Tagged: school

How Would Illiterate People React to Sydney’s Jeans Advertisement?

I feel very, very special for this post’s question.

I feel like I am pretty in-touch with how the Right has handled the stupid Woke response to the ads. But I haven’t seen anyone ask this question.

How do you think illiterate people would react to Sydney’s Jeans commercials? And for bonus points, “Would the illiterate be afforded anymore grace than the Woke received?”

Education Cannot Result In Less Education

I have two HS Freshman and two more kids that will soon be entering kindergarten in sequence (this fall and fall 2027). Faithful readers already knew as much. Likewise, you know that I read, for pleasure, as much as any human. The substance of what I read, with only limited deviations—mostly enacted to prove I am not AI—includes great books, great essays, and great articles.

Consequently, education is always on my mind—whether my own education, my kids’ education, or your education.

Education.

What is education?

One of the great articles I recently read was from, “Reporting Vietnam: Part One”. It was written by Susan Sheehan, and entitled, “A Viet Cong: A Defector Tells His Story 1965”.

This defector, this poor soul, this (Victor) Charlie was recruited and had to sit through, and later lead other Charlies in, “political studies”.

I doubt any of us would consider what the VC were doing was “education”.

If you read any current news on the subject of education, you’ll come upon articles and propaganda about school choice. How long has it been? Since GW Bush, right? Maybe earlier.

The anti-school-choice folks run an argument that insists that because available money will be directed to White Christian Nationalist Schools (my understanding of their latent fear), the already poor blacks will receive a worse education.

But this simply is not true. I know, because I am educated. And education cannot lead to less education anymore than there is only one everlasting total of wealth to be divided among Earth’s occupants. Less education is possible. But it is never the result of education.

People who are educated, to a man, know that the poor blacks find themselves in one of the most fortunate positions fate has ever given humans. It is theirs to either exploit or abuse.

The available money that these anti-school-choice folks seem to believe will be siphoned to the White Christian Nationalist Schools in some manner of a deviously rich-get-richer, power helps power, or even plain ol’, unpunished theft, believe it either A. will be spent on indoctrination or “political studies” (NOT education) or B. will be spent on education in its true sense. (The truth, of course, is even in the best educational institution, it will be some mix, as purity is hard won.)

If A., then the fight isn’t about money, but about the definition of education. If B., then the folks arguing against school choice aren’t making an argument. Instead, they are manifesting envy in their wish to sabotage the education of others—an immature, “I can’t have a good life, so you don’t get one either” attitude.

I know this to be true because I believe education cannot result in less education.

So, to my anti-school-choice readers: if what you fear is White Christian Nationalist Schools are not conducting education, then say so. But be ready to be asked to explain just what exactly you wish to do with the poor blacks if you had enough political clout to direct the available money to them.

As for me, I say that the most natural thing in the world is to deregulate education. It should be completely pay-to-play, every parent for themselves. Public schools must be abolished. The educated rich will more than happily subsidize earnest poor black families who agree to attending institutions which conduct education. (Yes, I am suggesting written plans/agreements, which could be broken/dissolved, that include formal declaration of what the education will include and how the student and their family will perform.)

How do I know? Because education cannot result in less education. There are many ways to be confident that education is occurring. For today, I’ll simply say that one certain, though incomplete, way to discern that the so-called “educational” experience is not education is that accountability is never agreed upon or assessed.

Public schools must be abolished. Always supporting “school choice” seems the most natural first step. On the other hand, supporting “public schools”, or what is the same, supporting “the perfectly even or fair expenditure of money per student”, seems the most natural expression of “doing the same thing and expecting different results”.

No matter how you frame it, education cannot result in less education.

It’s Like Movie Stars Complaining About Discrimination

As I keep reading essays and books essentially on “the definition of science”, I can’t help asking, “Where does the conflict with religion come in?” I can readily admit that I feel the conflict, but after spending any time in contemplation on the supposed conflict, I resolve everything to, “It’s comparing apples and oranges”. The only conflict is between bad religion and bad science. The real deal of either each stands alone and never the twain shall meet.

This new thought (in the post’s title ⤴️) about the conflict occurred to me just now.

So let me get this straight. The authors of all the mainstream science textbooks that are endlessly promoted and in use (or their conclusions are—which is the same) by all major educational institutions, these authors uniformly decry religion as, in general, something that holds humans back. Or that it stunts the development of knowledge and civilization etc.

