Jump to content

Welcome to the Freedomain Radio Message Board


Sign In 

Create Account
If you're interested in joining the philosophical discussion, click "sign in" or "create account" on the right of the page. If you're creating a new account, please be sure to include an explanation as to why you're interested in joining the message board community. This verification requirement is included to cut down on possible troll and spam accounts.

If you have supported Freedomain Radio financially and would like immediate access to the message board - or - your donation status is incorrect, please contact Michael at operations@freedomainradio.com with your information and the situation will be addresses ASAP.
 
Guest Message by DevFuse

LISTEN TO A 24/7 STREAM ON THE NEW FREEDOMAIN RADIO iOS APP!


DONATOR ONLY PREMIUM CONTENT - For more information on donator levels click here
66 Philosopher King files - 73 Gold files - 47 Silver files - 51 Bronze files


One new Silver podcast has been added to the donator section: Is a lack of empathy immoral?.

If your donator status is incorrect, please contact Michael at operations@freedomainradio.com with the relevant information and it will be corrected as soon as possible.


Photo

A critique of Stefan Molyneux's Discussion with Stephan Kinsella


  • Please log in to reply
106 replies to this topic

#1
ChangeOfSeasons

ChangeOfSeasons
  • 38 posts

Hello, this is not my article although I think it is a very well done piece on this subject of which I think is an important discussion.  

___

Author is Aaron0883 on youtube and the blog post was posted on the school sucks project website. 

__

Direct link to blog post - http://www.schoolsucksproject.com/blog_posts/8

__

The full text is below in which I will include a comment made by Kinsella and the response made by Aaron for quoting purposes. 

__

[font=" Verdana, 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 17px"]

A critique of Stefan Molyneux's Discussion with Stephan Kinsella


  • 0

#2
IDontDonateAnymore

IDontDonateAnymore
  • 453 posts

However, the condescending tone in your response is unneeded and unhelpful.

I strongly agree. Kinsella's comment was incredibly disrespectful. What with putting things in quotes and saying Aaron has latched onto things and such.


  • 0

#3
hkw

hkw

    '; DROP DATABASE PRISM;--

  • 629 posts

A rather interesting and thought-provoking essay. I also felt great disappointment at Kinsella's reply.


  • 0

#4
Giedrius

Giedrius
  • 84 posts

Thank you for sharing this, it was very interesting and helpful.

I'm a
big fan of Kinsella's works, especially about intellectual property,
but it's really a disappointment how Kinsella responded to a valid
criticism.

Who's interested in a topic of unschooling I would
recommend David
Friedman's blog articles
about that, he raised his children (they
are adults right now) according this philosophy and has a few helpful
things to say about that.


  • 0

#5
Stephan Kinsella

Stephan Kinsella
  • 13 posts

It didn't seem like a valid criticism to me. This is not even a political topic. It was just a friendly, intelligent discussion by two fathers about child-rearing. We are doing the best we can. And we talked about connections to this and being libertarian--such as the non-aggression principle re spanking, etc. That is not "thickish" it is just a regular conversation.

Then some guy starts accusing us of being in favor of minarchy, the police, using force against our kids--it seemed bizarre and out of left field. Apparently he has some strong personal views about some "unschooling" movement and draws a lot of connections between libertarian principles and his views, but he does it by doing what those who believe in libertarian "thickism" do--using sloppy concepts and overly-metaphorical langauge (for example the use of "imposing" -- this is a vague term -- it is one problem with Jan Lester's libertarian theories in Escape from Leviathan -- http://mises.org/journals/jls/17_4/17_4_4.pdf and with Partick Burke's focus on "harm" in his No Harm book http://www.reasonpapers.com/pdf/20/rp_20_13.pdf -- the overuse of metaphors (http://blog.mises.org/7614/objectivist-law-prof-mossoff-on-copyright-or-the-misuse-of-labor-value-and-creation-metaphors/).  And in fact it leads them both to error: Lester's support of contract is confused, as is his support of IP; Burke ends up opposing "dueling" and blackmail).

