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

[RandFan]

The moderator had a volume of statements from which to choose.

Your claim that education was slavery was the statement that led to a sub thread about whether or not education was slavery.

What's ironic is that you could have corrected yourself and ended this from the start. You are the one that decided to double down on the claim. Now you demur about being associated with the thread title all the while defending it.

And you don't seem to understand how that appears.

 

[Border Reiver]

I don't care. Cartel defenders have made an issue of it while ignoring the point: compulsion degrades motivation.

All forms of childhood education involve coercion.

 

[RandFan]

Again...This is how to conduct a neutral discussion.

Again, when an individual addresses another in the 3rd party and does so by attacking the individual "RandFan has a reading comprehension problem", that is very rude, very condescending and very patronizing.

Knowing that I don't like it you could just stop doing so in good faith. Again, attack my arguments and not me. Speak to me in a civil tone. 3rd party references sound like the teachers in junior high that sought to correct bad behavior by patronizing their students. That's not a civil tone. Frankly it's obnoxious. And I've already explained to you that I find argument via link a non-starter.

 

[RandFan]

I don't care. Cartel defenders have made an issue of it while ignoring the point: compulsion degrades motivation.

• Cartel defenders = ad hominem poisoning the well.
• You missed the point by a mile.
• Parents who home school their children do so by compulsion.
• Parents who send their children to parochial\private\independent schools do so by compulsion.
• Parents who have their children do chores do so by compulsion.
• People who go to work just to have food and a roof over their heads go to work by compulsion.
• Your definition is so vague as to be worthless.
• You complain about the thread title but you keep defending the thread title.

 

[A'isha]

I don't care. Cartel defenders have made an issue of it while ignoring the point: compulsion degrades motivation.

Children have to be coerced to go to private school and homeschools, too. Why is their motivation not degraded as well?

 

[Malcolm Kirkpatrick]

Children have to be coerced to go to private school and homeschools, too. Why is their motivation not degraded as well?

"Degraded" from what level? The State adds compulsion.

 

[jimbob]

Engrish, prease?

As an aside, that above quoted post could also be considered somewhat racist.

Sure, to someone who wants to shoehorn every observation of race-related difference into that category. "Native speaker of Japanese with limited spoken English fluency" is not a race (nor does the observation that Japanese speakers who are new to English have trouble with "l" imply anything about attitudes toward people whose chromosomes spent evolutionary time in Japan). In the USA today, "racist" just means "Caucasian who disagrees with a socialist".

How so? Because I don't agree with the defenders of the State-monopoly school system? Here's just the first page of this thread. I tried to make the case in abstract, against a constant downpour of innuendo and outright insults.
It's gone on like this for the entire discussion.Sure, to someone who wants to shoehorn every observation of race-related difference into that category. "Native speaker of Japanese with limited spoken English fluency" is not a race (nor does the observation that Japanese speakers who are new to English have trouble with "l" imply anything about attitudes toward people whose chromosomes spent evolutionary time in Japan). In the USA today, "racist" just means "Caucasian who disagrees with a socialist".

That is somewhat disingenuous. In practice, racism* does not solely consist of prejudice based on heritable traits, but also on cultural aspects, of which language is an obvious one.

I'd say the following is more accurate:
Sure, to someone who wants to shoehorn every observation of race-related difference insult based on characteristics held overwhelmingly by East Asians into that category.

It was also ironic, given that a mere six posts later you were complaining about a perceived air of "patronising faux superiority".


*Racist "theories" do, but that is a different matter.

 

[jimbob]

I don't even get his point? Is it a gotcha?

It was an attempt to get RandFan to moderate his pompous faux superiority.

Does that mean that your demand for a textbook definition of "anecdotal evidence" was just a derail? Or do you still not accept that stories about a handful of exceptional people* are not that useful?


*Most from the early 19th Century or earlier.

 

[RandFan]

"Degraded" from what level? The State adds compulsion.

What is this supposed to mean for the child?

Mom: Bobby, it's time to go to school.
Bobby: I don't want to go.
Mom: You have to go.
Bobby: Okay, well, at least the state isn't forcing me.