Yeah. Okay. I believe you. Just like I believe the claims of millionaire celebrities that they’re victims of discrimination.

Gimme a break.

On the Ol’ “Horse Running Beside the Train in which a Horse Moves to the Front” Thought Experiment

I can’t quite remember his name with certainty, but he lived in the house with the green shutters at the tip-top of the hill. He was right across the street from the bus stop.

One day he says “If nothing can move faster than the speed of light, explain this…” Then he gives the supposedly Einstein-derived thought experiment in which you imagine a train moving at the speed of light, inside which is a horse who moves from the back of the train to the front, and then add to this scene a horse beside the train who is pacing the horse in the train.

I took his point to be the classic midwestern point of “Einstein is wrong” sentiment (falling within the broader category of “bein’ smart ain’t nuttin’”), because the horse beside the train is obviously going faster than the speed-of-light train.

But I am working through Einstein’s own The Evolution of Physics and the truth is far different. Whether the kid knew it or not (it is possible I totally misread the moment), the thought experiment is not the one Einstein proposes (at least in this book) but does capture the concept—being relativity. In short, the speed of light is the limit. The horse beside the train is not going faster than the speed of light. This is Einstein’s discovery or theory or whatever you want to call it.

As with all knowledge, it is the presuppositions that matter and the thought experiment is based on the presuppositions of mechanical physics, whereas—it would seem—reality is not. (Reality is not based on mechanical physics—at least not entirely.)

And, yes, like you, I do have a bit of “so what, Albert?” in me. But then I remind myself that the point of my reading is not to “learn to care”, but to learn so that I can call out BS when I see it.

Teachers Receive Stricter Judgment

Do not, many of you, become teachers, my brothers, knowing that we will receive a stricter judgment.

For all the experimentally-derived information not found in the books of the Bible, it sure does contain many easily deduced sentiments.

For my part, I have been elbow deep in Natural Science essays of late, essays whose subject matter has ranged from stars to candles, from chalk to mountains, and from monkeys to conservation of energy. Essays, I say. Maybe 20 total. About 450 pages worth. And these by the actual discoverers of the subject. I have not been reading a textbook written by some no-account hack with bought-and-paid-for letters after their name, just essays written by the men whose genius advanced material life on this planet so rapidly in the last 400+ years.

After the last two essays which covered such basic topics as the “law of periodicity” and the “law of conservation of force”, of which such simple words like “period” and “foot-pound” were defined—words which none of you (or I) could define upon request, but which we employ at our leisure—I started to get angry.

I wasn’t feeling sorry for myself—I am certain that I have now read more than most ever have or will on from the field of Natural Science. And that thrills me. Instead, I was thinking of my kids and all other kids. They are sitting in schools right now, staring at the periodic table and completely unaware why it is so-named. They are, if lucky, in an auto-tech class turning wrenches, and applying torque, without being able to define what it means that the limit for that bolt is 120 foot-pounds—or from where the expended 120 foot-pounds of energy get replenished.

Before you get all “Well, Pete, you’re forgetting that not everyone…” on me, I want to re-iterate these are kids who are in school! What else are they doing if not learning? And, keep in mind I have already suggested a mere 500 pages would advance their knowledge to within reach of the current peaks of human knowledge of natural science.

Also to be clear, I am suggesting these essays would be the course. Have a teacher lead the kids through them and then see what the kids want to do. I cannot be persuaded that they would choose to stop there. It is a sure bet that their curiosity would be piqued and each would willingly follow the most interesting path they saw available to continue down.

As it stands, “hydrogen will bond with…” inspires hardly anyone and we act little different than the uneducated nations and “emerging” cultures which leave a child to himself as we declare, “Oh look at that! He’s gonna be a football player for sure!”

Since obtaining a step-son from another culture, worlds away, I have seen nothing but the distribution of participation trophies which the adults and kids assign as symbolic displays of new expertise in subjects of which they both are ignorant and of abilities of which they are both wanting.

My step-son’s skin is dark, so this was to be expected as the whites in education are utterly brainwashed into thinking BIPOC folks are genetically inferior.

But I have unfortunately watched this occur all across the spectrum. The entire field of education is one big gold star for trying. The underlying sentiment has become, “You are too stupid to understand the hard stuff, so let’s just stay in the shallow end.” The obvious trouble with this idea is the people doing the hard stuff disagree.

