| Submit your comments on this article |
| I just can't stand it... |
| 2007-10-03 |
Today's Rantburg carries this piece, which links to this article, which is a very well done fisking of Barak O'Bama and the Audacity of Smarm™. Jules Crittendon's analysis notes the tried and true cliche that ... the great responsibility of students is to question the world around you, to question things that don’t add up.Utter that phrase or one similar to it, and a certain type of innaleck is guaranteed to nod sagely in agreement. To another kind of mind, to whit, mine, it's in the same category as scraping your nails across the blackboard, or a dog entering its fourth hour of non-stop barking outside my bedroom window, or the muezzin's call to prayer. At which point in life are children supposed to start questioning everything they're told? I've got a 5-year-old grandkid in kindergarten. Should he be questioning the construction of the letter "A"? Should he wait until middle school or junior high, whichever is currently in vogue? Does that mean that 11-year-old Dan, Junior, should be second-guessing the guff his teachers are putting out about long division and nouns? Surely the admonition applies to high school students, since they're in court periodically to enforce their right to wear offensive tee shirts, to be male prom queens, or to call their teachers names. But there doesn't seem to be any easing into this obligation on the part of partially formed minds. It's a binary thing, on and off, it would seem, so there's no year or two to be spent questioning some things and swallowing others whole because the adults might have some idea how the world works along with the intent to pass that knowledge on to the kiddies. So my question is: At which point in their pointless little existences are children assumed to know enough to question everything? At which point do the children's opinions become more important than those of their elders? And that brings up the corollary: at which age do their oh-so-important opinions become suspect because they're deeply enough into adulthood for their minds to have gone, like ours have? |
| Posted by:Fred |
| #25 TW, the late Stephen Jay Gould wrote an interesting piece on William Jennings Bryan and his objections to the theory of evolution. Many of Bryan's objections were inspired by his disgust at the social Darwinism he saw in the US and as he had seen reports of in Germany. As Gould pointed out, Bryan's conclusions were invalid, but he had found a major problem. |
| Posted by: Eric Jablow 2007-10-03 23:38 |
| #24 It started earlier, when the pseudointellectuals took Mr. Darwin's descriptive theory and turned it into what it pleased them to call Social Darwinism. From that evil root grew nihilism, Socialism, Communism and Fascism, each of which said only the material world matters, and in that world a person's worth is only measured by his ability to seize power over others. The dogmas of the '50s were merely prettified versions of what had come earlier. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2007-10-03 23:23 |
| #23 But, the spiritual side of me says that this started earlier. When scientists began saying, "We're no different than the animals". In fact, that train of thought led to "we ARE animals," and thusly, we can ONLY follow our instincts. No argument, BA. The enemies of humanity have been struggling to lower us back onto the same plane as animal life since Rousseau's "Noble Savage" and even before then. Whether a person is religious or not, at day's end there still remains the mystic experience of human spirit and consciousness. It is something that distinguishes us from the animals and obliges us to be both better than them and strive for honorable stewardship of our planet. Your mention of the wildebeest die-off was most appropriate. Note how the author was insane enough to try and draw some sort of moral equivalency to the 9-11 atrocity? This stunning degree of relativism is precisely the sort of "We're no different than the animals" mentality that you noted to begin with. I believe this all started in the 50's Which is pretty much exactly where I place it too. One need only incorporate the debasing notions of Rousseau's "Noble Savage" and Kant's poisonous altruism to understand the framework of nihilism that modern academia has used to betray Western civilization. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2007-10-03 23:08 |
| #22 All humans are born perfect; it is civilization that corrupts? How can a civilization made of perfect beings be corrupt? How can supposedly intelligent people miss this glaring contradiction for 200 years? |
| Posted by: mom 2007-10-03 22:49 |
| #21 Wow, Zen, that is quite the masterpiece and I agree full on with your statements. But, the spiritual side of me says that this started earlier. When scientists began saying, "We're no different than the animals". In fact, that train of thought led to "we ARE animals," and thusly, we can ONLY follow our instincts. Case in point....the other story about 10,000 wildebeest carrening off the cliff into the river in Africa recently. WHY? one might ask. Because THAT'S what wildebeest do...they follow the pack (even to the point of being lemmings), and follow their instincts. Lions eat other animals (even to the horror of the "animal rights" groupies) because that's what they ARE (King of the Jungle). But, my Holy Book tells me that we HUMANS are more than that. We have a soul and spirit that speaks to us. Call it a conscience, the Holy Spirit, what ever, but that SEPARATES us from the animals. All animals act and REACT based upon instincts. Humans should be able to do so too, but also throw the "moral" side of the equation into it in order to TONE DOWN our instincts. Heck, I want to SHOOT anyone that cuts me off in traffic, but