Being forced to go to school, parochial, independent, private, state run, whatever, there is no difference to the child. It's the study that kids don't like.

 

[A'isha]

"Degraded" from what level?

From whatever level it's degraded from for public school kids.

The State adds compulsion.

It's not agents of the State that makes children get up in the morning, get on the bus, and do their homework. It's parents.

How will this parental compulsion change when it comes to private schools and homeschooling, and why will that parental compulsion to attend private achools/homeschools and complete homework/coursework not degrade children's motivation the same way?

 

[Belz...]

All forms of childhood education life involve coercion.

Fixed that for you.

 

[Malcolm Kirkpatrick]

Being forced to go to school, parochial, independent, private, state run, whatever, there is no difference to the child. It's the study that kids don't like.

We disagree. To repeat: the arguments for parent control of education parallel the arguments for markets (the system of title and contract law). The system of title (State recognition of a right to control a resource that includes the authority to transfer the resource on terms mutually agreeable to the donor and recipient) and contract law unites local knowledge with the incentive to use resources in socially beneficial ways. Policies that give to parents the power to determine for their own children how those children will spend the time between birth and adulthood empower people who know individual children best and who are most reliably concerned for their welfare. Furthermore, policies that give to parents the power to determine for their own children how their children will spend the time between birth and adulthood create incentives for providers of education services that differ systematically from the incentives in a State-monopoly environment.

To be sure, some children will fall through the cracks in any system. Some children of abusive parents, regardless of the schools they attend, will carry scars for life and take revenge on associates and total strangers. Some children of fundamentalist ____ (pick your religion or political philosophy) parents will mature into mass murderers. Again, some children will fall through the cracks in any system. Jose Padilla attended government schools. John Walker Lind attended government schools.

 

[Malcolm Kirkpatrick]

Does that mean that your demand for a textbook definition of "anecdotal evidence" was just a derail?

No more than Randfan's claim of a textbook definition of anecdotal evidence was a derail.

Or do you still not accept that stories about a handful of exceptional people* are not that useful?

The world is a pile of anecdotes (observations).

*Most from the early 19th Century or earlier.

Well, duh! Make attendance at school compulsory and you reduce the ranks of home-educated children.

 

[Malcolm Kirkpatrick]

And you don't seem to understand how that appears.

"You" again.
All human behavioral traits are heritable.

 

[RandFan]

We disagree. To repeat: the arguments for parent control of education parallel the arguments for markets (the system of title and contract law).

This is moving the goal posts. Either compulsion is an element of your definition or it is not. If it is then 1.) competent and caring parents compel their children to go to school regardless of whether it is parochial\private\independent or state run compulsory school. 2.) The comparison is fatally flawed because 2A) it is the parent who decides and not the child. The child does not get a choice but must do whatever the parent decides and thus is compelled to labor without compensation and thus a child must endure the drudgery of whatever school the parent chooses. 2B.) If your thesis were correct then private industry would already be competing with state run schools. They would, by your logic, provide a better product for less and steal many students from state run schools. They don't because your thesis is wrong.

To be sure, some children will fall through the cracks in any system.

To be sure, almost all poor children whose parents cannot now afford private/parochial school or whose parents are too incompetent to home school will fall through the cracks under your system.

 

[RandFan]

All human behavioral traits are heritable.

Appealing to derision is a fallacy. It's also a cheap shot and not civil. Try civility.

When I realized my mistake I owned up to it and didn't double down and try to defend it. You are still simultaneously complaining about the thread title and defending it. Surely you must realize that such a position is contradictory?

I say "you" because I'm speaking to... you guessed it, "you".

It's a convention that we have at JREF. We communicate to each other by the use of the word "you". It's actually a common convention in most forums. In fact, it's a convention in everyday communication, written and oral.

You | Define You at Dictionary.com

the pronoun of the second person singular or plural, used of the person or persons being addressed, in the nominative or objective case: You are the highest bidder. It is you who are to blame. We can't help you. This package came for you. Did she give you the book?

 

[Belz...]

"You" again.