So here we have someone criticizing my and Moly's sincere, honest, normal, libertarian efforts to talk about how to care for and rear a child, and some guy talks about how our ideas are "dangerous," it's sad, we favor force on our kids, we favor the police. Obviously the only way to make such claims about two anti-violent anarchist fathers is to have some pet theory, some unique view of the world in which the world looks faarr different to you than to most other peopel--a view, apparenlty this radical "Unschooling" view, a view that leads you say say that designing a classroom is "central planning."  A view that says kids should choose their own teachers, that it's imposing force on them to educate them in normal ways. Well this is not my view, and I'll be honest this guy sounds like a complete crank. I have no reason whatsoever to believe this guy has a coherent theory of education that wold justify his comments and that is required by libertarianism. The idea that he can start a school in 5 years "wiht his girlfriend" that will persuade parents to hand over their kids to this experiment seems risible to me. But what do I know. I can't tell b/c he didn't go into his reasoning for his unschooling views; he just assumed the listener was not only familiar with them but accepted them. I don't really see much reason to reply further to this guy.


  • 0

#6
fingolfin

fingolfin
  • 2001 posts

I must say I experienced this Aaron0883 fellow's post as being pissy and pedantic on the whole - valid criticisms or not. I mean Stef and Stephan were just having an (extremely interesting) informal conversation after all. 


  • 0

#7
Jimmy

Jimmy
  • 1293 posts

For what it's worth, my wife and I (parents to be, yay!) really really enjoyed the conversation between Kinsella and Steph and would donate extra to hear more on educating children from every angle imaginable. I find some of the the ideas of unschooling very intriguing, and am sympathetic to them, at least in theory. The same goes for Montessori and homeschooling. We are very much for separating the wheat from the chaff, without becoming beholden.

In a free society all of these ideas & approaches (and so many more that we can't possibly imagine today) would be free to compete, letting the effective flourish and the kooky wither. Given the overwhelming disproportionate transaction costs and path dependencies built into our current system, "everything else" (Montessori, unschooling, etc.) is competing for the small thoughtful, daring percentage of parents who are seeking, and can afford to seek, a better way. So in the meantime, if we want a free market in ideas on & approaches to  education, we will have to create it in the best way possible. And the way we do that, I think, is very much in the direction of Kinsella & Stephan's conversation. We simply need to talk about it and curiously explore - with as few assumptions and preconceived notions as possible. And I certainly don't think making accusations or imputing motives is helpful to any conversation. 

 


  • 0

#8
Jimmy

Jimmy
  • 1293 posts

Here's a good intro thread on unschooling we had back in 2008: http://freedomainradio.com/BOARD/forums/t/18377.aspx


  • 0

#9
Aaron White

Aaron White
  • 39 posts

"It didn't seem like a valid criticism to me. This is not even a
political topic. It was just a friendly, intelligent discussion by two
fathers about child-rearing. We are doing the best we can. And we talked
about connections to this and being libertarian--such as the
non-aggression principle re spanking, etc. That is not "thickish" it is
just a regular conversation."

I had no intention of making you guys feel bad or to attack you.  I tried not to make it sound accusitory or anything else.  Maybe I failed in places?  I rather tried to critique ideas that were presented to the public as ideas on parenting.  I am the blogger for the School Sucks Podcast, and I know most of the School Sucks audience follows Freedomain Radio.  I thought this would be an interesting subject for the people there.

"Then some guy starts accusing us of being in favor of minarchy, the
police, using force against our kids--it seemed bizarre and out of left
field."

I do not think you or Stefan are minarchists and believe in police.  I used minarchy and anarchy for the sake of analogy.

I asked you some questions in the reply at School Sucks Project and I am interested in how you address them.  I do believe that forced is used if a child has no choice of his teachers, his school, and his activites.

The rest of your response doesn't really address anything, but to use Molyneux's terminology, is just "critique by advective."  I would be interested in how my ideas are wrong.  I do believe I grounded them fairly well, and made a good defense for them.  If you do not believe so, and you think I made logical leaps.  I would be interested in where you think I made those.

 

"I must say I experienced this Aaron0883 fellow's post as being
pissy and pedantic on the whole - valid criticisms or not. I mean Stef
and Stephan were just having an (extremely interesting) informal
conversation after all"

 

The podcast/video made was titled "Libertarian Parenting."  It seemed to be presented to the public as interesting ideas that others might be able to learn from.  If two people made a video having an informal conversation about how they kill their bugs as advice to others, and I think their ideas have some problematic strategies I might make a video saying why i find their ideas problematic.  I probably wouldn't since that isn't very interesting to me, but you get the point.  I am sorry you had such a negative view of my post.  In what way would you suggest (without watering down the message), to make my post less pissy and pedantic?

 

"In a free society all of these ideas & approaches (and so many more
that we can't possibly imagine today) would be free to compete, letting
the effective flourish and the kooky wither. Given the overwhelming
disproportionate transaction costs and path dependencies built into our
current system, "everything else" (Montessori, unschooling, etc.) is
competing for the small thoughtful, daring percentage of parents who are
seeking, and can afford to seek, a better way."