I don't because I KNOW murder is wrong. Animals don't have that knowledge/conscience and thus, they just REACT. When we've accepted that we're not only LIKE the animals, but we ARE animals, guess what you get? You'll get animals (Hitler, Pol Pot, Stalin, Saddam, the Mullahs, etc.). But, we've gone even further than that, so far that we o.k. aborting/killing babies (no one can argue that abortion at 9 months gestation is NOT infanticide), who are the most innocent among us, yet hold national protests over killing convicted killers (Death Penalty). We literally have hospitals, where in one room a mother is aborting a normal, healthy baby, whereas in the next room, the doctors are doing EVERYTHING humanly possible to save a "preemie". We have more laws protecting real animals (dog fighting; dog abuse; etc.), than we do our own children (not that I believe laws stop bad things from happening, mind you). We (not us 'burgians) HATE our own culture, yet hold up despotic/tyrannical cultures as "equal" (multiculturalism). I believe this all started in the 50's (teaching man = animal), and has reaped the effects of the 60s (Make Love, not War), the 70s (institution of abortion on demand instituted nationwide) and saw a hiccup in the 80s under Reagan. Finally, when you believe that man is just an animal, you get the education system we now have. It's all about your "self-esteem" and the inmates run the jail in some areas. I've heard horror stories of teachers being beaten to a bloody pulp by students, but they refuesed to defend themselves for fear of a lawsuit. We truly live in a bizarro world, where up is down and right is wrong. |
| Posted by: BA 2007-10-03 22:28 |
| #20 The problem these days is that sometimes the teachers in elementary school don't know the answers to a problem, a smart student does, and yet the teachers give an incorrect answer. |
| Posted by: Eric Jablow 2007-10-03 20:55 |
| #19 as I told my children (all 3 grown now): "because my life experience and education exceeds your own, I feed, clothe, and house you, and I gave you life. I cannot take back my life, so I may have to take yours...please continue" they never said much after that |
| Posted by: Frank G 2007-10-03 20:38 |
| #18 As for the interminable "Why?" of the little ones, that's as much for the security of eliciting an answer, any answer, as actually getting information... and seeing how long it takes for the frustrated adult to burst out with, "Because I said so, you little brat!" Teach the child to look things up in a Child's Encyclopedia Brittanica -- with the promise to graduate to the adult version whenever it wants to stick a toe in the grown-up world -- and at least the discussions can move to ramifications. (Buy both at garage sales if possible. It will all be new to the child anyway, and I well remember when Mr. Wife informed me that at retail prices the sets were far beyond my budget!) |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2007-10-03 19:41 |
| #17 In my not at all humble opinion on this subject, a child's opinions become more important than its parents' when it knows more about a subject and understands the ramifications better. I strongly suspect we all here (all our lovely lurkers included) had a least one subject in our youth in which we knew considerably more than most of the adults around us. But understanding the ramifications take more than intelligence and curiosity, it takes life experience in consequences -- and that only comes with having lived for more than five or ten or, often enough, twenty years. Beyond that, I remember keenly that beginning parenthood stage you're going through, swksvolFF. It sounds like you and momma swksvolFF have a good handle on things. If I might suggest adding a season or two of soccer when your little Rantburger is in kindergarten or so, because there are so many more possibilities to attempt and fail or succeed in the 30 or so minutes of playing time, compared to T-ball. I'd also suggest adding a second language if you can when Baby is in preschool, because languages learnt at that age go to the speaking part of the brain, whereas any language learnt once Baby can read goes to the reading/logic part of the brain -- a much more difficult way to learn. Starting two languages simultaneously in infancy tends to delay sentence formation as the young brain puzzles out two sets of grammar, and I've seen it cause true confusion in little ones with unsuspected learning disabilities. But those are quibbles in what sounds like a well-reasoned parenting plan. Good luck! :-) |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2007-10-03 19:20 |
| #15 At which point do the children's opinions become more important than those of their elders? That already happened starting in the 60's. It's been downhill ever since. |
| Posted by: gorb 2007-10-03 17:37 |
| #14 Sherry, the best argument I can make for a Republican president is that we need a skeptical, questioning Press. And if we elect the Hildebeest instead, _we won't have one_. |
| Posted by: Shusong Abdominal Lord of the Snowmen9157 2007-10-03 17:25 |
| #13 Yes -- this is as bad as the first time I heard a journalist/reporter about questioning at White House briefings, "but it's our job to be skeptical of all the President does." "Since when," says me, after closing my mouth after it having dropped open. Since Bush was sworn in back in January of 2001. |
| Posted by: Shusong Abdominal Lord of the Snowmen9157 2007-10-03 17:21 |
