Split Thread Does compulsory schooling equate to slavery? (Split from: "Liberal Fallacies" thread)

[Mister Earl]

Compulsory unpaid labor is slavery (definition). Compulsory school attendance is (a) compulsory and (b) labor.

It isn't labor. You're being provided a service at no cost to you. That you are incapable of understanding this further enforces the assertion that education is important.

#EDIT: Are you trying to say that homeschooling is better than a regulated state education system? I certainly hope not!

 

[RandFan]

Correct.False on two counts: (1) Many children lose, relative to what they would have received in an uncoerced environment

So, parochial schools are out.

(2) those students who get something of value from a school often earn the transcripts they receive.

Yes and? That's the whole point. Children don't want to study. Math and formal logic are hard. They would rather post on facebook. It the responsibility of adults to ensure that children engage in activities that they don't want to engage in. Children don't want to clean their rooms or wash dishes but these habits are important to their well being so we coerce them into doing these things in the hopes that they will be autonomous when they are adults. Everyone who attends school of any kind will get valuable life lessons, both intellectually and socially. Attending state run school I learned math, history, English, reading, writing, woodworking, metal shop, and skills I use to this very day. The first computer program I ever wrote was in High School. Had there been no state compulsory school my father would have likely just have kept me working on the farm all day. You've yet to tell me how I would have gained such critically important education without state run schools. I won't hold my breath.

• I do not claim that there are no problems associated with state run schools.
• I do not object to additional private options.
• I do not object to bettering public schools.

 

[TjW]

Compulsory unpaid labor is slavery (definition). Compulsory school attendance is (a) compulsory and (b) labor.

Under this definition, most children are slaves whether they go to school or not, since most children are compelled by their parents to do unpaid labor.

It's not a very useful definition, since it fails to differentiate normal home life from slavery.

 

[Mister Earl]

I just want to say something. I do not mean this to have any specific bearing whatsoever on the OP, as I do not know him, and do not intend on pretending to.

I just want to note that primary argument method of this thread reminds me of that kind of argument I'd expect from an early teenager. You know what I mean... great embellishment, silly comparisons, that sort of thing. Like a tween who is forced to wait another ten minutes for a meal to be finished being cooked, and they try to convince you that they'll suddenly die from starvation if it isn't done in two minutes instead. They're not lying about how they feel, they just think that more embellishment means it adds more weight to the argument. And when you don't agree with them, they try repitition instead, to the point of beating the subject to death, if need be, in the hope that you tire of it and give up.

 

[RandFan]

I just want to say something. I do not mean this to have any specific bearing whatsoever on the OP, as I do not know him, and do not intend on pretending to.

I just want to note that primary argument method of this thread reminds me of that kind of argument I'd expect from an early teenager. You know what I mean... great embellishment, silly comparisons, that sort of thing. Like a tween who is forced to wait another ten minutes for a meal to be finished being cooked, and they try to convince you that they'll suddenly die from starvation if it isn't done in two minutes instead. They're not lying about how they feel, they just think that more embellishment means it adds more weight to the argument. And when you don't agree with them, they try repitition instead, to the point of beating the subject to death, if need be, in the hope that you tire of it and give up.

And slipping and sliding. In favor of parochial schools on one hand and against coercion from strangers on another.

Special pleading, moving goals posts, ad hoc rationalization every time he is painted into a corner.

MK: Unpaid coerced labor is slavery.
RF: This is what parents do.
MK: Parents are a special circumstance.

MK: Coerced education from strangers is slavery.
RF: This is what parochial schools do.

I'm guessing that parochial schools are special circumstances. Ad hoc rationalization.

Timmy: Mommy I want a Popsicle like Bobby has.
Mom: I gave you each a Popsicle. You ate yours before Bobby could finish his.
Timmy: But I'm older and need more.

There is nothing cogent I can find in Malcolm's arguments. They appear to change to suit his bias. He attacks the notion of school and copies and pastes claims that children would be better out of school than in. When it's pointed out that school is critical to becoming gainfully employed he dodges and points out that there are other ways to get an education besides state run school. At one point he supports parochial schools and then attacks the idea of coercing children to be taught by strangers. Which is precisely what sending children to parochial schools is doing. School, he argues, is slavery because it's unpaid labor. It's the very same unpaid labor as parochial schools or home schooling. He then says that in those instances parents reward their children with love. I point out that most parents take an interest in their children when the children go to state run school and reward them with love also. He doesn't explain how poor children would be educated if we accepted his thesis.

