Bob wrote:
> Public schools are socialistic, very static, boring.
Interesting to apply the label of socialism to schools! I never considered
that before.
Any system that represses individuals is subject to violent outbursts, as at
Columbine, or other forms of protest. Problem customers in retail businesses
come to mind as a lesser example.
> They also don't teach any values.... Can you imagine
> a public school teaching the MoQ? Private schools could.
"Values" as in value system, i.e. morals? I wouldn't want any school to
teach my son values. Pirsig called school indoctrination and I heartily
agree. Indoctrinating values is promulgating dogma, isn't it? Whether the
dogma is Christian morality and the Golden Rule, Satanism or the MoQ, I don't
want any school taking dogma and indoctrinating students with it. I think
public school should be mainly for learning about math, history, science and
literature; leave the values to us, as parents.
Then again, my favorite class in high school was Humanities. The debate
between students on the relative merits of this or that value system was
electric. Perhaps my experience is rare; but then, I wonder, those in my
class who did not participate much in the discussions, did they perceive it
the same way? I doubt it. Point is, the teacher never came forward and
said, "But this value system is the correct one." She had values, and one of
them was respect for the individual students' differing beliefs and their
ability to distinguish Quality.
BTW, I mentioned I was not close with my parents during high school. But
they taught me right and wrong; they were not failures. I remember the Bible
says, "Honor thy father and mother." It didn't say anything about liking
them, just honoring them. I honor my father for teaching me his values; it's
up to me to carry on and develop my own values. It's certainly not the
responsibility of public school. (Yes, I like my dad.)
Private schools are another matter; families will send children to them
because they want to, because they teach values the parents subscribe to,
because they have a particular excellence in instruction, whatever. Nowadays
parents may even use private schools for fear of their children's lives,
given the violent nature of some public schools today. That is a problem
that requires addressing, but I don't believe it is due to the "failure" of
public schools to teach values. It is the fault of certain parents who
failed to teach right and wrong; it is the fault of society for allowing and
perhaps even encouraging excess and inappropriate violence; but primarily, it
is the fault of the violent students who choose to act as they do.
> Private schools are almost inherently "religious."
> Values. Sure, you'd [have] some nutcase schools,
> like the Nation of Islam, but at least the students
> wouldn't be raping and robbing and killing.
Nice. Is anyone here a black Muslim? <g> (Probably not; we're probably
mostly white American males.)
Private schools are less susceptible to violence for at least two reasons:
one, they screen the students to determine who they will teach; two, they
generally have better security than do public schools. Nonetheless, private
schools have had violent incidents as well. However, being private, I should
think their damage control is better.
> Government is slow and stupid. If something doesn't
> work it gets more money and gets bigger. Like the public schools.
With all the examples I can think of, that statement is hard to refute. How
would you propose changing that?
> The free market is fast and smart. If something doesn't
> work [it] disappears.
Hmmm. Many people I know have never heard of Robert Pirsig or his books.
Yet I believe his words have a lot of value.
One problem I have with your characterization of the free market is that
Jerry Springer and Rush Limbaugh are very popular. Are the products they
offer valuable?
> I've always thought a good idea is for schools
> to have student courts, for violations of student
> law (like bullying or making fun of somebody.)
> Who would be the judges?
Interesting idea. I think the judges would end up being the heads of
whatever clique was best organized (think of student councils)... unless
judges were chosen by random lot.
> I believe the MoQ supports a small, mostly Static
> government, with a huge, competing, Dynamic free market.
I think I agree with you Bob. Isn't that what we have?
Of course, mechanisms exist to change government, but it's still mostly
static. And regulations exist to curb abuse in the free market, but it's
still mostly dynamic. As Pirsig said (paraphrasing), "What people value can
never be contained in any formula."
> Public schools have pretty much destroyed private ones.
I don't think that is correct. Private schools have grown extraordinarily in
the past decade. I live in a town with more private schools than public
(three different parochial school systems and three secular private).
Good discussion, I think. I look forward to all comments.
-Scott
MOQ Online Homepage - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Unsubscribe - http://www.moq.org/md/index.html
MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