 

The problem I see, is that there is no free market for children.  Lets make an extreme analogy.  If I made a similar comment and ended it with "
competing for the small thoughtful, daring percentage of slaveowners who are
seeking, and can afford to seek, a better way."  Do you think the slaves are going to get great treatment?  I believe once we open free market ideas for children it will be the end of systematic child abuse, but until that happens children are to the mercy of their (non)philosopher king.

I am super interested in criticism, however it seems like the conversation has had nothing to do with the points that I made.  If someone thinks I am wrong or even said something in an unideal way.  I would super appriciate some feedback, thanks.

 

 

 


  • 0

#10
Michael_J

Michael_J
  • 638 posts

@Mr. Kinsella - Is the subject of Unschooling one that at all interests you? If so, I'd be glad to discuss the topic. If not, that's perfectly alright.

NOTE: In the interest of full disclosure, I have been an "unschooling facilitator" for the past two years for my now 7 year old son.


  • 0

"False ideas never die; only their supporters eventually snuff it." - Hervé This


#11
Rose

Rose
  • 14 posts

 

"It was just a friendly, intelligent discussion by two fathers about child-rearing..." "Then some guy starts accusing us of being in favor of minarchy, the police, using force against our kids--it seemed bizarre and out of left field."

 

Maybe it seemed out in left-field to you because you're not able to see it from his perspective- it seems like in both article responses you wrote, the language is full of condescending and attacking remarks. You keep labeling his ideas as 'pet theories', 'thickish', and you put quotations on things to portray his thoughts as out of the ordinary (which, even if they are, is not at all a bad thing- how many people do you know who think Libertarianism and anarchism is 'out of the ordinary', yet you still believe in the ideas, does that make you a lunatic Stephan? It's interesting to me that in your responses you keep trying to make Aaron seem outlandish, like here: "The idea that he can start a school in 5 years "wiht his girlfriend" that will persuade parents to hand over their kids to this experiment seems risible to me." That's fine, it can seem risible to you, that doesn't mean that it is- it means that is your personal take on it. I'm sure Aaron wrote the article for people who were actually open to ideas of Unschooling; not to entertain people who find the ideas laughable, like yourself. Also, what's with the quotes on 'with his girlfriend'? Is it outlandish that someone would desire to open a school with someone he shares his life with? I don't think you think that at all. I think you were trying to make him look foolish again, as if he operates off of whims or something.

 

 

"Apparently he has some strong personal views about some "unschooling" movement and draws a lot of connections between libertarian principles and his views, but he does it by doing what those who believe in libertarian "thickism" do--using sloppy concepts and overly-metaphorical langauge." 

It seems like you have a preference for writing a certain way, which is fine, but plenty of people read the article and understood what he was communicating very well. It's not like it was written in ebonics, when even if it was, I'm sure you'd be able to understand the connections easily as well, assuming you're an intelligent guy.

 

"Obviously the only way to make such claims about two anti-violent anarchist fathers is to have some pet theory, some unique view of the world in which the world looks faarr different to you than to most other peopel." Yes, they are very unique theories that not many people hold, which inspires people to write articles about it to spread them further.

 

It's pretty clear you're having an really hard time understanding where he is coming from, seeing as your entire responses have been trying to pin him as stupid instead of actually arguing about the points he made in his article. It would be nice to see something a little more intellectual and a little less defensive if you are going to bother responding at all. To open the lines a little more though, I can see why the critique would be bothersome to you in the first place: like you said, you're both trying to do your best, and with that, I imagine it's easy to feel bothered when someone says they think you could do better. To clarify, the connection between the ideas lies in the overall, long-term consequences of sending your kid to school five days a week without offering him a choice otherwise. As Aaron asked you, would you be willing to let your kid stay home and learn on his own in whatever way he wants- learning physics by playing basketball, reading, writing, living in general the way he wants- without ultimately forcing him to go to a center of planned-learning, at a set time, for a set amount of days per week? If you are, then you are ultimately an Unschooler, which is awesome. If not, it might be of interest to you and your kid.

 


  • 0

#12
Jimmy

Jimmy
  • 1293 posts

[color= #333333; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica; font-size: 13px]"The problem I see, is that there is no free market for children.  Lets make an extreme analogy.  If I made a similar comment and ended it with " competing for the small thoughtful, daring percentage of slaveowners who are seeking, and can afford to seek, a better way."  Do you think the slaves are going to get great treatment? "[/color]

Could you help me out with the connection between slave owners and parents in this analogy? 