I've said numerous times that his arguments are incoherent for the very simple fact that they are. It's all made up ad hoc to rescue his thesis. The problem is that making stuff up as you go along has the unintended consequence of not being cogent or coherent.

After all of this time the only thing I'm certain of is that Malcolm doesn't like state run schools. I could not confidently tell you anything else about his position because it is so contrary and convoluted.

 

[Mister Earl]

Well, you know what they say, RandFan.

"The world needs ditch-diggers, too."

 

[RandFan]

Well, you know what they say, RandFan.

"The world needs ditch-diggers, too."

EXACTLY!

What's sad is that when make it harder for an entire group of people to be educated you reduce your talent pool by that much. We will never know how much talent was lost because of slavery, segregation, subjugation of women and poverty.

Had Newton or Einstein been born slaves we would not likely even know their names. I'm sure both would have made fine ditch diggers though.

 

[A'isha]

Today, on her sixteenth birthday, Malala Yousafzai, shot in the head by the Taliban because she had the temerity to be a girl who not just wanted an education for herself, but who also spoke out for the right of all children to receive an education, gave a speech in front of the UN. "We call upon all governments to ensure free, compulsory education -- all around the world for every child," she said in her speech.

She is not arguing for the enslavement of children. She is putting her own life on the line to fight for freedom for children.

 

[Malcolm Kirkpatrick]

Unaddressed propositions.

I've addressed most of these in this thread already.

• The act of reading a math book is the same from the perspective of a child, regardless of whether he or she is attending state run school or parochial school.¹
• The purpose and functional result of parochial school and state run school are the same. Both allow a child to be autonomous and to persue happiness. Poor people who are not educated are not likely to get good jobs and enjoy the fruits of capitalism.²
• Attending school, public, parochial, state run, etc., are critical to autonomy and being gainfully employed.³
• Humans are born incapable of autonomy without education. In a modern society this requires a formal education. It is demonstrable that the best outcomes for society and individuals is to have an educated society.⁴
• Lack of state run schools harms poor people the most. Absent state run schools, children in poverty are far more likely to remain in poverty.⁵

These premises have been made over and over only to be willfully ignored over and over.⁶ These premises are fundamental and cannot simply be hand waved away or ignored by any intellectually honest person. They must be addressed. That they have been ignored for so long is quite telling.⁷

1. Whether children will get appropriate instruction depends, in part, on the incentives that institutions present to students, parents, real classroom teachers, and others. These incentives vary systematically between institutional structures. Across industries, State-monopoly enterprises deliver wretched goods and services at high per-unit cost.
2. The "purpose" of an institution is a composite of the purposes of the people in that institution. The NEA/AFT/AFSCME cartel offers padded construction contracts and plush do-nothing consulting contracts to well-connected insiders.
3. Flat false. Homeschoolers systematically outperform conventionally schooled children.
4. NOT(education = attendance at school).
5. False. Political control of school harms most the children of the least politically adept parents. Please read James Tooley, The Beautiful Tree.
6. All of these rebuttals appeared already.
7. That Randfan contends these points have met no response is telling.

 

[RandFan]

I've addressed most of these in this thread already.1. Whether children will get appropriate instruction depends, in part, on the incentives that institutions present to students, parents, real classroom teachers, and others. These incentives vary systematically between institutional structures. Across industries, State-monopoly enterprises deliver wretched goods and services at high per-unit cost.
2. The "purpose" of an institution is a composite of the purposes of the people in that institution. The NEA/AFT/AFSCME cartel offers padded construction contracts and plush do-nothing consulting contracts to well-connected insiders.
3. Flat false. Homeschoolers systematically outperform conventionally schooled children.
4. NOT(education = attendance at school).
5. False. Political control of school harms most the children of the least politically adept parents. Please read James Tooley, The Beautiful Tree.
6. All of these rebuttals appeared already.
7. That Randfan contends these points have met no response is telling.

1. Even if I grant you your premise it doesn't change the truth statement of my proposition.
2. Rhetorical.
3. Non-sequitur.
4. Again, doesn't address my proposition.
5. This isn't an argument. It's an assertion and an appeal to a book.
6. Rhetorical.
7. Rhetorical.

 

[RandFan]

Still unaddressed:

Unaddressed propositions.