Yes, it's the English word for the singular 2nd person, used when addressing someone.

 

[jimbob]

Does that mean that your demand for a textbook definition of "anecdotal evidence" was just a derail?

No more than Randfan's claim of a textbook definition of anecdotal evidence was a derail.

Or do you still not accept that stories about a handful of exceptional people* are not that useful?

The world is a pile of anecdotes (observations).

*Most from the early 19th Century or earlier.

Well, duh! Make attendance at school compulsory and you reduce the ranks of home-educated children.

I think your reading of what RandFan actually said and why is a bit mistaken:

Until you demonstrate a statisticaly significant sample size all you have is anecdote. That is the context of what is being said. See, in statistics words like "anecdote" have specific meanings. It's your failure to grasp the point being made that caused me to point out that you should learn a bit about the subject before you start spouting off on it.

You made a claim. Please provide the meaning of "anecdote" that's "specific" to statistics. Let's have author, title, edition, and page number.

It was thirty years ago but I don't recall that any of my statistics texts defined "anecdote". The practical statistics classes discuss sources of sample bias. The theoretical classes discuss the relation between sample size and the distribution of sample measures around theoretical population measures (mean, variance, mode, etc.).

Did they define Anecdotal evidence Mine sure as hell did.

Accurate determination of whether an anecdote is "typical" requires statistical evidence.

"Requires".

^ p. 75 of Psychology: Themes and Variations by Wayne Weiten
^ p. 25 in Research in Psychology: Methods and Design, by C. James Goodwin.

Anecdotes vs statistics – it isn't a fair fight

Anecdotal Evidence

Anecdotes that are not backed up with systematic and rigorous comparative data are not trusted. Anecdotes are the weakest form of evidence, but they are often the most persuasive. Even scientists can be moved by a telling anecdote that contradicts a mass of statistical evidence.

That is not a derail.

 

[jimbob]

Does that mean that your demand for a textbook definition of "anecdotal evidence" was just a derail?

No more than Randfan's claim of a textbook definition of anecdotal evidence was a derail.

Or do you still not accept that stories about a handful of exceptional people* are not that useful?

The world is a pile of anecdotes (observations).

*Most from the early 19th Century or earlier.

Well, duh! Make attendance at school compulsory and you reduce the ranks of home-educated children.

They still were a handful of exceptional people, most from a period when an individual educated person could know most of the West's scientific, historical, and geographical knowledge.

You have a handful of anecdotes and nothing pointing out how many failed due to a lack of adequate education.

 

[Malcolm Kirkpatrick]

This is moving the goal posts.

Typically, Randfan leads with an accusation of arguing in bad faith.

Either compulsion is an element of your definition or it is not.

a) There's "you" again.
b) Definition of what?

If it is then 1. competent and caring parents compel their children to go to school regardless of whether it is parochial\private\independent or state run compulsory school.
2. The comparison is fatally flawed because 2A) it is the parent who decides and not the child. The child does not get a choice but must do whatever the parent decides and thus is compelled to labor without compensation and thus a child must endure the drudgery of whatever school the parent chooses.

No. We have trod this ground already. Parent control enhances the match between the child's interests and abilities, on the one hand, and the institution's curriculum and methods, on the other. Education system (including homeschooling and on-the-job training) performance depends on motivation ("compensation"), and parent control enhances motivation.

2B.) If your thesis were correct then private industry would already be competing with state run schools. They would, by your logic, provide a better product for less and steal many students from state run schools. They don't because your thesis is wrong.

a) To some extent, non-State actors do compete with public schools.
b) Minimum wage laws, child labor laws, and compulsory attendance laws limit the options.
c) Courts have accepted accreditation agency arguments that bar for-profit agencies from accreditation.
d) The policy that restricts parents' options for the use of the taxpayers' age 6-18 subsidy to schools operated by dues-paying members of the NEA/AFT/AFSCME cartel tilts the scale strongly in favor of government schools.

To be sure, almost all poor children whose parents cannot now afford private/parochial school or whose parents are too incompetent to home school will fall through the cracks under your system.

There's that "you" again. Which system?