BAA 'references to "morality, moral, immorality"'
i had a notion that would happen. Just think of morality as doing the right thing for the most people; some care some don't--about concerning themselves with the welfare of others--in this case kids.
"i'd prefer to live without one, or the desire for one [school system]."
So, what do we do in the mean time while we got one?
Hoping there wouldn't be a school system regardless of how it's run. The concept of grouping a bunch of people together specifically for education time isn't that appealing to me for an anarchist society. I don't see a reason for why there should be a school system in an anarchist society.
The desire for a more democratic process concerning running schools, that you or whoever references, is still conditioning the people to accept the authority of the outcome of said process. It can still be authoritarian in its own way, even if it's democratic.Besides, for 99% of human existence, schools did not exist. :)
sas, you might want to check out this thread too for more discussion of the subject....
my answers to those questions explain a little more about my thoughts....although a year later i might express some things differently.
ba@: "however, that doesn't mean i "don't concern myself with the welfare of others". i don't see those two things ("doing the right thing for most people" and "concern with the welfare of others") as synonymous. far from it."
it is not possible to know what is the "right thing" for "most people", and i find it patronizing when folks think they do. and almost everybody thinks they do. my concern for others is abundant, but that concern is not some universal, monolithic thing. it directly correlates to my relationship with the being i am concerned with.
(edited for clarity
here is this anarchist's take:
there would be no school "system". learning would happen primarily through the experiences and activities of life itself. since people would be much more directly engaged in the activities that sustain and fulfill them them, the basics - things like growing and preparing food, making clothes and shelters/dwellings, working with water, constructing the things they need and want - would be learned fairly young.
as people (of all ages) discover the things that particularly interest them, they can focus on those areas, sometimes (often?) with others that share the same or similar interests. [edited to add] of course folks sharing a given interest will have different levels of expertise and experience in those areas; those with more advanced skills would naturally and organically impart some of their knowledge to those with less skills who are open to it. [end edit] if they want to do that in a more "formal" setting, cool, have at it. those involved and interested are the ones that would make it happen. there would be no institutions, and the idea of "going to school" would not make sense - living life would serve the function of "learning" far better than that outdated, authoritarian, capitalist concept.
the school system has as its primary goal - at least at the level where it fits very neatly into the network of institutions that dominate life - to churn out "productive citizens". this anarchist wants a world where neither of those words have any meaning.
"discover the things that particularly interest them, they can focus on those areas," FA
Very good. I appreciate your answer along with the others who responded. Focusing on what interests the student is the goal of student centered teaching also--since students learn far more when they study what interests them.
The point about doing away with the institution as we now have it, does make sense to me. I'm not sure, at this point, if I agree. I need to finish some of the reading suggested above. Anyway, I got the point. Thanks.
i am not familiar with student centered teaching, but if it actually does what it claims, that would no doubt be preferable to my educational experience (likely typical across the u.s., at least in my generation). it is just difficult for me to imagine something truly being "student centered" in almost any institutional setting. i graduated from a large, inner city high school in new york city in the 70s, having attended maybe half the time in my 4 years. one thing i did get out of the experience was the clear understanding that i had zero desire to pursue further "education". i had learned far more on the streets in those 4 years than i could even imagine learning in a classroom, and i never even considered college. (i also learned how to strategically lie to adults really well).
sas, i have to say you seem like one of the more open minded progressives i have come across in some time. i don't mean that to sound condescending, i am serious.
FA, "not familiar with student centered teaching, but if it actually does what it claims, that would no doubt be preferable to my educational experience"
The web-site lafered.com is dedicated to it. There are a "few" schools out there that are student centered as opposed to curriculum centered. Just have to google it. I actually took education classes from Dr. Lafer, the creator of that web-site mentioned above at UNR. He is currently fighting the school system's way of doing things--state standards and the stupid testing which goes along with it--memorize and forget it. He is not very well liked among the leaders of the school system!
"open minded progressives"
I did write that I am definitely a progressive, but I do not like labels. There is a cliche' saying, "If you label me you negate me." I think, to a degree, it is true. It's not what people believe or say; it's what they do that matters. That is how I try to evaluate people. Too, I just try to listen to people and try to understand their point--learn from it--and go on.
sas: "but I do not like labels"
agreed, i hate labels. despite that fact that i do use them as shorthand.
FA, "i do use them"
One of the drawbacks of using language; it is always an abstraction of the reality itself: symbols representing something else. It is not easy to be a good communicator.
On the other hand, some language is so abstract that it does not represent anything real, but it is so authentic that it can bring a vision so spectacular that others that will actually help make it become real. Just rambling about the ramblings of a few anarchists.
RST 666, When you wrote "warehouses" I was reading it too fast and I thought you wrote whorehouses. When I realized you meant warehouse and not whorehouse, it was kind've a let down. I live in NV where there are the legal whores and the illegal whores. The first thing I would do as a head-master in this school is introduce the kids who are old enough to the NV whores and ask them to write an essay on why they think a whore is any different or better or worse than anybody else selling their time and bodies to make a living: like driving a truck or working in a grocery store.
I did like the part about pooping on the robot; I could do that just about every morning about 5:30 am.