• The act of reading a math book is the same from the perspective of a child, regardless of whether he or she is attending state run school or parochial school.
• The purpose and functional result of parochial school and state run school are the same. Both allow a child to be autonomous and to persue happiness. Poor people who are not educated are not likely to get good jobs and enjoy the fruits of capitalism.
• Attending school, public, parochial, state run, etc., are critical to autonomy and being gainfully employed.
• Humans are born incapable of autonomy without education. In a modern society this requires a formal education. It is demonstrable that the best outcomes for society and individuals is to have an educated society.
• Lack of state run schools harms poor people the most. Absent state run schools, children in poverty are far more likely to remain in poverty.

These premises have been made over and over only to be willfully ignored over and over. These premises are fundamental and cannot simply be hand waved away or ignored by any intellectually honest person. They must be addressed. That they have been ignored for so long is quite telling.

Waiting.

 

[Malcolm Kirkpatrick]

Had Newton or Einstein been born slaves we would not likely even know their names. I'm sure both would have made fine ditch diggers though.

Newton never attended a government-operated school, pre-college. Britain did not subsidize pre-college schooling until the 19th century.

Here's Einstein on schooling:
Albert Einstein
"Force and Fear Have No Place in Education"

To me the worst thing seems to be for a school principally to work with methods of fear, force and artificial authority. Such treatment destroys the sound sentiments, the sincerity and self-confidence of the pupil. It produces the submissive subject. . . It is comparatively simple to keep the school free from this worst of all evils. Give into the power of the teacher the fewest possible coercive measures, so that the only source of the pupil's respect for the teacher is the human and intellectual qualities of the latter.

Albert Einstein
"Autobiographical Notes"
Albert Einstein: Philosopher-Scientist, Paul Schilpp, ed. (1951)

It is, in fact, nothing short of a miracle that the modern methods of instruction have not yet entirely strangled the holy curiosity of inquiry; for this delicate little plant, aside from stimulation, stands mainly in need of freedom; without this it goes to wreck and ruin without fail. It is a very grave mistake to think that the enjoyment of seeing and searching can be promoted by means of coercion and a sense of duty. To the contrary, I believe it would be possible to rob even a healthy beast of prey of its voraciousness, if it were possible, with the aid of a whip, to force the beast to devour continuously, even when not hungry, especially if the food, handed out under such coercion, were to be selected accordingly.

 

[RandFan]

Newton never attended a government-operated school, pre-college.

Entirely beside my point. I said if either had been slaves we would not have known their names. How is it you missed that?

It's in the best interest of society to give all of out talent an opportunity to use that talent. You've yet to explain how we accomplish that absent state run schools. You've yet to demonstrate that eliminated state run schools has resulted in better outcomes. ANTPogo has more than adequately dealt with your cherry picked appeals to authority but even if she had not you would still be off topic.

 

[bruto]

Entirely beside my point. I said if either had been slaves we would not have known their names. How is it you missed that?

It's in the best interest of society to give all of out talent an opportunity to use that talent. You've yet to explain how we accomplish that absent state run schools. You've yet to demonstrate that eliminated state run schools has resulted in better outcomes. ANTPogo has more than adequately dealt with your cherry picked appeals to authority but even if she had not you would still be off topic.

While I largely agree with you, and hate to sound even for a moment as if I'm on the other side of this silly argument, for the sake of historical accuracy, and especially for the sake of a favorite philosopher, I must point out that the great Stoic Epictetus spent much of his life as a slave, and we do know his name, as well as some of what he said.

 

[A'isha]

Newton never attended a government-operated school, pre-college. Britain did not subsidize pre-college schooling until the 19th century.

Yes, and as a result only the children of the well-off, like Newton, could get an education. How many Newtons did the world miss out on because they, unlike he, did not have families which could afford to send them to schools like this one?

 

[RandFan]

While I largely agree with you, and hate to sound even for a moment as if I'm on the other side of this silly argument, for the sake of historical accuracy, and especially for the sake of a favorite philosopher, I must point out that the great Stoic Epictetus spent much of his life as a slave, and we do know his name, as well as some of what he said.

Thank you. You are correct. I don't mind that at all. There were of course famous thinkers who were slaves or had been slaves even in more modern times (see below). Fredrick Douglas had been a slave. my claim isn't an absolute one. It's a probabilistic one. The likelihood of being born a slave and rising to prominence in America was very slim. One would have to think that slaves were genetically inferior to presume that those who didn't rise to prominence could not have risen to prominence had they been free.

Top 10 Famous Slaves

 

[Malcolm Kirkpatrick]

I'm guessing that parochial schools are special circumstances. Ad hoc rationalization.

