Is institutional schooling the opiate of the masses?

Originally Posted by azazel

In the Bible we're told of how the Hebrews considered a 12 year old a man already (I'm not sure at what age girls were considered women), but contrast that with today's society where helicopter parents ensure their kids at least go to school till the obligatory age of 22 (or longer) so they can get a degree and hopefully, (and finally) work.

I'm told they take this to the Nth degree in asian countries (we've hosted exchange students b4) where kids are white elephants for the most part and have zero life skills.

Your thoughts.

Think about how the bible was written 1000's of years ago and how basic education has gone from little reading/writing/math to a very complex arrange of skills and diffrent education for 13 years (K-12) and than on top of that, major in a skill for an extra 2-6 years (post secondary).

High schools are finding that 69% of parents are expecting their kids to get a Uni education, however only 16% are actually making it to Uni (Georgia Striagt).

The reason parents feel so pressured to get their kids into Uni is because Uni (knowledge based) are not only the highest paying, but are also city based jobs. Unlike many trade jobs.

With the way the economy is moving, they are now telling highschool students that not only are they studdying for jobs now that may not exist in 10-20 years, but they should expect to change their job 20-30 times in there life.

If your going to generalize Asian education with not having life skills, Id say its more based on culture. Asian students are also growing up in a high/dence population area = greater competition = greater results. Also keep in mind that the majority of immigrants (often from Asia/Europe) have professional careers/educations. Although this is great for Canada's economy, it has also greatly efected our culture and put A LOT of pressure on Canadian students.

In the end you have to realize with technology and immigration that we are no longer competing and comparing our selfs in our own community, province, or country, BUT the entire world.

Is this what you talking about wum?

[decypher]

Originally Posted by Grapes

Fixed

you sure that sounds fixed? i'm drunk though so i dunno. doesn't sound right !#!@#

[azazel]

Originally Posted by decypher

The thing is you have a choice between institutions. Different institutions subscribe to different ideologies and have a different focus within their faculties. You have a choice which field and what direction you want to go in. You don't have to be molded into believing one idea over another.

When marx was talking about the opiate of the masses he was talking about how it was the 'sigh of the oppressed.' How people come to legitimate inequalities in society (ie, the kings anointed by god to be the rulers." With this definition i would not say that a uni was on the same level. People don't goto school out of a distress of inequality. If anything they are encouraged to be wage laborers and to skip education all together.

I was talking more about public education in particular, but perhaps it can be extended to uni as well.

just because we do something out of 'free will' that doesn't mean it wasn't strongly influenced by an original trauma. Kinda like how a battered wife 'chooses' to sustain abusive relationships.

[ebbomega]

If organized religion is the opium of the masses, then disorganized religion is the marijuana of the lunatic fringe.
- Kerry Thornley
Introduction to the Fifth Edition of the Principia Discordia

[ebbomega]

Originally Posted by azazel

I was talking more about public education in particular, but perhaps it can be extended to uni as well.

just because we do something out of 'free will' that doesn't mean it wasn't strongly influenced by an original trauma. Kinda like how a battered wife 'chooses' to sustain abusive relationships.

You know the idea of codependence was kind of laughed out of psychology as being basically sexist justification for spousal abuse, right?

what you say is only true in trends, but for individual cases there's too many examples of resiliency for statements like what you just said to be 100% true.

[azazel]

Originally Posted by ebbomega

You know the idea of codependence was kind of laughed out of psychology as being basically sexist justification for spousal abuse, right?

what you say is only true in trends, but for individual cases there's too many examples of resiliency for statements like what you just said to be 100% true.

didn't say it was 100% true, but perhaps a large factor.

[ebbomega]

A lot of the peer-reviewed journals that have explored that idea have refuted that it's at all any kind of a significant factor, really.

The free will argument is a good one, but introducing codependence into the equation will just make you look ignorant. There's a lot of literature on the subject, though. Go do some research already and form some educated opinions instead of asking the internet for theirs.

[azazel]

Originally Posted by ebbomega

A lot of the peer-reviewed journals that have explored that idea have refuted that it's at all any kind of a significant factor, really.

The free will argument is a good one, but introducing codependence into the equation will just make you look ignorant. There's a lot of literature on the subject, though. Go do some research already and form some educated opinions instead of asking the internet for theirs.

My main point is something in line with the old Jesuit model: Give me a child until he is seven and I will give you the man.

