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

[Border Reiver]

Malcolm try this definition:

slav·er·y/ˈsleɪvəri, ˈsleɪvri/ Show Spelled [sley-vuh-ree, sleyv-ree] Show IPA
noun
1. the condition of a slave; bondage.
2. the keeping of slaves as a practice or institution.
3. a state of subjection like that of a slave: He was kept in slavery by drugs.
4. severe toil; drudgery.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Origin:
1545–55; slave + -ery

Related forms
pre·slav·er·y, adjective, noun


Synonyms
1. thralldom, enthrallment. Slavery, bondage, servitude refer to involuntary subjection to another or others. Slavery emphasizes the idea of complete ownership and control by a master: to be sold into slavery. Bondage indicates a state of subjugation or captivity often involving burdensome and degrading labor: in bondage to a cruel master. Servitude is compulsory service, often such as is required by a legal penalty: penal servitude. 4. moil, labor.

Ref: Dictionary.com

 

[RandFan]

I spent a summer in the pineapple fields on Lanai. What's your point?

My point is that your comparison is absurd. You cannot equate slavery to compulsory education anymore than you can equate home chores to slavery. I note how you dodged my argument.

How does it relate to my characterization of compulsory school attendance as slavery or to my objection to Ant's mischaracterization of my position of school as Dachau?

Is it slavery for parents to give their children compulsory rules Yes or no?

The model universe of basic economic theory consists of rational economic actors and property. This is analogous to the geometry of Euclidean one-space (the line), a very simplified universe. Individuals are represented as endowments (the property to which they have title) and preferences (an ordering of possible endowments). Theorists expand this universe to accommodate real-world complications (e.g., common property, limited rationality). Children occupy an anomalous position, as we do not suppose that they have title to property and they are incompletely rational. This does not prevent economic theory from making predictions about behavior of children, or slaves, or animals (or about teachers or union bosses to whom current laws give control of children's time, six hours a day, 180 days a year, for 12 years). Some rationality is assumed. Children, slaves, and animals respond to rewards (or there's no point to rewards or punishment).
Someone will control children's time. The abstract policy issue of sub-adult education depends on the effects of different assignments of responsibility (title, in effect) for (to) children and children's time. Gandhi said that parents are the natural teachers of children. I would like to see a shift to a legal/institutional environment that assigns control over children and their time to their parents unless parents demonstrate their incapacity. And I'd set that bar (proof of incapacity) very high. We don't take fawns from wild deer.

Dodge. Either it's slavery for a parent to have control over the life of its child or not. Which is it Malcolm?

 

[Dancing David]

Most property does not. Slaves do. How do you define "tax"? It's not much of a stretch from a reasonable definition of "tax" to the conclusion that slaves are taxed 100% of their income.

Now cows pay taxes, yes it is a stretch and an unreasonable one.

 

[RandFan]

Most property does not. Slaves do. How do you define "tax"? It's not much of a stretch from a reasonable definition of "tax" to the conclusion that slaves are taxed 100% of their income.

Now cows pay taxes, yes it is a stretch and an unreasonable one.

The problem with ad hoc explanations is that they are not often thought out very well and tend to lead to absurdities.

Yes, by his logic cows pay taxes.

However, what you don't understand is that if one can ad hoc try to save a thesis then one can also special plead. Expect that next.

 

[Malcolm Kirkpatrick]

My point is that your comparison is absurd. You cannot equate slavery to compulsory education anymore than you can equate home chores to slavery. I note how you dodged...

Try civility,

... my argument.

Aside from saying "nonsense", you did not make an argument. Compulsory unpaid labor is slavery (definition). Laws compel attendance at school. Overseers (teachers) threaten to blight children's lives with unattractive transcripts unless those children jump through the hoops that teachers present. Classwork and homework are "work". This work is compulsory and (for many students) unpaid.

Is it slavery for parents to give their children compulsory rules Yes or no?

Sometimes. As I wrote, children occupy an anomalous position in economic theory; halfway between property and rational economic actor. Parents compensate children with benign attention. Children, especially very young children, will work for love, which parents will more reliably supply than will strangers. As children mature, thet will, if given freedom to follow their own benign interests, self-reward.

... Dodge. ...

Try civility,

... Either it's slavery for a parent to have control over the life of its child or not. Which is it Malcolm?

You speak English, right? Verstehen sie "anomalous"? Is a workbench a table? How many grains of sand make a heap? When does a mound become a mountain?

 

[Malcolm Kirkpatrick]

The problem with ad hoc explanations is that they are not often thought out very well and tend to lead to absurdities.