Education, hear me clearly, is directly opposed to the priesthood. If you believe there is some special class of human that children cannot generally achieve, you cannot also believe in education. You might as well burn books. This is no different than how you cannot believe both in a geocentric and heliocentric model of the universe, or girls can become boys and boys can become girls.

In the end, in all my “this is wrong”, I found myself reminded of the scripture I opened with. Most Christians would limit James’ warning to spiritual matters. I disagree. Teachers will be more strictly judged. Teachers are being judged. We are all being judged by their failure.

Science Teachers: Teach the Truth

I was at an FBO (airport gas station—incidentally, this means very, very wealthy people are frequently around. I assure you, they do not inspire). Anyhow, I was there awaiting some maintenance on the helicopter for an afternoon the other day and I couldn’t help but notice that on the TV was a silly show where a “Science is fun!” guest teacher was visiting an inner city school to pep up the otherwise dry material.

It caught my attention, as you might expect, faithful reader, because the topic of my guided reading through the Great Books of the Western World is “Foundations of Math and Science”. So when I hear, “Newton”, “Force”, “Inertia”, and certain other keywords, I am always interested to take a closer look.

The particular concept the energetic guest was bringing to the kids was inertia. His whole game was to demonstrate inertia by yanking the tablecloth from under some dishes as they remain in place.

He says, “Inertia: the tendency of an object to stay at rest until a force acts upon it.”

The definition isn’t troubling. The troubling thing is…can you name it with me? On three. One, two, three: Everything in the universe is demonstrating it!

Whether this zany, cooler-than-your-teacher (and actually, kinda disrespectful) man shows up to a school and says the words “learn” “newton” “inertia”, or not, inertia is demonstrated by not only every object in a student’s immediate observation, the student’s body itself, but also by every object in the entirety of the universe!

But the man adds, “Isaac Newton would be so proud that you’re learning!!”

And there is the whopper. Isaac Newton would be proud if kids were learning (they’re not), but he would not be proud that a man claiming to be an expert is teaching kids that he is demonstrating inertia.

With me?

Inertia isn’t “demonstrated”. Inertia is.

“Pete, you’re being way too sensitive here.”

Am I?

****

Why does learning have to be fun?

From what I have read, the math and science greats do not seem to have had much fun while attempting to communicate their ideas. Moreover, many of their lives were fairly difficult—as they were battling commonly held conceptions held by nearly each and every fellow man.

Instead of “fun”, I say let’s teach the truth to kids.

Straight from the man.

Definition III from Isaac Newton’s Mathematical Principle of Natural Philosophy.

****

The vis insita, or innate force of matter, is a power of resisting, by which every body, as much as in it lies, continues in its present state, whether it be of rest, or of moving uniformly forwards in a right line.

This force is always proportional to the body whose force it is and differs nothing from the inactivity of the mass, but in our manner of conceiving it. A body, from the inert nature of matter, is not without difficulty put out of its state of rest or motion. Upon which account, this vis insita may, by a most significant name, be called inertia (vis inertio) or force of inactivity. But a body only exerts this force when another force, impressed upon it, endeavors to change its condition; and the exercise of this force may be considered as both resistance and impulse; it is resistance so far as the body, for maintaining its present state, opposes the force impressed; it is impulse so far as the body, by not easily giving way to the impressed force of another, endeavors to change the state of that other. Resistance is usually ascribed to bodies at rest, and impulse to those in motion; but motion and rest, as commonly conceived, are only relatively distinguished; nor are those bodies always truly at rest, which commonly are taken to be so.

(My underline.)

****

If that doesn’t do it for ya, if you still don’t understand what Newton means by the word inertia, then the only sentiment I may offer as a last ditch effort is this.

Imagine a man moving while inside a moving vehicle. Got it? (It doesn’t have to be a car with a man reaching back to grab a snack from the back seat, or a pirate ship approaching a storm while the captain paces to and fro by the helm, or an airplane with a man squeezing down the aisle after a bathroom break. It can be any vehicle, any person, but the vehicle and the person inside must be moving.)

That is the Newtonian picture of the universe as described at the end of that definition. Because, Newton says, the vehicle we’re in (which you didn’t know we’re in—and he doesn’t mean merely planet Earth) is moving; there is no “rest” in the plain sense.

