taught in the dangerous bubble of attenuated familial bonds and unnatural stresses.

Where individuals are robbed of their natural sense of self-possession they look outside themselves to make up the void, leading to a kind of territory-taking from others, a warfare for resources in the futile attempt to become complete.

This pattern needs to be replaced, and replaced right from the beginning when our self-hood is formed. It leads back to conception choices, to nurturing pregnancy, to birth, to bonding and rearing... and so on.

I take the meaning of "It takes a tribe to raise a child" to be true, and as a starting point in looking for answers. Likewise I take seriously the biological boundaries of our monkey sphere too.

The nuclear unit isolates one man and one woman in the sea of consumerist culture where the gods are brand names, the allegiances are sporting teams, and the monkey sphere of social connection is populated with celebrity idols.

The genuine must be reinstated over the ersatz, so our hungers can feed rather than flummox and destroy us.

 

[Kuu]

Well it could be along the lines of...
Smallish communes working through direct democracy, where children are free to run about, and just be curious, learning about life by living it, every adult being responsable for any of them.

And after a certain age they can leave the commune if they so desire, roam around seeking for another commune that might fit them better. All around there would be places such as an old style traveler's Inn, like those in India, but all required to provide free lodging and food for the young and old, and thus always having a place to eat and sleep and be with people, but not necessarily being dependent on a particular one. This way they can wander a city safely with no stress over the more basic human necessities, being free to learn and experiment and be individuals at the same time as being part of the community.

In this search for identity and purpose, when a particular thing or place takes a child's interest, then they can enroll in open, community run schools of their own liking, where attendance is not mandatory but voluntary, and they are encouraged by tutors to try various subjects until they find those they are interested in, and then learn by apprenticeship, with real world goals, people and experiences instead of years of distanced theories in prison-schools.

Ultimately, they can become full and productive members of society, with personal goals and free to associate with people of any age and procedence.

Basically, letting children be independent individuals since very very young, but with the safety net of a large and diverse community instead of a couple adults.

Of course this requires both a slowing down of the insane pace of society and industry, as well as a reduction of the overall population. We really need both of these things now, on a global scale.


Utopian, isn't it I know, never in my lifetime...

Edit: ehh. Or not. I don't have any idea on how things should be. Maybe its just that the grass is always greener on the other side, we're condemned to greed, a part of the human condition...

 

[severus]

That world sounds quite lovely, Tekton. And even if there are problems with it that I have missed, it can't be worse than what we have now.

I also don't like how it assumes that all people who participate in public schooling will have the same outcome. We are not robots that can't help our programming

Appart from that bit, I agreed with the article. Though perhaps some other types would fall victim to the school more easily. At any rate, the school at least makes it harder to be yourself.

 

[loveofreason]

Get small, get real, get connected and get out of the way. Let process unfold.

Unless it is a spontaneous movement it won't succeed.

Utopian, isn't it I know, never in my lifetime...

We need a place here for closet Utopian dreamers to plan a better world... shhhh... don't tell anyone.

 

[Da Blob]

I wish I had the answers!

All I have is a deep sense that what we have now needs to change - I see the same toxic pattern based on emotional possession - slavery where ever I look from individuals to the total human zeitgeist, and it comes down to an inability to perceive and respect boundaries. A lack of self-possession that is taught in the dangerous bubble of attenuated familial bonds and unnatural stresses.

Where individuals are robbed of their natural sense of self-possession they look outside themselves to make up the void, leading to a kind of territory-taking from others, a warfare for resources in the futile attempt to become complete.

This pattern needs to be replaced, and replaced right from the beginning when our self-hood is formed. It leads back to conception choices, to nurturing pregnancy, to birth, to bonding and rearing... and so on.

I take the meaning of "It takes a tribe to raise a child" to be true, and as a starting point in looking for answers. Likewise I take seriously the biological boundaries of our monkey sphere too.

The nuclear unit isolates one man and one woman in the sea of consumerist culture where the gods are brand names, the allegiances are sporting teams, and the monkey sphere of social connection is populated with celebrity idols.

The genuine must be reinstated over the ersatz, so our hungers can feed rather than flummox and destroy us.

"Self Respect is the fruit of Discipline, it is a Dignity that grows with the Ability to say 'NO!" to one's Self" -Hershal

"Free Men Govern Themselves"

"The definition of a person's Identity is found in that which is called 'Mine'. - William James


I ran an effective rehab. program based upon the single concept of allowing my clients to form a "Human" Identity to replace the one society had provided them...

 

[loveofreason]

Your knowledge then is very needed and vital to creating healthy communities from the mess that we have.

I don't have the knowledge of what is needed to repair every human, I just see the need.

Have you thought of involving yourself in establishing an intentional community or the like?