Basically the government re-education camp we go through in our formative years (one-upping the Jesuits, really) is a shaping process that effects most of us for the rest of our lives.

[ebbomega]

... except for in cases where it doesn't.

That's the part you keep forgetting. Psychology (human behaviour) is not an exact science.

[pstylez]

Originally Posted by robyn

wouldn't it be fun if opium was the opiate of the masses

Fun and intoxicating. ;)

[tiedye]

Originally Posted by ebbomega

... except for in cases where it doesn't.

That's the part you keep forgetting. Psychology (human behaviour) is not an exact science.

Wherever human behaviour shows up, you can be damn sure predictability and consistency are excusing themselves from the room.

[azazel]

Originally Posted by R Wellbelove

Think about how the bible was written 1000's of years ago and how basic education has gone from little reading/writing/math to a very complex arrange of skills and diffrent education for 13 years (K-12) and than on top of that, major in a skill for an extra 2-6 years (post secondary).

High schools are finding that 69% of parents are expecting their kids to get a Uni education, however only 16% are actually making it to Uni (Georgia Striagt).

The reason parents feel so pressured to get their kids into Uni is because Uni (knowledge based) are not only the highest paying, but are also city based jobs. Unlike many trade jobs.

With the way the economy is moving, they are now telling highschool students that not only are they studdying for jobs now that may not exist in 10-20 years, but they should expect to change their job 20-30 times in there life.

If your going to generalize Asian education with not having life skills, Id say its more based on culture. Asian students are also growing up in a high/dence population area = greater competition = greater results. Also keep in mind that the majority of immigrants (often from Asia/Europe) have professional careers/educations. Although this is great for Canada's economy, it has also greatly efected our culture and put A LOT of pressure on Canadian students.

In the end you have to realize with technology and immigration that we are no longer competing and comparing our selfs in our own community, province, or country, BUT the entire world.

Is this what you talking about wum?

this is a lot of propaganda in IMHO. The way to riches is owning the means of production, not being a cog in the wheel.

And I don't think more school is the answer for people to become hip to this fact, or even to become better trained at a "job". What marketable skills did you have exactly after HS? 13 years, 6 hours a day, homework, and hundreds of thousands of tax dollars later, what did you have to show for it? Did they teach you how to tie a knot, run an organization, leadership skills, network with people, people skills, cooking, how to spot a scam, or really anything important? Or was the whole thing a 13 year character test? Something is obviously very wrong with our system. But all this is beside the point.

Read about the lives of Benjamin Franklin or other people who lived during his era. He ran a newspaper at the age of 15 and was RUNNING SHIT in his teens. He went to Europe twice before he turned 18 in search of opportunity and was almost completely self-educated. Here was a guy who was obviously in charge of his life.

Contrast that with the young generation of today whose daily life is completely devoid of meaning as they are forced to memorize useless facts and put their work into assignments, tests, and projects that have ZERO impact outside the classroom. All this imaginary 'play time' as it were keeps people in a state of arrest development, and that's why so many (read: adult babies) are playing games like world of warcraft or other useless bullshit well into their 20's.

[azazel]

Originally Posted by ebbomega

... except for in cases where it doesn't.

That's the part you keep forgetting. Psychology (human behaviour) is not an exact science.

ebbo, i don't want to quibble about definitions here. what is your main point?

[decypher]

Originally Posted by azazel

I was talking more about public education in particular, but perhaps it can be extended to uni as well.

just because we do something out of 'free will' that doesn't mean it wasn't strongly influenced by an original trauma. Kinda like how a battered wife 'chooses' to sustain abusive relationships.

I know and I'm saying that the opiate of the masses is weak when applied to your definition. If you wanna diss institutional education then say something like we all follow the biased world-views of our profs, or you could make an argument against technocratic power relationships in society. etc etc etc. But the opiate of the masses? That is more like a false consciousness of religion or consumerism or something like that. I wouldn't say its critical of university education.

And no wife chooses to sustain abusive relationships (sado-masochism aside). Someone will stay in an abusive relationship do to all sorts of constraints which are specific to that situation. This does not sound quite like free will to me but rather coercion and power.

I think you are dancing on all these concepts but not quite hitting that controversy button well enough.

[Grapes]

Originally Posted by decypher

I think you are dancing on all these concepts but not quite hitting that smart button well enough.

Fixed. AGAIN.

