Mailvox: what is education

JohnR writes: I would like to make a suggestion for a posting topic. WHAT IS EDUCATION? I think many times WB, Jamsco, RC and the rest of us are talking past one another. Maybe if we tried to define our terms the discussion may be more fruitful. If the purpose of education is to get a good job then it is mere training. If it is to live a good and moral life and make the the best possible choices then perhaps it is education.

Education, in the educrat’s view, is the subsumption of the individual. In other words, the socialization of the individual to extinguish his individuality and transfer his identification to the collective. This is why even the most intelligent and fiery personalities who have passed through the system tend to be individuals who readily and unquestioningly accept the word of any authority accepted as such by the masses.

After 12 years of this subsumption they may be okay, on the whole, but they are nevertheless intellectually maimed and it will take them years to recover their ability to think critically, if they ever do. Being classroom-educated myself, I still find it necessary to consciously resist the urge to unthinkingly accept information that I am given by an “authority”. It is far more important for the public school child to learn how to stand in line, refrain from asking questions and do as he is told than for him to learn how to think critically; it should surprise no one that public school children are far better at the former than the latter.

My definition of education, on the other hand, is preparing a child for adulthood by giving them the tools and knowledge that will allow them to develop the fullness of their intellectual ability. Public school can, and does, accomplish the educratic definition. It doesn’t even begin to come anywhere close to accomplishing mine, nor can it ever do so.