 

[Da Blob]

Your knowledge then is very needed and vital to creating healthy communities from the mess that we have.

I don't have the knowledge of what is needed to repair every human, I just see the need.

Have you thought of involving yourself in establishing an intentional community or the like?

Yes, but that is where being an INTP becomes a handicap. The HR class where I took the Myers-Briggs for the first time, went on to talk about MBTI types working in a group or team context. I think I could be a part of a Groupmind/team that could do such a thing. but I do not believe I could do it alone - it would take a very good team with a wide range of abilities to create this community.

I was basically allowed to experiment with a group of convicts for 18 months and it only took me six months of experimentation before I came up with a very good program based on Developmental Psychology and some Introductory Philosophy. I modified their Faith, which gave me access to manipulate their Belief systems, which led to an adjustment of Attitudes, which colored Perceptions, which led to viewing change as opportunity and not threat, which opened their minds to Thinking differently and finally becoming more pro-social in their Actions.
I actually made some friends in that process... There are clients of mine that have a very high opinion of me - unfortunately, they are locked up and most likely will be for quite a while...(!)

Not scapegoating my INTPness, but I have no idea what to do next... However, a true therapeutic community (village) would be a very nice place to be...

 

[Ermine]

Well it could be along the lines of...
Smallish communes working through direct democracy, where children are free to run about, and just be curious, learning about life by living it, every adult being responsable for any of them.

And after a certain age they can leave the commune if they so desire, roam around seeking for another commune that might fit them better. All around there would be places such as an old style traveler's Inn, like those in India, but all required to provide free lodging and food for the young and old, and thus always having a place to eat and sleep and be with people, but not necessarily being dependent on a particular one. This way they can wander a city safely with no stress over the more basic human necessities, being free to learn and experiment and be individuals at the same time as being part of the community.

In this search for identity and purpose, when a particular thing or place takes a child's interest, then they can enroll in open, community run schools of their own liking, where attendance is not mandatory but voluntary, and they are encouraged by tutors to try various subjects until they find those they are interested in, and then learn by apprenticeship, with real world goals, people and experiences instead of years of distanced theories in prison-schools.

Ultimately, they can become full and productive members of society, with personal goals and free to associate with people of any age and procedence.

Basically, letting children be independent individuals since very very young, but with the safety net of a large and diverse community instead of a couple adults.

Of course this requires both a slowing down of the insane pace of society and industry, as well as a reduction of the overall population. We really need both of these things now, on a global scale.


Utopian, isn't it I know, never in my lifetime...

Edit: ehh. Or not. I don't have any idea on how things should be. Maybe its just that the grass is always greener on the other side, we're condemned to greed, a part of the human condition...

I really like your idea. Sounds like I place I'd like to live in. But how can this be achieved if parents have an incredible attachment to their children by birth as opposed to other children? They'd only want to take care of their biological children and not anyone else.

 

[severus]

Ah, that's just custom. Give it a few generations... Maybe let them keep the childrem when they are very young. Children get bothersome, parents are more willing to give them up.
!
Or else become even more attached to them.
Perhaps they could start with a small group take the children right after birth and tell the parents they had died.
Wait--what is this accomplishing? I've lost myself.

Well regardless, even if you got parents to loosen their hold on their offspring, and this became normal, there would be a revolt eventually. Some parents would be afraid for their children, unwilling to take the next step and set them free. They would be celebrated for the overthrowing of this "horrid, unnatural system which we have all been caught in." I can see it now.

 

[loveofreason]

Ahh, only if it is taken to extremes.

Like the case of a certain INTJ that believes children should be raised in a temperature controlled rubber box with a drain...

It's not a matter of giving up responsibility, it's a matter of allowing natural confidence to emerge in adults and children in the context of small groups. Easier said than done, I know

 

[Duty]

You guys sure are idealists. *Looks around to make sure no one is suspecting him of the same*

With the communication breakthrough of the 20th century, society is becoming more and more "mass." The popular high schooler in years past may have had 30 or so friends and that was considered really preppy and popular. Now they have myspace profiles with 900 friends. The local newspaper was probably the only way of getting information about significant happenings in the world in 1908, but now you can find out from the internet, TV, local or national newspapers, and a host of other communication sources in 2008.

Small communes that children are born into seems to not solve the problem, no matter how cozy and neighborly they may be. Being born into a community means that the people in that may have absolutely nothing to offer you as far as growth and development (I'm living proof of that lol). The family unit is just a form of micro commune, so I lump it here.