Inertia, then, is the conception (defensible by math and experimentation) that all bodies resist. It’s an action. Or a force. To resist, there must be something to resist. (Period.)

And I’m out.

Moms and Dads of School Children: Buy Their Lunch

It’s immoral to accept free lunch.

Reader: no one, not one person who genuinely needs charity will ever read this blog post. So calm down.

And then call the school and inform them they are not to serve your child(ren) lunch unless your child(ren) pay (or what is equivalent, you have set up the lunch account and it has money in it).

I am calling the school now. I will report back with how the conversation went.

Children Grown Older

“What are you doing, A-? Just get in your seat!” I begged my toddler daughter as she almost finally got into her car seat.

“I’m looking at the pictures,” she replied, un-phased by my pleading tone.

“The what? Oh. Those are instructions for people who can’t read,” I retorted, no less annoyed. Instructions for people who can’t read, I repeated to myself.

That’s about right. We have plastic seats for children. The poor and illiterate didn’t invent them, and wouldn’t think to use them if it wasn’t for the wealthy and literate. So what do the literate do? Write instructions on the seat, as if that solves any problem.

****

I would’ve thought this experience was a one-off. Wouldn’t you? This “providing help in an utterly un-useful manner”.

Then we were at the local mega-playground today. And there is a sign with English, Spanish, and Braille. But the Braille is not textured—ie, not Braille.

In English, our native tongue, then, “It gets worse. It always gets worse.”

Real Fears of a White Step-Dad

“Thank you for agreeing to meet with me today. I want to talk to you about something that is generally taboo, but especially given the details (often in footnotes) of the recent Supreme Court case on affirmative action and university admittance, it is important that we chat.”

“Um-”

“I’d ask you to not interrupt and I request this indulgence because I am the one with something to lose here—not you. Thank you.

“I see the supposed excellence of your school. While I am fully persuaded home school is the best way to educate a child, a future citizen of America, I am also fully persuaded that a charter school like yours is far superior to public school.

“I struggle to believe that the way my step-son was admitted to your school was fair. You have exceedingly few black students as is, and while regular demographics of our city account for it, there is some sick love/hate relationship with educated—do not hear intelligent—educated whites and what they see as possible black success.

“If you enroll too many black kids, then no whites will find that school desirable. If no black kids, then whites will be painted as racist. So ya’ll are stuck in a pickle, the way I see it. Precisely just how many blacks can you afford your school to enroll and still keep the whites coming?

“Here’s the rub: A- is not black. I have already made it clear that I suspect we disagree on this matter. So let me repeat myself. A- is not black. You all let him in to your school. I believe it is because you saw him (especially as he is an immigrant, not the really difficult American black) as able to help keep the whites happy. Whether your gamble was well-informed or not, we will all find out together. But he is not black. Do you hear me?

“For the last four years I have watched and listened to educators get run over by, ignore, and turn a blind eye to A-, all because they see a little black boy they can use to fulfill some twisted quota. Everything has been graded on a curve and relative to other students. The calendar hasn’t existed. Endless ability to retake and correct assignments and tests has been proffered. In a word, he has been in “schools” which have absolutely zero accountability for A-. He has a grand total of no understanding of where he stands in relationship to his fellow man, and worse, he seems to think he hasn’t ever failed. This has to stop.

“Did I introduce myself? Apologies for that oversight. Here are the vital stats. I am A-’s step-dad, not you. Second to that fact, I have and will always perform better than any of you here on every mental subject and assessment you can develop. And I have used all my brain power to decide that it is worthwhile to give you the benefit of the doubt to start.

“But I am watching. And if I start to get even the slightest feeling that A- is receiving special treatment because you can’t shake the feeling that he is some little black boy available for use in atoning for your perverse understanding of life, then we will be done here. I will pull him from your school and you will know why.

“To be clear: I am not asking for fair treatment. This isn’t funnel cakes and ferris wheels. I am asking for you to teach him to know he has failed where he has failed and for him to know he has learned where he has learned. No more “stars” for effort, or on time work, or completed assignments.

“Maybe I am asking too much.

“To conclude then, I put the choice in your hands. What do you say? Can you do this for me? Will you agree, no matter how this relationship started, that A- is not black, that he is not some project?

“Will you agree that he will fail if he doesn’t perform appropriately? I can pull him right now if you won’t. There is no need to waste anyone’s time. So what do you say?”