| #12 I just became a first time father recently and have been having similar discusions with momma about what we feel is important in education. All theory at this point, all I can do is fall back on my own experiences: recently I have been learning to fight fire. I first had to have confidence. I then would mimic the experienced firefighters and at the same time listen to and learn from them. Later, I began to anticipate moves and understand why we were performing an action - and understand that there were no dumb questions just dumb actions because I didn't ask. Being just a dumb rookie though, I had to scrutinize what I was being told lest I end up with wet underwear or otherwise hazed. I wanted them to have to work to get me, but it made me really pay attention to what they were saying. To me, there are things to learn which are definate - such as the acceleration of gravity and the structure of language - to build on; math and English. Building these strong foundations, momma and I feel, will give baby the tools to question when that confidence/ability is there to do that. That is, math will lead into problem solving with definate outcomes eventually leading to logic and critical thinking and when combined with English, which will give the ability to read and learn other languages, and find information other than what people tell baby is the truth or only interpretation. With these tools (I hope) baby will have the ability to mull the more abstract concepts of history, art, philosophy, etc. This will (hopefully) return full circle if baby is skilled and interested enough, to choose to tackle the more theoretical aspects of math and english. Community and Sports will also be encouraged; dealing with the ups and downs of teamwork and competition, the ability to deal with the cold fact that maybe only 1 time in 'n' attempts will baby get a base hit but can improve that percentage with dedication, practice, concentration, patience. I am in my early 30's and welcome any input or advice in this area and am mostly a lurker to this community, but that is my take on this ponder. If I have not learned something new or improved on something I know, I feel I have wasted a day. |
| Posted by: swksvolFF 2007-10-03 17:12 |
| #11 At the point the children can - and do - support themselves outside the parents' home. In fact IMHO people should not have right to vote or demonstrate before they support themselves: I find shocking that 18 year olds could get someone elected while at the same time they don't pay taxes or suffer the inconvenienies of his politics. |
| Posted by: JFM 2007-10-03 17:03 |
| #10 Yes -- this is as bad as the first time I heard a journalist/reporter about questioning at White House briefings, "but it's our job to be skeptical of all the President does." "Since when," says me, after closing my mouth after it having dropped open. |
| Posted by: Sherry 2007-10-03 17:01 |
| #9 Fred, I see this as the "question authority" mentality coming full circle. Critical analysis—the ability to assess and parse perceived reality—has been supplanted by doubt. This should come as absolutely no surprise considering what America’s youth have been taught for the last several decades. It is impossible to overstate how damaging to young minds modern academia’s school of nihilist “thought” truly is. Let’s examine its "tenets": 1. You can never know anything for sure. 2. There is no right or wrong, only shades of gray. 3. Truth is subjective. 4. Logic is conditional. 5. There are no absolutes. 6. Life is without meaning. All of the above—now commonly held—"tenets" engender belief in a malevolent universe. They spawn pessimism, insecurity, cynicism and the ready dismissal of established norms. All of these behaviors are prerequisites for the subordination of less capable minds by those who seek to control them. Loosing an individual from the moorings of rational philosophy makes those cut adrift extremely vulnerable to programming of any sort. Cults and brainwashers are notorious for using such methods in recruiting new members or inducing political defections. Let’s examine these modern “tenets” one by one: You can never know anything for sure. I’ve had people actually try to argue with me about how I can be so sure that the sun will rise tomorrow. My simple reply is that such debate is irrelevant because if the sun does not rise, all life will end and further dispute serves no valid purpose. Ayn Rand addresses this in her law of identity: A=A. Certain laws do hold with a degree of immutability whereby they can be accepted as absolute. The lack of surety bred up by this one supposition is amongst the most damaging of all to young minds. There is no right or wrong, only shades of gray. Whenever confronted with this utter nonsense simply ask, “When is rape permissible?” There are certain things in this world that are wrong and to think otherwise is indicates an unwholesome degree of moral flexibility. It fosters an ability to tolerate the intolerable. This particular “tenet” serves as a cornerstone of moral relativism and represents a core driver of Multiculturalism’s refusal to condemn even the most hideous of traditions. Truth is subjective. There can be no better way of undermining an individual’s personal convictions than by making truth circumstantial. Welcome to the brave new world of “truthiness”. When a person’s moral compass is demagnetized its poles become interchangeable and from thereon it’s all a downhill slide. Once you leave the mountaintop of moral clarity all perspective is lost and certainty perishes swiftly thereafter. Logic is conditional. This is how you strip the mind’s gearbox and destroy any transmission of meaningful reality. Critical analysis is impossible without the guideposts of logic. Once this guardian of intellect is slain any barbarian can crash the gates of reason. Constructive criticism and the assassination of ideas suddenly become indistinguishable. Deform this vital toolset and there is no way to repair the damage done by the preceding “tenets”. There are no absolutes. Tear out the moorings of mental discrimination and personal judgment becomes impossible. Witness the recent