What is needed are communities for children. Subcultures and subsocieties have become a phenomnon that has shown up in strength only after the birth of this communication age. What we need to do is capitalize on the subculture phenomenon, by identifying the strengths and weaknesses of children and fitting them into learning subjects that are likely to be of interest to them, as well as being with students of a like mind. As much as I feel sorry for the INTP (being one myself!) for being forced to learn subjects that neither interest him/her nor are relevent to personal growth, I also feel sorry for the ESFP that has to learn higher math, or the ESTJ that has doors closed on them because they don't have the mindset to complete traditional college.

Communes and the family unit just don't cater to the development of people that aren't of the predominant societal mindset (US society being ESTJ, but all the SJs and ESs seem to do fine). Public schools don't cater well to anything but a certain mindset as well (Ps having the most trouble with the whole homework system that's been instituted). Higher education caters to xNxJs more then anything. You get the picture...the institutions we have are just too rigid and set up for a particular mindset...anything outside that mindset is just told to get lost or is somehow defective and deviant. Being thrown into a perfect mix of the other types just doesn't seem to be a good idea...but that's what has happened. An INTP should not be thrown into a school of SJs and ESPs being dominant...it's not a good idea, especially when he's been raised by ISTJs.


So subcultures should be capitalized on imo. Like minded individuals put together with other like minded individuals. People grow when they can be with others of a like mind and share similar experiences and ways of coping.

 

[Da Blob]

Speaking of young people
does anyone have any idea of how many impressionable youngsters are in this community?

 

[Dissident]

What we need to do is capitalize on the subculture phenomenon, by identifying the strengths and weaknesses of children and fitting them into learning subjects that are likely to be of interest to them, as well as being with students of a like mind.

Isnt that taking the current system a step further? I think that part of the problem is precisely kids having little contact with adults and different points of view, slowing their development. Everyone has things to learn from other types and from people of different ages. Instead of making masses disappear you'd be creating several different but even more homogeneous masses, with even narrower points of view.

I think that something radically new has to be done, where yes, subjects and study methodology should be adapted to the individual, but not preventing them of having precious contact with the real world, its problems and inhabitants.

 

[Agent Intellect]

Speaking of young people
does anyone have any idea of how many impressionable youngsters are in this community?

their are youngsters, but i would hardly call them impressionable.

 

[severus]

Hm yes, grouping children by type would be too comfortable for them.

We must interact with different types and ages and cultures to learn, and we must learn in order to grow as people.

I think that up to a point (highschool?) everyone should be learning the same things, setting the foundation. Before that you don't know what you are doing or where you are going. High school should have more freedom and more advice.

The freedom it has now is bound by a hundred and one different requirements for graduation that make it almost impossible to fit in electives. Limited electives results in limited experience and knowledge. (Maybe I would like x, but I had to drop it for y.)

I wish we could have private highschools that were affordable to all. Solely merit-based. The idiots in my school, you wouldn't believe it. But then of course you have the problems with that too. What if I'm amazing at math, but I suck horribly at English?

I give up.

 

[Duty]

Isnt that taking the current system a step further? I think that part of the problem is precisely kids having little contact with adults and different points of view, slowing their development. Everyone has things to learn from other types and from people of different ages. Instead of making masses disappear you'd be creating several different but even more homogeneous masses, with even narrower points of view.

I think that something radically new has to be done, where yes, subjects and study methodology should be adapted to the individual, but not preventing them of having precious contact with the real world, its problems and inhabitants.

I guess I fail to see how making an ESTJ learn about Shakespearean literature or an ESFP learn higher math really benefits anyone.

I think the biggest problem is people not feeling a sense of belonging and importance. Maybe this is just my personal experience, but I never ever fit in at any school I've been to (including college), and I've met only 1 person ever who gave a crap about me...or even respected me for my own talents. There's nothing worse then having kids that are forced into situations that they have no support, or they're wasting time by "learning" a subject that is worthless to them.


For one, they need to teach a whole lot less literature and probably less math or physical science in schools, to replace it with cultural studies and social sciences. Chemistry was a required class at my high school (why? great as an elective for those interested...but why required?), but my high school didn't even have world history or psychology as an elective. Kids do need to learn to get along with everyone...but that should be done through education itself more then direct social interaction (it's direct social interaction that causes stereotypes and feuds...people hear that such and such group does X and that's bad, then they see them doing Xy and assume they're doing X and they're bad). We need to educate kids on different social customs, religious beliefs, and different types, etc. Then they can be put into the world with knowledge that different people just have a different way of things, not that they're bad or evil.

Problem is overly conservative parents. No offense to religious people, but the ultra religious parents think it's wrong to have their kid learn about other cultures and religions for fear that it might corrupt them or whatever. It's this behavior that must not be tolerated...kids need to learn, not be indoctrinated.



No, I think kids should be educated on different groups BEFORE they interact with them. They're more likely to have an open mind and not just believe the crap that they're told by their peers.