Yes, by his logic cows pay taxes.

However, what you don't understand is that if one can ad hoc try to save a thesis then one can also special plead. Expect that next.

What Randfan apparently does not understand (unless he's a paid shill who understands just fine and is in this argument to derail it with incivility) is the impact of incivility on considerate discussion. Cows would be slaves if they were human under the law. As I wrote, the stripped-down model universe of basic economic theory contains two categories of object: "rational actors" and "property".

 

[RandFan]

Try civility,Aside from saying "nonsense", you did not make an argument. Compulsory unpaid labor is slavery (definition). Laws compel attendance at school. Overseers (teachers) threaten to blight children's lives with unattractive transcripts unless those children jump through the hoops that teachers present. Classwork and homework are "work". This work is compulsory and (for many students) unpaid.Sometimes. As I wrote, children occupy an anomalous position in economic theory; halfway between property and rational economic actor. Parents compensate children with benign attention. Children, especially very young children, will work for love, which parents will more reliably supply than will strangers. As children mature, thet will, if given freedom to follow their own benign interests, self-reward.Try civility,You speak English, right? Verstehen sie "anomalous"? Is a workbench a table? How many grains of sand make a heap? When does a mound become a mountain?

Sorry, that simply will not do. You can't have it both ways. Oh, I agree that there is a gradient between a child and adult as far as responsibility goes. But once you concede that there is a relationship that allows for parents to control the actions of their children then you don't get to special plead to give you rhetorical advantage. If a parent can control the actions of their children then school isn't slavery.

End of story.

 

[RandFan]

What Randfan apparently does not understand (unless he's a paid shill who understands just fine and is in this argument to derail it with incivility) is the impact of incivility on considerate discussion. Cows would be slaves if they were human under the law. As I wrote, the stripped-down model universe of basic economic theory contains two categories of object: "rational actors" and "property".

Prior to ending slavery in America, blacks were not "human under the law". This is you again trying to have it both ways. It simply will not work.

 

[A'isha]

Try civility

Yes, you should.

Compulsory unpaid labor is slavery (definition).

Slavery involves a lot more than that.

Laws compel attendance at school.

Yes, to prevent crackpot parents from keeping their kids away from such Satanic influences as real math, science, and history.

Overseers (teachers) threaten to blight children's lives with unattractive transcripts unless those children jump through the hoops that teachers present.

No, teachers (who have zero resemblance to slave overseers) grade students based on their knowledge and comprehension of the subjects they are being taught.

Classwork and homework are "work".

No, they aren't. They certainly aren't "labor" in the sense used by economic theorists.

This work is compulsory and (for many students) unpaid.

My parents certainly rewarded me with "benign attention...and love" for doing my homework and performing well in school.

Parents compensate children with benign attention.

So, under your definition, parents who do not do this are slaveholders?

 

[RandFan]

As I wrote, children occupy an anomalous position in economic theory; halfway between property and rational economic actor.

Given Loki's paradox, at what point is it slavery for a parent to control his or her child according to your stripped down theory?

BTW: Given that people who graduate from public school are far more likely to get a job than those who drop out, isn't a child and parent both rewarded for a child finishing his or her public education?

 

[A'isha]

BTW: Given that people who graduate from public school are far more likely to get a job than those who drop out, isn't a child and parent both rewarded for a child finishing his or her public education?

I guess private-sector employers are all part of the NEA conspiracy to enslave children.

 

[RandFan]

I guess private-sector employers are all part of the NEA conspiracy to enslave children.

The notion is so absurd. I'm sure Malcolm would find it neglectful for a parent to not care for young children in a way as to increases their well-being. Yet, according to Malcolm, while it is demonstrable that school increases the overall well-being of children in the long term it is still slavery.

You can make your child wash dishes for love but you can't make your child go to school to increase the likelihood of success later in life for that child.

 

[Malcolm Kirkpatrick]

If a parent can control the actions of their children then school isn't slavery.

Why not? Compulsory, unpaid labor is slavery (definition). Currently, in the USA, State laws compel attendance at school. Children labor, unpaid, as windowdressing in the massive make-work program for dues-paying members of the zNEA/AFT/AFSCME cartel trhat people call "the public school system".

End of story.[/QUOTE]

 

[A'isha]

Why not? Compulsory, unpaid labor is slavery (definition). Currently, in the USA, State laws compel attendance at school. Children labor, unpaid, as windowdressing in the massive make-work program for dues-paying members of the zNEA/AFT/AFSCME cartel trhat people call "the public school system".