[azazel]

Originally Posted by decypher

I know and I'm saying that the opiate of the masses is weak when applied to your definition. If you wanna diss institutional education then say something like we all follow the biased world-views of our profs, or you could make an argument against technocratic power relationships in society. etc etc etc. But the opiate of the masses? That is more like a false consciousness of religion or consumerism or something like that. I wouldn't say its critical of university education.

And no wife chooses to sustain abusive relationships (sado-masochism aside). Someone will stay in an abusive relationship do to all sorts of constraints which are specific to that situation. This does not sound quite like free will to me but rather coercion and power.

I think you are dancing on all these concepts but not quite hitting that controversy button well enough.

I'd appreciate it if you'd stop trying to analyze me personally for once and actually try to further the discussion ;)

[ebbomega]

Originally Posted by azazel

ebbo, i don't want to quibble about definitions here. what is your main point?

My point is you can't make sweeping generalizations like that without looking like a fool. You keep ignoring the exceptions to the rule, and it's a surefire way to undercut your position by exhibiting such a blatant bias.

Having a bias is okay, but failing to admit or acknowledge such a bias is very detrimental to an argument, particularly when it's being reviewed by peers (or marked by a TA).

And I still think using the phrase "opiate of the masses" is hella cliche.

[azazel]

Originally Posted by ebbomega

My point is you can't make sweeping generalizations like that without looking like a fool. You keep ignoring the exceptions to the rule, and it's a surefire way to undercut your position by exhibiting such a blatant bias.

Having a bias is okay, but failing to admit or acknowledge such a bias is very detrimental to an argument, particularly when it's being reviewed by peers (or marked by a TA).

And I still think using the phrase "opiate of the masses" is hella cliche.

where was the sweeping generalization?

[ebbomega]

Originally Posted by azazel

I'd appreciate it if you'd stop trying to analyze me personally for once and actually try to further the discussion ;)

That was probably the most well-rounded critique that I've seen on this forum. And you take the last sentence, which was a critique more on your argument style than an analysis of you as a person (which honestly you should be grateful for since that's what you're going to be graded on), and tried to pretend that it was an ad hominem attack.

Do you want us to help you with your homework or do you just want us to do the writing for you so you can take our ideas and print them as your own? Sheesh.

(see, that was trying to analyze you)

[tiedye]

If it wasn't for our resident Daves, we'd never land these err-planes safely.

[azazel]

go away wum haters :(

[ebbomega]

Originally Posted by azazel

where was the sweeping generalization?

"Basically the government re-education camp we go through in our formative years (one-upping the Jesuits, really) is a shaping process that effects most of us for the rest of our lives."

This is one of the central points of your argument, but it lumps people together too easily. It ignores all concept of humanism or resiliency, and leads to other sweeping statements like "opiate of the masses".

It's justified but dangerous, because it leads you into logistical corners and it becomes easy to find holes in your arguments. If you point them out before your detractors do, you come out of it looking smart and well-thought-out.

Honestly, profs and TAs love it when you argue with yourself.

[decypher]

Grapes you're my fnk assistant, hired!

[azazel]

Originally Posted by ebbomega

"Basically the government re-education camp we go through in our formative years (one-upping the Jesuits, really) is a shaping process that effects most of us for the rest of our lives."

This is one of the central points of your argument, but it lumps people together too easily. It ignores all concept of humanism or resiliency, and leads to other sweeping statements like "opiate of the masses".

It's justified but dangerous, because it leads you into logistical corners and it becomes easy to find holes in your arguments. If you point them out before your detractors do, you come out of it looking smart and well-thought-out.

Honestly, profs and TAs love it when you argue with yourself.

And how are you so certain that school HASN'T effected you to a large extent again?

[azazel]

Originally Posted by decypher

I know and I'm saying that the opiate of the masses is weak when applied to your definition. If you wanna diss institutional education then say something like we all follow the biased world-views of our profs, or you could make an argument against technocratic power relationships in society. etc etc etc. But the opiate of the masses? That is more like a false consciousness of religion or consumerism or something like that. I wouldn't say its critical of university education.

first of all I'm not trying to write a dissertation (this is not hwk), so you can stop trying to counter/contradict everything you see. I didn't write my complete ideas in the OP because I want to hear what other people have to say. ;)

But to flesh things out if I must, an opiate is something that has a dulling effect on people. Based on all the people I see in a state of arrested development, I posit that school is the culprit.