 

 


  • 0

#13
Jimmy

Jimmy
  • 1293 posts

I understand, am familiar with and sympathetic to the unschooling perspective. In fact, I am leaning heavily in that direction in regards to my own child.

What I don't understand, and would like some assistance with, is the presumption that all other forms (i.e. Montessori) are a priori coercive and/or violent in nature. Aaron and RobR, if I understand them correctly, seem to be suggesting that this is the case. Could someone expand on these arguments and make the case (if this is indeed what you are arguing) that coercive violence is implicit in these other methods? Perhaps I am misunderstanding your arguments, or am missing some obvious logical step, but I do not see it. 


  • 0

#14
Michael_J

Michael_J
  • 638 posts

What I don't understand, and would like some assistance with, is the presumption that all other forms (i.e. Montessori) are a priori coercive and/or violent in nature.

How do you see the violence of the state? Imagine what happens when you refuse to cooperate with it.

How do you see the violence of modern education? Imagine what happens when a child refuses to cooperate with it...

I honestly don't know what happens in Montessori schools when a child refuses to cooperate with/attend them. Perhaps someone else does. I do know what happens when a child refuses to cooperate with present "school system". If Montessori handles those situations in an non-coercive fashion then fantastic. I know "free schools" handle it non-coercively. The question ultimately is, how does the system deal with those who refuse to cooperate with it... Does that make sense?


  • 0

"False ideas never die; only their supporters eventually snuff it." - Hervé This


#15
Jimmy

Jimmy
  • 1293 posts

Thanks Michael. I'm not so much looking for ways to see the violence in the state or public education as a whole, as I'm pretty well acquainted with the arguments and hold them as my own. 

What I am seeking is specific insight into the presumption that the practice of Montessori schooling is a priori coercive/violent. The commenters seem to be implying that this is the case, and I do not see it - though I admit I may be missing something in my thought process.

 


  • 0

#16
hkw

hkw

    '; DROP DATABASE PRISM;--

  • 629 posts

It didn't seem like a valid criticism to me. This is not even a political topic. It was just a friendly, intelligent discussion by two fathers about child-rearing.


It was a very enjoyable and intelligent discussion, I completely agree! Thanks for doing that convo with Stef, and I hope you participate in future conversations. :-)

That said, I don't think that the essayist's criticism was of the nature or intended subject of the conversation, but of particular elements of your parenting decisions and whether they are consistent with a pro-NAP philosophy. I don't think that he chose the most pleasant or respectful way of presenting these criticisms, unfortunately, but I'm not sure that this invalidates his criticisms. I agree with some of the other posters here that I did not find your response to him to be pleasant or respectful, in turn.

We are doing the best we can.


This community has never accepted this as a justification for parenting decisions.

using sloppy concepts and overly-metaphorical langauge


I quite agree that his language was imprecise and that the analogy between certain forms of schooling and minarchy needs some fleshing out before it is intellectually satisfying to me. In particular, it is not clear to me that children attending a school with a structured curriculum is necessarily involuntary on the part of the children, so long as the parents have made it 100% clear that their children's preferences are to be respected, though I can easily see how it would become coercive if that line of communication broke down between parent and child.

and some guy talks about how our ideas are "dangerous,"


I also experienced this statement in the essay as sensationalist and unpleasant. I think both you and Stef are in the top < 1/100th of a percentile in terms of the world's parents, and that your parenting techniques are a tremendous step in the right direction. I congratulate you on your efforts to apply sensitivity and reasoning to your parenting. Stef, whose parenting I have heard much more about, is half of the single best couple of parents I've ever heard of and exceed anything I could have dreamed of for parents before coming to FDR.

a view that leads you say say that designing a classroom is "central planning."


I thought that this argument by the essayist was pretty compelling. I'd love to hear some counter-debate on why designing a curriculum for young students is NOT akin to central planning. I admit that I felt a tad disturbed and mystified by the language that you and Stefan used about "managing" children, and was perplexed by the assertion that assigning a week's worth of homework instead of a night's worth is a large victory for the child.


  • 0

#17
Stephan Kinsella

Stephan Kinsella
  • 13 posts

It didn't seem like a valid criticism to me. This is not even a political topic. It was just a friendly, intelligent discussion by two fathers about child-rearing.


