It’s amazing how the greatest insights, academia, answers and knowledge were not created in a classroom.
They were created by people that were already smart, thinking and learning in different locations, who then shared this knowledge with other people.
They weren’t doing it because they had to.
They were doing it because they wanted to.
But somehow, schooling is supposed to create people that are going to do the same.
I think that is why there is a schooling to try to create people like this, but it cannot be done.
Education happens anywhere.
I have no right to educate a man if he does not want to be educated.
But I just find it fascinating that the smartest things ever created were created by men and women that just sat around in their homes, thinking and writing.
School had nothing to do with a lot of these instances.
So what does school really do?
Don’t get me wrong: people do learn at school.
But I think this is merely by chance.
These advances in academia were created by people that love knowledge (not all people do so, nor should they).
It is impossible to make everyone a Newton, and this is why schools are failing: they want everyone to achieve the same intelligence level instead of maximizing individual intelligence levels.
There is no true learning in schools: it is merely repeating what others have already learned.
There can be some learning this way, but most of the time, kids just memorize it to get good grades.
Because that is how the school system is designed.
This is why people “forget” what they “learned” in school.
Don’t you find it ironic that people say “I ‘forgot’ what I learned in school”, but you never forget how to ride a bike?
That’s because you actually learned how to ride the bike.
You just memorized in school.
But this is no fault of their own: this is the fault of the education system itself.
Learning is a truly individual process.
Don’t believe me, and look at the wide variety of things that have inspired the greatest names throughout academic history.
There is no way that we can all learn the same way.
But this is what schooling attempts to do.
It is flawed from the beginning.
Why is it that people in Newton’s time weren’t worried that there were more Newtons?
Because it didn’t matter that much.
Learning happens on an individual basis.
I will not say that learning is overrated, but our education system is way overrated, and in fact I would argue that it does almost nothing at all.
I would say that most people, after they learn to read and do math (which happens early on), they learn nothing from their later years in school.
A man’s mind is his own: he should do with it what he pleases.
It does not matter that some people do not know how to read if they do not want to read.
It is their own decision.
So when should there be intervention in people’s lives?
Only when there is intervention in other people’s lives.
In other words, if I do not know how to write, it does not affect anyone else’s life.
If I steal their car, it does.
If I am a Christian and someone else is an atheist, if we both merely announce our denominations, then we have not affected each other’s lives.
But if I stab a man in the chest, I clearly have.
These are the only distinctions which a truly just law should consider.
If I know how to do arithmetic and love calculating and someone else doesn’t know how to count, then I can’t say that we must force this man to learn to count if he is happy with how he is.
This brings into question who is living our lives?
“Oh, but everyone should know how to count.”
Look at how many people drop out of schools.
That should tell you something.
The people that love to learn should not be hurt by the people that hate it.
The people that are learning are not hurting the people that hate to learn.
They have nothing to do with the fact that these people do not want to learn.
It is their own desire.
Intervening upon this is only going to drive them down further into their own desire and make them angry that someone else is trying to teach them something that they do not want to learn.
Leave them alone.
Kids do not want to eat broccoli, but their parents make them because it is good for them.
Obviously, you cannot say that the parents should not be allowed to feed their child broccoli by law, because that does not make any sense.
The kids should be able to do whatever they want without anyone telling them what to do?
I don’t think anyone is arguing for that.
That is why there have to be legal definitions by law of when choices are able to be made, which for the most part, are already in place.
18 to buy cigarettes, 21 to buy alcohol, etc.
What should be a law and what should not be a law?
Should it be legal for someone to steal my stuff?
Should it be legal for people to stab me?
Should it be legal for people to rape me?
What do all of these have in common?
These are things that directly affect me.
Things that I did not consent to.
Should it be legal for me to smoke?
Should it be legal for me to drink alcohol?
Should it be legal for me to do other drugs?
Things are things that I want to do and choose for myself.
I cannot say that you can live my life better than I can, because if that were the case, then I can live your life better than you can.
There is a reason why no one else is making me type this.
There is a reason that when I am hungry, I eat, and no one else eats because I am hungry.
We were created to be individual creatures.
Individual creatures that can love each other.
If I am not hungry, should I be forced by law to eat because someone else thinks it is good for me?
What about limiting my drug use?
Why is it ok for me to eat when I am hungry, but not feed my drug addictions if this is another need that I have?
If I do not care, then you cannot force me by law to ever care.
I will constantly skate around the law, just like kids that never learned about education in the first place.
The only difference is that your tax dollars are paying to keep me in prison.
And your tax dollars are going to force dropouts to go to school.
That is a waste of money.
The individual is the most important part of all of our beings.
Am I you?
Are you me?
Am I me?
Are you you?
Do you see how all of these statements are?
I cannot treat you exactly the same as I would Stephen Hawking.
Because our conversations would be different.
I can, however, say that you should not be stabbed.
And neither should Stephen Hawking.
This is the extent to which equality should be pursued.
Everything else destroys the individual.
And that means that it destroys you and I.