Politics is all about causing destruction and patting yourself on the back.
That’s exactly what university chancellors do when they celebrate enrolled students who have piled on tens of thousands of dollars of debt to learn faulty philosophies and basically to get drilled in the head with agenda-pushing.
Teachers are not the students’ slaves.
And neither are the students the teachers’ slaves.
The teacher decides how to teach the class: period. If the teacher is bad, then the students should have the right to tell other students that the teacher is bad, and no student should be required by administration to take that course.
You replace the teacher and replace the course, and there you go.
However, the administrator also does not have to do this either, for perhaps there are just lazy students, and the teacher is actually a good teacher.
However, ultimately, a person’s life is his or her own responsibility. If a teacher gets fired, it is his or her responsibility to find a new source of income. If a student gets bad grades, it is his or her responsibility to get them up. And it is up to the student to determine his own education: not a government official, nor a school administrator, nor even a teacher.
The hope is that teachers inspire kids, but kids have to decide for themselves whether or not they are going to learn, and if they don’t, it is no one’s fault but their own, so they should bear the consequences of their decisions, whether they ultimately become economical, romantic, literary, mathematical, scientific, historical, etc.
Students should be able to decide which teachers they want to learn from (if at all possible practically, personnel-wise and financially possible from an administrative standpoint: if a school is stubborn, allow free market competition to eventually meet the needs of the market if choice like this is what they desire), and if that isn’t possible, it is still up to the student to put his or her own education into his or her own hands. The public library is seen as a dirty, gross injustice in today’s world, because teachers aren’t getting paid and kids are learning in a building called a “public library” instead of a building called a “public school”, but if education is truly our goal, then we can’t victimize libraries, nor condemn people as “uncaring to the poor” if we suggest that they learn from the public library instead of a government school (public libraries are typically free, from MY experience).
In other words, their ignorance is their own fault, and no one is responsible to these people except themselves.
(Obviously, it is the parents’ responsibility to take care of kids, but I’m talking more of anyone in general who is in “school” to learn: especially high school kids, college kids, etc.).
The teacher’s union is evil.
Teachers that aren’t that smart, wanting to get paid more for being lazier.
If you want to improve education in this country, legislation is not the answer.
The answer lies within the individuals, and each individual’s own personal desire to learn.
If you don’t have that, then you will suffer the consequences, and it is no one’s fault but your own.
Guilt is not sympathy.
Responsibility is a word that is being attempted to be eliminated out of the English language simply by destroying it’s meaning.
The word will soon follow suit without a change of action.
January 31, 2014.
I learn best by myself, not when someone is “teaching” me, i.e. talking to me (they aren’t really “teaching” me if I’m not learning anything).
There is a direct and also inverse relationship between teaching and learning: the information spewed out is directly related to the information received, although there are only precise times when this happens: not every spew leads to an intake, although they are directly related in that an intake cannot occur without some sort of “spew”, i.e. we cannot learn anything if there is not something to learn.
We cannot see something if there is nothing to see, etc. etc.
The inverse relationship is that one is given and one is received: it’s much like sex, or relationships, or anything like that.
With sex, you give pleasure and receive pleasure. With relationships, you also give and receive.
Your giving is directly related to the other person receiving (desires don’t always match up, much like not everyone who tries to teach teaches every student that he has) and your receiving is directly related to another person giving (although you might not always like what is given to you).
My receiving works best when the “giver” is my own thoughts, i.e. my own curiosity based on the “giver” that is nature.
In other words, nature and my own curiosity stimulates me receiving information about nature.
Curiosity is the gift that allows me to receive understanding.
My love for curiosity can only come from God, because there’s nothing else that I could think of that could give me any other type of love.
But I think that logic and math are at the roots of ALL of our problems, including social problems, psychological problems, philosophical problems, etc. etc.
We just have to discover them, and I honestly believe it is possible to do so.
I don’t think that modern mathematical economics has even come close to deciphering economic theory, and I think that the classical economists have a better understanding of it when they talk about property rights, free trade, etc. etc. I don’t think math has really figured it out, and Rothbard discusses this very well in his piece “Praxeology: The Methodology of Austrian Economics” (I still need to finish reading it, but I’ve been FAR too busy).
But in order for me to learn, nature and my “thoughts” can be the only teacher.
If I’m going to learn from a human, more often than not, I am going to have to recruit their services, and only after discovering them by accident but not just because they have directly contacted me and wished to teach me.
Not every “spewing” leads to an intake, and I’ve learned, from my own thoughts and conclusions, that I learn best when left to my own thoughts and conclusions and only when I selectively pursue who to listen to: not just everyone that wants to “teach” me.
January 16, 2014.
(I originally dated this 2013.
Obviously, I wasn’t used to the new year in January).
If you don’t consistently put good things into your brain, then confusion and lies will clog it up, and they are incredibly hard to get out. Information is a never ending battle: we must be ever vigilant to what we put into our own heads because if we are intellectually lazy, there is a much less likely chance of us understanding anything about the world that we live in, and we will constantly be walking around, observing miseries, and questioning “Why? Why?”, because we didn’t take the time to put good information into our heads earlier on with which we could recall and make associations about the world that we live in and then we could use logic to understand things more clearly and take more appropriate actions.
Without logic, our actions are meaningless, and we will have no idea what we are doing, and confusion will be our companion instead of reason.
Reason is all around us, whether we realize it or not. It is everywhere: it is unavoidable. Why some people accept it while others don’t, especially on very simple issues, is one of the mysteries of the universe that I’m sure I will stew over for a while (stop telling me to “not think about it and just have fun” because thinking IS my fun. I know that a lot of people don’t understand that, but it’s true).