It was a very enjoyable and intelligent discussion, I completely agree! Thanks for doing that convo with Stef, and I hope you participate in future conversations. :-)

That said, I don't think that the essayist's criticism was of the nature or intended subject of the conversation, but of particular elements of your parenting decisions and whether they are consistent with a pro-NAP philosophy. I don't think that he chose the most pleasant or respectful way of presenting these criticisms, unfortunately, but I'm not sure that this invalidates his criticisms. I agree with some of the other posters here that I did not find your response to him to be pleasant or respectful, in turn.

We are doing the best we can.


This community has never accepted this as a justification for parenting decisions.

 



using sloppy concepts and overly-metaphorical langauge


I quite agree that his language was imprecise and that the analogy between certain forms of schooling and minarchy needs some fleshing out before it is intellectually satisfying to me. In particular, it is not clear to me that children attending a school with a structured curriculum is necessarily involuntary on the part of the children, so long as the parents have made it 100% clear that their children's preferences are to be respected, though I can easily see how it would become coercive if that line of communication broke down between parent and child.

and some guy talks about how our ideas are "dangerous,"


I also experienced this statement in the essay as sensationalist and unpleasant. I think both you and Stef are in the top < 1/100th of a percentile in terms of the world's parents, and that your parenting techniques are a tremendous step in the right direction. I congratulate you on your efforts to apply sensitivity and reasoning to your parenting. Stef, whose parenting I have heard much more about, is half of the single best couple of parents I've ever heard of and exceed anything I could have dreamed of for parents before coming to FDR.

a view that leads you say say that designing a classroom is "central planning."

Well, I was maybe too humble. I'm doing a damn good job, better than most other parents I know, and I bet MOly is too. I have to say I just have little interest in the "unschooling" ideas, given the glimpse I've seen here. I don't mind if others do it. It's a-libertairan IMO and libertarianism is what I"m interested in. I bristle when people go over-thickish and try to make everything about libertarianism. The idea that a classroom is a bad idea b/c it's "centrally planned" is IMO ridiculous.  I am quite happy with my parenting and educational views and am content to let others have theirs. I see no reason to think the unschooling ideas are compelled by libertarianism, so it just doesn't interest me. My approach is fine and works for us.

I thought that this argument by the essayist was pretty compelling. I'd love to hear some counter-debate on why designing a curriculum for young students is NOT akin to central planning. I admit that I felt a tad disturbed and mystified by the language that you and Stefan used about "managing" children, and was perplexed by the assertion that assigning a week's worth of homework instead of a night's worth is a large victory for the child.


It wasn't about that--it was about how the way it's done teaches time management. Our disagreement about homework was about how much is assigned. We both probably think less should be assigned than typically is. But I certainly don't think *some* homework is "coercive" or whatever.

I was probably too snippy w/ Aaron at first but I was taken aback by what I took to be a ridiculous charge on me--that I'm a minarchist or believe in force. I see now that according to his view of libertarianism, if you send your child to a school, and don't let him "choose" his own teacher, this is subjecting him to some kind of central planning and kidnapping or something. I strongly disagree with this, and thus in my view it's pretty obvious there are some serious errors in the thought that underlies this approach. So, no, I have no interest in learning more about it.

  • 0

#18
Formelyknown

Formelyknown
  • 445 posts

I love Aaron's drama aka "unresolved mommy issues".

 

*Start to eat Pop-corn* [H][B]


  • 0

To follow ethics is subjective but the interaction between each individual's behavior is objective if you choose honesty over deception.


#19
Jimmy

Jimmy
  • 1293 posts

[font=" 'Trebuchet MS', Helvetica; font-size: 13px"]"I strongly disagree with this, and thus in my view it's pretty obvious there are some serious errors in the thought that underlies this approach. So, no, I have no interest in learning more about it."[/font]

Mr Kinsella, I of course care not if you choose or choose not to become more informed about unschooling. But surely you recognize the logical error in basing that decision on your perception of Aaron's interpretation of it, as opposed to dealing with the content of the approach itself. 

A good place to start, at least as an introduction to the person who coined the term, would be Jeff Riggenbach's Mises Daily titled John Holt: Libertarian Outsider.


  • 0

#20
Rose

Rose
  • 14 posts

I love Aaron's drama aka "unresolved mommy issues".

 

*Start to eat Pop-corn* /BOARD/emoticons/emotion-11.gif/BOARD/emoticons/emotion-22.gif

 

 Ohhh man, if you wrote that comment towards anyone else on the FDR forums you would get ripped a new asshole, but because it's Aaron, you probably wont.


  • 0

#21
Jimmy

Jimmy
  • 1293 posts

I love Aaron's drama aka "unresolved mommy issues".