pejorative cast given to the word “discrimination”. Although wholly different in meaning, it is now demonized with the same negative connotations attributed to the word “prejudice”. Little value is held in the ability to discern between right and wrong. Especially so when the difference between right and wrong has already been denied. When people cannot make up their own minds the time is ripe for someone else to do it for them. Life is without meaning. Here is the grand finale for those who seek to subvert humanity and civilization. Eliminate a sense of individual purpose in life and blind obedience becomes—not just a welcome relief from crippling disorientation—but an easy descent into conformity and total lack of free thought. Communism sought to do this by alienating workers from their labor, product and compensation. Make a person’s work irrelevant to their daily living and life rapidly becomes meaningless. Have the result of human labor bear no direct relation to personal survival and existence loses its importance. Reward individuals in ways that have little connection to their efforts and soon they lose all contact with reality. Authoritarian religions do this as well. They attempt to channel all human spirituality into a more narrow definition that serves only their own ends. True liberation of the mind represents a least desirable outcome. Life’s meaning can only be perceived within the limited confines of hidebound doctrine and not via an individual quest for uplift. Now, combine all of these “tenets” together and you brew up an intellectual poison so toxic that there is little chance of escaping its fatal effects. The antidotes of reason, logic and morality have all been diluted into impotence and little more remains than being led to the slaughterhouse. Welcome to Htrae, the Bizarro World of Politically Correct thinking and Multiculturalism. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2007-10-03 17:01 |
| #8 That phrase has always been joke to me because the teachers and professors that said it the most were the ones who brooked no questioning of their own statements and beliefs. |
| Posted by: DoDo 2007-10-03 16:34 |
| #7 To question things that donÂ’t add up is a part and parcel of maturing process, provided that at the same time, logic and reasoning principles are taught. Word, 2x4. First you need to understand *how* to add things up before you can tell that which things aren't adding up and need the questioning. |
| Posted by: ExtremeModerate 2007-10-03 16:32 |
| #6 Enlightenment: All humans have reason, which needs educating, developing and the acquisition of self-discipline if it is to mature and inform one's actions. Rousseau and the Romantics (including Marx): All humans are born perfect. Civilization corrupts; therefore, the ways of civilization must be torn down so as to allow the perfect human to emerge. All You Need Is Love. etc etc |
| Posted by: lotp 2007-10-03 16:13 |
| #5 When you are through learning, as when you are through looking, you're through living. Life is a learning experience. The most distinguished scientists will tell you that they have learned to expect their experiments to fail (since 90%+ do exactly that). When one succeeds they receive that "sense of wonder" high that keeps them going through the lean times when all that's in sight is failure after failure after failure. Most scientists learn throughout their lives. They learn something even from failure. As Edison is rumored to have said upon being asked what he had learned from a thousand failed attempts to invent the light bulb "I know a thousand ways it won't work." Unfortunately, we have been taught to believe that risk taking and failure are not worth the effort or the cost. We have also been ingrained with the idea that once we exit high school, or college, or grad school, or once we earn that PhD or MBA there is nothing left for us to learn. That could not be farther from the truth. Learning is something we do our entire lives. Once we close our minds to learning, we close our minds to the potential for our own success. |
| Posted by: FOTSGreg 2007-10-03 16:12 |
| #4 Importantly: questioning what surrounds you means *asking* questions, not just voicing opinions. It is the rare student who asks "But why *is* the sky blue?", and the rarer teacher who tells him why, without either being annoyed or patronizing. When I was a young teenager, and knew the scientific explanation for why the sky is blue, I was asked just that question by a small neighbor boy, perhaps six years old. So I told him, in as complete and unvarnished a way as I had been told. Years later, he told me that answer from me meant a lot more to him than just the answer to the question he had asked. When he grew up, I think he became a scientist. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2007-10-03 15:59 |
| #3 to question things that donÂ’t add up != to start questioning everything they're told (!= is not equal) To question things that donÂ’t add up is a part and parcel of maturing process, provided that at the same time, logic and reasoning principles are taught. |
| Posted by: twobyfour 2007-10-03 15:29 |
| #2 "At which point do the children's opinions become more important than those of their elders?" At the point the children can - and do - support themselves outside the parents' home. Too bad a lot of parents don't believe that.... |
| Posted by: Barbara Skolaut 2007-10-03 15:24 |
| #1 Amen Fred. The great responsibility of students is to LEARN. "Questioning the world around you" is just another euphamism from the left that means 'don't believe anything they tell you'. Quickly followed of course by 'now that you know that's not true, let US tell you what to think'. Indoctrination and Education are not one and the same. |
| Posted by: mcsegeek1 2007-10-03 15:20 |