I have spent my whole life wondering why some people are less intelligent than others (as have many others), and I honestly do not know. But those people are no excuse for the rest of us not being able to learn. This is why individual liberty is so important: I have the right to learn even if others do not value education as much as I do.
As I’ve stated before, learning and writing are as natural to me as breathing, and I see a lot of people that say things like “I forgot what I learned in school” and then they complain about how terrible their life is. Would reason not be an appropriate facility to use in this circumstance? Why your life is so terrible? Instead, I see people using faulty logic and their lives get more and more terrible. It seems to me that logic dictates that we must use logic if we wish to understand issues.
There is much vilification of science and logic and reason from religious enthusiasts, and sadly, the only way for these people to break through from this is for God to reveal the truth to them, which I am hopeful of, but in the meantime, the Bible is right: there will be misery in our lives as long as we are here, because of the things that people such as the religious enthusiasts do. There is far too much to discuss to put into this article, but I’m sure I will think about it for a couple of years and then write an article about the subject.
Logic gets a bad rap because of simple things like “Well you can’t see and measure God, so that means science is a lie.” Well, you see, this is one instance where it is important to understand why logic is so important. That is faulty logic. It’s based on the fear of God, but it does not make sense for science to be evil simply because we can measure it but we can’t measure God. I don’t understand how science, which can make our lives happier, is evil, but God, who can also make our lives happier, is good. This is where lies start to entangle truth and make it hard to understand what is true and what is false. Only a divine revelation can explain to us what is true and what is false, and this is why I think that logic is so important. I think that logic is truly divine, in that it explains to us what truths are in the truest sense of the meaning of the word “truth.”
Once again, why some people are not capable of learning certain things or accepting certain truths and do not value learning, I do not know. But I do know that if I am to understand anything about the universe, as is the case for anyone else, then I must value my own education and I must use logic to obtain these truths because logic is as true as can be.
How we know something to be logical when something else is not, and how we can tell if someone isn’t using logic despite the fact that they say they are are topics for many other articles down the road, but I do know that if there are any logical statements to be had in the universe (as I know there are plenty), then we must accept these and use these, and I believe that because these things are so true and so helpful, that we must use our learning and education to learn about more of the logic truths that are in the universe that we might not quite be aware of so that we can add these to our repertoire as well, and our lives will only benefit because of the things that we can learn by using the infinite amount of logic that is out there and is only yet waiting to be discovered.
But we can do none of this if we do not learn, and people will not learn if they do not want to learn. Why I value education while others don’t is a big mystery of the universe, but I do know that if I don’t value my education, I will not learn, and because I value understanding, I must value my education. Why I value education and why others don’t are subjects for many other articles, but if you want to have any understanding of the universe (as many people say they do as evidenced by all of the questions they ask, which is a good thing), you must do two things: you must accept logic, and you must value your own education enough to learn.
My biggest fear is getting older and to stop learning, like many adults do that never cared about school and just stop learning altogether. That is my biggest fear, and sometimes, it feels like one of those “inevitabilities” that adults talk about, but I’m not quite sure if all of these adults are truthful, despite their good intentions. This is one thing that I want to learn about, and one of the (I would guess to be) infinite number of reasons as to why education and logic are so vitally important if we are going to be happy. Perhaps some people can be happy without those things, but I look at all of the things that these two things can do for people and see that it can grant them happiness, whether or not they realize it (for instance, computers are logic machines, and it required some type of understanding to piece them together, and once that was done, happiness was had by all that use computers), so I know that for at least me personally, my happiness will not come unless I am allowed to use logic for all of the learning that I want to obtain in the world, and I think that many others could follow suit because although it could be argued that “ignorance is bliss”, I know this isn’t true for me because I love education so much, and I would imagine that if more people started following down my path, they would be pleasantly surprised at the things that they learned as well.
So if I can get people to love this as much as I do, that would be a good thing, even though this is not my ultimate cause. My ultimate cause is to learn for myself because it makes me happy, but logic dictates that there are only so many things you can do after you learn something, and one of those things is to share it with the world, which is what I’m doing. Whether or not people care is their own decision, but that is not why I am doing this. I am doing this for my own benefit and because I love it as much as anyone could love anything in the world, and if there is someone else in the world either like that that is reading this or if reading this causes someone else to be like that, that would be a great accomplishment indeed.
(This was inspired by Descartes, who although did not inspire my desire to learn and my ability to do these things, has begun to shatter the guilt I have had for thinking about these things because of people telling me that I shouldn’t do this. The fact that he did what he did at the ages that he did them are encouraging to me on levels beyond the ability to communicate, but I am very thankful to this man for showing me an instance of where it is ok to be a deep-thinking, intelligent “adult” and that the traditional definition of what it means to be an “adult” can be deeply flawed if we can use logic to discredit some of these things said about what it means to be an “adult”).
December 17, 2013.
People think that it is the moral requirement of those with passion to give passion to those without it.
But how is that possible?
It’s like a teacher trying to force a student to learn. If the student doesn’t want to, then he’ll never learn. The teacher can try everything he can but if the student never cares, the teacher can keep trying, but that’s no guarantee that anything will change. I’m not saying the teacher shouldn’t do that: they can if they want to (and if parents aren’t happy with their teachers, they should be able to find new ones) but it doesn’t always work that teachers can give kids passion and if they can’t, what should be done about it? I say you leave them alone and find a new teacher and if that doesn’t work, you decide what course is best: either to keep trying or give up.
People with passion can’t feel guilty because they have it when others don’t or else no one will have any passion.
Besides, we are the products of our own decisions, and that is important.
When we make shitty decisions, we can either learn from them ourselves or we make the decision to value what we perceive to be the good things about our decisions more so than the bad things about our decisions, but it is not the requirement of other people to do things for ourselves. They merely can if they wish.
December 11, 2013.
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.