Repeating a false assertion doesn't actually do anything to make it any less false, you know.

 

[RandFan]

Why not?

Why aren't home chores slavery? Special pleading?

Compulsory, unpaid labor is slavery (definition). Currently, in the USA, State laws compel attendance at school. Children labor, unpaid, as windowdressing in the massive make-work program for dues-paying members of the zNEA/AFT/AFSCME cartel trhat people call "the public school system".

Yep, special pleading. Do you deny that school provides a benefit for children (increased likelihood of greater salary and job benefits and greater freedom)?

People who do not graduate from school are more likely to suffer from poverty as adults. That's a fact.

Students' chances for success are minimal without high school

 

[Malcolm Kirkpatrick]

Repeating a false assertion doesn't actually do anything to make it any less false, you know.

What's your definition of slavery? Is school attendance compulsory or not?

 

[RandFan]

What's your definition of slavery? Is school attendance compulsory or not?

Are home chores compulsory or not?

 

[A'isha]

What's your definition of slavery?

A system in which human beings are bought, sold, traded, treated, and used like property.

Is school attendance compulsory or not?

Not everything that is compulsory is slavery. Were the vast majority of the American soldiers who served in Vietnam and World War II slaves?

 

[RandFan]

Not everything that is compulsory is slavery. Were the vast majority of the American soldiers who served in Vietnam and World War II slaves?

And all American soldiers who were drafted during WWII and other wars?

 

[Malcolm Kirkpatrick]

... BTW: Given that people who graduate from public school are far more likely to get a job than those who drop out, isn't a child and parent both rewarded for a child finishing his or her public education?

I guess private-sector employers are all part of the NEA conspiracy to enslave children.

"More likely than those who drop out" is like saying that slaves who stayed on the plantation ate better than runaways. Not "more likely to get a job" than children in independent or parochial schools.
Joshua Angrist
"Randomized Trials and Quasi-Experiments in Education Research"
NBER Reporter, summer, 2003

One of the most controversial innovations highlighted by NCLB is school choice. In a recently published paper,(5) my collaborators and I studied what appears to be the largest school voucher program to date. This program provided over 125,000 pupils from poor neighborhoods in the country of Colombia with vouchers that covered approximately half the cost of private secondary school. Colombia is an especially interesting setting for testing the voucher concept because private secondary schooling in Colombia is a widely available and often inexpensive alternative to crowded public schools. (In Bogota, over half of secondary school students are in private schools.) Moreover, governments in many poor countries are increasingly likely to experiment with demand-side education finance programs, including vouchers.

Although not a randomized trial, a key feature of our Colombia study is the exploitation of voucher lotteries as the basis for a quasi-experimental research design. Because demand for vouchers exceeded supply, the available vouchers were allocated by lottery in large cities. Our study compares voucher applicants who won a voucher in the lottery to those who lost. Since the lotteries used random assignment, losers provide a good control group for winners. A comparison of voucher winners and losers shows that three years after the lotteries were held, winners were 15 percentage points more likely to have attended private school and were about 10 percentage points more likely to have finished eighth grade, primarily because they were less likely to repeat grades. Lottery winners also scored 0.2 standard deviations higher on standardized tests. A follow-up study in progress shows that voucher winners also were more likely to apply to college. On balance, our study provides some of the strongest evidence to date for the possible benefits of demand-side financing of secondary schooling, at least in a developing country setting.

Not compared to homeschoolers.
Marvin Minsky (Interview, Communications of the Association for Computing Machinery, 1994-July)

(Minsky): "... the evidence is that many of our foremost achievers developed under conditions that are not much like those of present-day mass education. Robert Lawler just showed me a paper by Harold Macurdy on the child pattern of genius. Macurdy reviews the early education of many eminent people from the last couple of centuries and concludes (1) that most of them had an enormous amount of attention paid to them by one or both parents and (2) that generally they were relatively isolated from other children. This is very different from what most people today consider an ideal school. It seems to me that much of what we call education is really socialization. Consider what we do to our kids. Is it really a good idea to send your 6-year-old into a room full of 6-year-olds, and then, the next year, to put your 7-year-old in with 7-year-olds, and so on? A simple recursive argument suggests this exposes them to a real danger of all growing up with the minds of 6-year-olds. And, so far as I can see, that's exactly what happens.
Our present culture may be largely shaped by this strange idea of isolating children's thought from adult thought. Perhaps the way our culture educates its children better explains why most of us come out as dumb as they do, than it explains how some of us come out as smart as they do.

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.

Note the comment on the incentive structure that compulsory instruction creates.