 

*Start to eat Pop-corn* /BOARD/emoticons/emotion-11.gif/BOARD/emoticons/emotion-22.gif

 

 Ohhh man, if you wrote that comment towards anyone else on the FDR forums you would get ripped a new asshole, but because it's Aaron, you probably wont.

No Rose I thought that was pretty rude and shitty remark. I just figured he was a troll so did not engage.


  • 0

#22
Formelyknown

Formelyknown
  • 445 posts

Gotcha!

I know, and I like it.

Did Aaron let you down by choosing the side of an irational stranger? telling you how irational you are, instead of been curious about how you feel yet?

 

P.S Are you aware you are the dude and Aaron is the chick in your relation? [:)]


  • 0

To follow ethics is subjective but the interaction between each individual's behavior is objective if you choose honesty over deception.


#23
hkw

hkw

    '; DROP DATABASE PRISM;--

  • 629 posts

I love Aaron's drama aka "unresolved mommy issues".

 

*Start to eat Pop-corn* /BOARD/emoticons/emotion-11.gif/BOARD/emoticons/emotion-22.gif

I'm rather surprised that someone who joined the site over a year ago would make a comment like this. =[


  • 0

#24
Jimmy

Jimmy
  • 1293 posts

Gotcha!

I know, and I like it.

Did Aaron let you down by choosing the side of an irational stranger? telling you how irational you are, instead of been curious about how you feel yet?

 

P.S Are you aware you are the dude and Aaron is the chick in your relation? /BOARD/emoticons/emotion-1.gif

Banned in 3, 2, 1...


  • 0

#25
Formelyknown

Formelyknown
  • 445 posts

You guys are so hypocrites. I never stop doing this kind of assholish behaviors since the begining but you were so blind to see your own bias attitudes toward others.


  • 0

To follow ethics is subjective but the interaction between each individual's behavior is objective if you choose honesty over deception.


#26
IDontDonateAnymore

IDontDonateAnymore
  • 453 posts

I was probably too snippy w/ Aaron at first but I was taken aback by what I took to be a ridiculous charge on me--that I'm a minarchist or believe in force. I see now that according to his view of libertarianism, if you send your child to a school, and don't let him "choose" his own teacher, this is subjecting him to some kind of central planning and kidnapping or something. I strongly disagree with this, and thus in my view it's pretty obvious there are some serious errors in the thought that underlies this approach. So, no, I have no interest in learning more about it.

Merely "too snippy" is a bit of an understatement, imo. I think it would be a good idea to look inside into why you react in such a hostile way to a rather unhostile critique of your parenting style.

I saw a breaking of the NAP in a story Stef told on a recent call-in show where he took Izzy home from the playground seeing she was quite tired despite her desire to keep playing on the swings and her crying all the while saying he was so sorry he had to do this. She napped 3 hours after they got home and he will most likely get retroactive consent for what he did, but it appears to me a violation of the NAP occured here.

Do you not see a violation of the NAP in this situation? If not, why not?

I'd be interested to see answers from others as well.


  • 0

#27
Stephan Kinsella

Stephan Kinsella
  • 13 posts

No, that's not aggression. I frankly think it's silly and ridiculous to characterize it this way.


  • 0

#28
Stefan Molyneux

Stefan Molyneux
  • 19755 posts

I saw a breaking of the NAP in a story Stef told on a recent call-in show where he took Izzy home from the playground seeing she was quite tired despite her desire to keep playing on the swings and her crying all the while saying he was so sorry he had to do this. She napped 3 hours after they got home and he will most likely get retroactive consent for what he did, but it appears to me a violation of the NAP occured here.

If there is retroactive consent, there is no NAP violation.


  • 0

Please join the new Freedomain Radio Facebook page:


Freedomain Radio | Promote Your Page Too
18322869182.6864.748552535.png



stefan_molyneux


#29
ChangeOfSeasons

ChangeOfSeasons
  • 38 posts

I saw a breaking of the NAP in a story Stef told on a recent call-in show where he took Izzy home from the playground seeing she was quite tired despite her desire to keep playing on the swings and her crying all the while saying he was so sorry he had to do this. She napped 3 hours after they got home and he will most likely get retroactive consent for what he did, but it appears to me a violation of the NAP occured here.

If there is retroactive consent, there is no NAP violation.