 

[Dissident]

I guess I fail to see how making an ESTJ learn about Shakespearean literature or an ESFP learn higher math really benefits anyone.

Again:

subjects and study methodology should be adapted to the individual, but not preventing them of having precious contact with the real world, its problems and inhabitants.

Kids do need to learn to get along with everyone...but that should be done through education itself more then direct social interaction (it's direct social interaction that causes stereotypes and feuds...people hear that such and such group does X and that's bad, then they see them doing Xy and assume they're doing X and they're bad).

On the contrary, you just need to teach them how to think straight, how to abide to evidence and critical thinking, not common sense, not rumors. Then when someone tells them that such group does X they will respond "I dont know about that, we'll see" and when they see them doing Xy they will realize that it was wrong. You dont need to tell them how things "really are" you just need to help them develop a clear mind so they can see and undestand the facts by themselves.

 

[Ermine]

In order to surmount all those obstacles, I'd propose that each group of 5-10 people has a personal tutor that understands the group personality dynamics and knows how to relay the subject matter to them effectively.

 

[Duty]

On the contrary, you just need to teach them how to think straight, how to abide to evidence and critical thinking, not common sense, not rumors. Then when someone tells them that such group does X they will respond "I dont know about that, we'll see" and when they see them doing Xy they will realize that it was wrong. You dont need to tell them how things "really are" you just need to help them develop a clear mind so they can see and undestand the facts by themselves.

I think we're agreeing more then disagreeing here. I certainly advocate, and you seem to too, that social sciences are not taught enough in schools today, and that children are too indoctrinated by parents and peers to be bigoted, assumptive, and use "common sense."

Ok, rant about common sense. I hate the phrase, as most INTPs probably do. It's a completely vague and undefined set of values that often contradict each other, and the whole notion has nothing to do with reality. The term seems to stem from parents that can't justify to their children why they shouldn't or should do something. "Why don't I hit other children mom?" "Because it's common sense!" Parents seem to think they have a monopoly on moral knowledge when dealing with their children, when they don't even have any grounds whatsoever for believing what they do, and don't even have a coherent set of beliefs in the first place (it's ok for mommy to hit you, but not ok for you to hit other children...WTF!)...UGH, it's ludicrous.

I just don't see implementation, short of forcing parents to stop indoctrinating their children with this non-sense (an obvious breech of rights, and a scary one as now whoever is taking those children away can indoctrinate however they see fit).

 

[dbtng_thomas]

It's interesting that we perceive social science education as lacking, when we have so many young folks join us here. They are being introduced to MB somewhere. I scanned a couple pages of the new arrivals posts, and it looks like most of the young folks either learned about Myers Briggs from a friend or encountered it in the first year of college in Psych 101.

I have some very specific ideas how social science education should be changed. Children should be taught active social mechanics. They should learn how to recognize the signs of incipient violence and techniques for avoiding it. We should teach our children the art of negotiation. If we taught our children that people aren't logical and have hidden motives and needs which must be teased out and satisfied, they would grow into more effective adults. Our children should learn what is going on in the mind of a bully. Kids should understand the dynamic of a Mexican standoff. Etc.

I don't have any grand plan for teaching such a revolutionary course of study. I see it as a mix of theory and practice. As a child, I always hated any sort of role playing exercises, but they would be critical for this subject. I know I would have absolutely hated studying all of these things, but learning them would have made significant difference to my self-imposed exile. I think they would have similar impact on all children, and help them grow up gracefully.

 

[Da Blob]

It's interesting that we perceive social science education as lacking, when we have so many young folks join us here. They are being introduced to MB somewhere. I scanned a couple pages of the new arrivals posts, and it looks like most of the young folks either learned about Myers Briggs from a friend or encountered it in the first year of college in Psych 101.

I have some very specific ideas how social science education should be changed. Children should be taught active social mechanics. They should learn how to recognize the signs of incipient violence and techniques for avoiding it. We should teach our children the art of negotiation. If we taught our children that people aren't logical and have hidden motives and needs which must be teased out and satisfied, they would grow into more effective adults. Our children should learn what is going on in the mind of a bully. Kids should understand the dynamic of a Mexican standoff. Etc.

I don't have any grand plan for teaching such a revolutionary course of study. I see it as a mix of theory and practice. As a child, I always hated any sort of role playing exercises, but they would be critical for this subject. I know I would have absolutely hated studying all of these things, but learning them would have made significant difference to my self-imposed exile. I think they would have similar impact on all children, and help them grow up gracefully.

Amen!

However, the suggestions you make are pretty much covered a "Good' introductory Human Relations(hips) class, which is not a course offered in very many schools(?)

 

[Ex-User (5841)]

Necro # 3/3 for the day.