No need to guess. I have addressed this issue repeatedly. The topic is ultimately what government activity in any sector has to contribute to society (split from "Liberal Fallacies", remember). In the case of the education industry, what effect the assumption of responsibility by government actors has on the education industry.
Contrary to Randfan's assertion, every point that Randfan raises above has been addressed. Again:
Compulsory, unpaid labor is slavery. This was not central. The issue is the effect of compulsion on incentives.
Attendance at school is compulsory (for many children).
Compulsion is a matter of degree.
Compensation is a matter of degree.
Every expansion of education options available to children and parents potentially reduces compulsion and enhances compensation, by allowing parents and students to better fit curricula and methods of instruction to individual children's interests and abilities. Expansion or contraction of the range of education options also has systematic effects on the incentives that institutions present to system insiders. We have been over this repeatedly.

There is nothing cogent I can find in Malcolm's arguments.

Naturally, given Randfan's problems with reading comprehension, amazing ability to forget or dismiss without consideration points that occurred in the argument short steps before, and wild misrepresentation of the argument.

He attacks the notion of school...

Nope. State policies that limit the range of options available to children and parents.

... and copies and pastes claims that children would be better out of school than in.

I cite professional literature, against Randfan's "no evidence" claims.

When it's pointed out that school is critical to becoming gainfully employed he dodges and points out that there are other ways to get an education besides state run school.

How is this a dodge?

At one point he supports parochial schools and then attacks the idea of coercing children to be taught by strangers. Which is precisely what sending children to parochial schools is doing. School, he argues, is slavery because it's unpaid labor. It's the very same unpaid labor as parochial schools or home schooling. He then says that in those instances parents reward their children with love. I point out that most parents take an interest in their children when the children go to state run school and reward them with love also. He doesn't explain how poor children would be educated if we accepted his thesis.

I have addressed all of this. Randfan attacks a fantastic strawman he calls "Malcolm Kirkpatrick", not the arguments I actually make..

I've said numerous times that his arguments are incoherent for the very simple fact that they are...

If one ignores or misrepresents all the connecting dots.

Randfan's argument is all made up ad hoc to rescue his thesis. The problem is that making stuff up as you go along has the unintended consequence of not being cogent or coherent.

After all of this time the only thing I'm certain of is that Malcolm doesn't like state run schools. I could not confidently tell you anything else about his position because it is so contrary and convoluted.

After all of this time the only thing I'm certain of is that Randfan worships government and will wildly misrepresent arguments against State provision of goods and services where opponents see no need for compulsory processes.

I could not confidently tell you anything else about his position because it is so contrary and convoluted.[/QUOTE]

 

[RandFan]

Compulsory, unpaid labor is slavery.

The act of reading a math book and doing homework is the same whether it is compelled by parents or compelled by the state. Children are compensated in that they receive an education vital to their survival. Your definition is absurd. The ramblings of Walter Williams is simply propaganda. I reject your definition as being so broad as to make all children slaves to their parents.

Special pleading in 3, 2, 1....

 

[Mister Earl]

Saying his definition is absurd is being woefully polite. My adjective would be far more... hrm... colorful?

 

[Malcolm Kirkpatrick]

The act of reading a math book and doing homework is the same whether it is compelled by parents or compelled by the state.

Which books children read and whether or not the child will read the book are NOT invariant under differences in the legal environment in which education institutions operate.

Children are compensated in that they receive an education vital to their survival.¹ Your definition is absurd. The ramblings of Walter Williams is simply propaganda. I reject your definition as being so broad as to make all children slaves to their parents.

Some children are compensated. Some are abused and/or neglected in the NEA/AFT/AFSCME cartel's schools. Some parents will neglect and/or abuse children. Different legal environments will have different effects on overall system performance. Inevitably, for each child, somebody or some body will decide how that child spends the time between birth and age 18. Policies which give to individual parents the power to determine for their own children the choice of curriculum and the pace and method of instruction put control in the hands of people who are most reliably concerned for children's well-being and who have closest knowledge of each individual child's interests and aptitudes.
2. Compulsory, unpaid labor is slavery (definition, after Williams). Compulsion and compensation are matters of degree. Slavery relates to our school policy discussion through the impact of compulsion on motivation. Compulsion kills motivation (as Einstein observed).

Special pleading in 3, 2, 1....

Ad hominem and/or wild misrepresentation of the argument in 3,2,1 ...