How about rewording what he said to this in the interest of getting a response to this specific situation and his question. [:)]

[font=" 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: 12px"]I saw a breaking of the NAP in a story Stef told on a recent call-in show where he took Izzy home from the playground seeing she was quite tired despite her desire to keep playing on the swings and her crying all the while saying he was so sorry he had to do this. She napped 3 hours after they got home and it [/font][font=" 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: 12px"]appears to me a violation of the NAP occured here.[/font]


  • 0

#30
ChangeOfSeasons

ChangeOfSeasons
  • 38 posts

The principle remains the gun in the room.

If the child doesn't want to go to Montessori or any place of learning...are you willing to use violence, the withdraw of affection, coercion, arguments from authority, or punishment to force them to go?

Does the child have a legitimate choice in the matter?  What are the options?

Is there any evidence that directed instruction is healthier for a child rather than the child following their own direction?  Does it have unintended consequences on motivation, self-respect, or self-esteem?

I have never experienced what I would consider a skilled teacher.. I found the argument that teaching is a fine skill hard to grasp.  I understand the advantage of an accessible peer group with Montessori or centralized schooling, but any teacher being more in-tune with the child than the parents seems unlikely to me...especially when trying to teach a group of children instead of one on one instruction.    I have found teachers to only ever be obstructive... I naturally read subjects I am interested in with great voracity.  (I could be totally wrong if there are outstanding teachers or a skill I don't know about)...  

I really enjoyed the critique Aaron, thank you for writing it and giving School Sucks some additional content and perspective :)

RobR made a good post with some questions that the thread would really benefit from if they could be specifically answered, specially by Stephen and/or Stefan , of which not many direct answers are being offered to the specific criticisms. [:)]


  • 0

#31
hkw

hkw

    '; DROP DATABASE PRISM;--

  • 629 posts

I saw a breaking of the NAP in a story Stef told on a recent call-in
show where he took Izzy home from the playground seeing she was quite
tired despite her desire to keep playing on the swings and her crying
all the while saying he was so sorry he had to do this. She napped 3
hours after they got home and he will most likely get retroactive
consent for what he did, but it appears to me a violation of the NAP
occured here.

I think adaywillcome changed his mind a bit about this after he and I talked following his posting of this -- I will let him comment on it if he feels like it. :-)


  • 0

#32
ChangeOfSeasons

ChangeOfSeasons
  • 38 posts

I saw a breaking of the NAP in a story Stef told on a recent call-in
show where he took Izzy home from the playground seeing she was quite
tired despite her desire to keep playing on the swings and her crying
all the while saying he was so sorry he had to do this. She napped 3
hours after they got home and he will most likely get retroactive
consent for what he did, but it appears to me a violation of the NAP
occured here.

I think adaywillcome changed his mind a bit about this after he and I talked following his posting of this -- I will let him comment on it if he feels like it. :-)

Cool.. I find this all very interesting and love reading the discussion just wish more direct answers to critiques[H]


  • 0

#33
candice

candice
  • 682 posts

After listening to the talk between Stef and Kinsella, and reading this article, I still lean towards home schooling my own children when I have them, because I believe in freedom for the child, so maybe that's more of an unschooling approach, I haven't done any research on what unschooling is exactly though.

I thought one really good point raised in the article that crossed my mind also when I listened to the podcast with Stef and Kinsella, was how Kinsella won't remind his son of certain things like if his son forgot some books, and how he won't take responsibility if his son is bored because it's not his job to entertain his son, but I think this is totally unnecessary, I mean, I make small forgetful mistakes like that all the time, for example I've lost count of the amount of times now I've headed out to the groceries and not put enough money onto my debit card for it, the consequences suck but just out of plain human fault, I forget! Thank goodness that when I do go out with my partner he double checks I've got everything I need and that I check he's got everything he needs. If we got to the shops and I didnt have my wallet, and he said "Oh I know you didn't have your wallet, I just wanted to teach you a lesson!" I think my blood would boil.

I didn't find Aaron's article nasty in any way, however I did think he showed genuine concern and raised many excellent points.

So thanks to him I guess for doing the critique.


  • 0

 


My blog!


 


#34
David Friedman

David Friedman
  • 2 posts

I don't know if "coercive/violent" is quite the right term, but the conventional approach to schooling, including Montessori, does involve some people making choices for other people that those other people could have made for themselves. That's more defensible in the adult/child situation than the adult/adult situation, since the adult does have knowledge the child doesn't. On the other hand, just as in the analogous argument about government experts making decisions for people, the child also has knowledge the adult does not have--about his own interests, abilities, and the like. And the child also has, as in the analogous case, a considerably stronger reason to care about his own welfare than does the adult making decisions for him--especially if the adult is a teacher not a parent.

Our daughter went briefly to a Montessori school. They thought she wasn't ready to learn to read--wanted her to go through whatever sequence of learning activities was supposed to come first. We thought she was. My wife taught her to read--I think it took a couple of weeks. They had a theory they wanted to fit the kid into--whether or not the kid fit. We then gave her the choice of where to go to school, and she ended up in a very small private school run on Sudbury Valley (unschooling) lines.

A second thing disturbed us about the Montessori school. They at some point were telling the kids about how life evolved. My wife is a geologist/paleontologist, and their sequence of what happened in what order was wrong. People make mistakes, of course--but when she pointed it out to them, they pretty clearly weren't interested. It was enough that they teach the kids--how true what they taught was was not very important. Their version made a nice story, and that was enough.

I do not know if you have thought about the negative effect of being in a profession where you are mostly dealing with people who know less than you, are smaller than you, and are under your authority. It encourages attitudes that may not be what you want in the people responsible for helping you bring up your children. Twice in my high school experience, once in a good public school and once in a very good private school--the same one Obama later sent his daughters to--I encountered a teacher saying something flatly wrong. In one case, it had been known to be wrong for thirty years or so (she thought Piltdown man was a real ancient man). In the other it was a mistake in physics--by the physics teacher. In that case I offered a proof of the contrary conclusion, he had no rebuttal, but insisted that since he was the teacher he knew. It's easy enough to see how that attitude--more interested in sounding knowledgeable than in figuring out whether what you say is true--can develop in that environment.

Also, if you think about the standard curriculum (more standard in non-Montessori schools), you will have a hard time defending the claim that it is what every child needs to know. How many ever use trig, for example, or even algebra? But the institutions aren't driven by what is actually of interest to, or likely to be useful to, the children.

I have two children who were unschooled, first in a very small private school and then home unschooled--I describe the process as throwing books at them and seeing which ones stick. When my daughter went away to college, one of the things that bothered her was that most of the other students took it for granted that cancelling a class was a good thing, and were not bothered when the French teacher spent his time discussing French culture (in English) instead of speaking French with them. Most of them weren't really there because they wanted to learn what was being taught. Another was that the work she was being given to do wasn't of any ultimate use--she was writing papers that nobody but the professor grading them would ever read. She wanted to be doing things, not just pretending to. When she had the opportunity--Oberlin has a one month winter term in which students can do their own projects--she translated a renassance Italian cookbook. The translation is now on the web for people interested in cooking history to use.

One thing that bothered me reading Kinsella's post was that he clearly did not know what unschooling was, showed no obvious interest in finding out--but was nonetheless dismissive of it. As someone else mentioned in the thread, I have a couple of posts on my blog discussing the idea in some detail. Curious participants in this discussion may want to look at it.

http://daviddfriedman.blogspot.com/2007/12/home-unschooling-theory.html

http://daviddfriedman.blogspot.com/2007/12/home-unschooling-practice.html

 


  • 0

#35
Stephan Kinsella

Stephan Kinsella
  • 13 posts

I don't know if "coercive/violent" is quite the right term, but the conventional approach to schooling, including Montessori, does involve some people making choices for other people that those other people could have made for themselves. That's more defensible in the adult/child situation than the adult/adult situation, since the adult does have knowledge the child doesn't. On the other hand, just as in the analogous argument about government experts making decisions for people, the child also has knowledge the adult does not have--about his own interests, abilities, and the like. And the child also has, as in the analogous case, a considerably stronger reason to care about his own welfare than does the adult making decisions for him--especially if the adult is a teacher not a parent.

Our daughter went briefly to a Montessori school. They thought she wasn't ready to learn to read--wanted her to go through whatever sequence of learning activities was supposed to come first. We thought she was. My wife taught her to read--I think it took a couple of weeks.

 

Yes. Montessori says teach writing before reading, etc. I didn't follow it either. I taught my kid to read earlier than they say. But I don't see a problem with this. Parental involvement is good.

They had a theory they wanted to fit the kid into--whether or not the kid fit. We then gave her the choice of where to go to school, and she ended up in a very small private school run on Sudbury Valley (unschooling) lines.

A second thing disturbed us about the Montessori school. They at some point were telling the kids about how life evolved. My wife is a geologist/paleontologist, and their sequence of what happened in what order was wrong. People make mistakes, of course--but when she pointed it out to them, they pretty clearly weren't interested. It was enough that they teach the kids--how true what they taught was was not very important. Their version made a nice story, and that was enough.

I have never seen anything like this at our school. Ours is AMI. Maybe that's the difference. I don't know. 


  • 0