(no subject)

Reading Material:	How to Buy a House in California by Ralph Warner Esq. et.al.
	+ asst. romance novels and children's books

More of the great rationality debate...

When I think about requiring that all children receive as uniform an education as possible, I can think of a variety of different reasons. Some good, some bad, but I'm having trouble with rational :) The good ones (the ones I like) have to do with a love of knowledge, and the democratic ideal: a level playing field.

Knowledge for knowledge's sake seems more like a value judgement than anything rational. It can be argued that knowledge with practical application is uncovered in this way that would not otherwise be, but that's incidental. Satisfying one's curiousity probably isn't much more rational than satisfying other basic appetites. (If children were taught exclusively practical knowledge in school, and only that math, science, etc. that is necessary to it, I'm curious what effect that would have. That's largely the direction I'm leaning towards at this point. I think that 'recreational' knowledge, knowledge for knowledge's sake, might best be child directed.)

The rationality of the democratic ideal, if it exists, might be pretty incidental as well. It is pretty much accepted fact these days that the average human can successfully fill almost any niche in our society, regardless of race or creed or social stratum, given the proper training and encouragement. The idea that any person should have a uniform shot at any niche that strikes his or her fancy seems to have more to do with fair play (empathy) than rationality. It would be more efficient and rational to divide people up, even if only broadly (as specific market demands are impossible to predict) and instruct them to suit, rather than try and prepare everyone for any possibility. That humans are largely equally capable only means that these divisions could be largely arbitrary.

The bad reasons (to my mind) have to do with xenophobia and intolerance, again irrational. 'Those kids should be in school', may sometimes be more truthfully stated: 'They aren't raising their kids the way I think they should'. To what extent this underlies the support for compulsory schooling, which does reduce the influence parents have over their children, is difficult to judge, but it seems likely to be significant. I seem to be a fairly open-minded person, and I am hardly immune from this impulse. An example for myself would be homeschoolers that have largely Bible-based instruction. Problem is, I don't have all the answers. I can't really say that their way won't lead their children to a good and full life.

(no subject)

This talk of faith has got me wondering why people react with such strong negativity toward non-mainstream faiths. Even sects of highly established religious traditions are not immune. Many folks look askance at Mormans and Jehovah's Witness.

Some ideas I've come up with, not real profound or anything:

1: We're raised with the basic tenets and symbolism of the 2 of the big 5 that we are most exposed to in this country. For example, when I see a statue of Jesus on the cross, I don't think: 'These people are sick, they have a bloody corpse on their wall'. I've been raised with their symbolism and understand it. If the group down the street think Bob was drawn and quartered for their sins, I might be less blase about a representation of Bob's sacrifice. When Christians talk about winged humanoids and talking snakes, this is familiar weird, normal weird. New faiths don't have that advantage.

2: For many people, their faith would no longer be meaningful to them if they didn't believe in its mythology in a fairly literal, physical way. It's not enough that there is wisdom in the teachings of Jesus, if he's not the son of God then it's a serious problem. Someone with a different faith seems to be saying, well, I think he was just a really nice guy. In some cases, that's exactly what they're saying and we've seen how these have proven to be killin' words.

3: New faiths be may be inferior in some arguable ways. It's hard to put an up-start faith on equal footing with one that's been around for thousands of years and feel as though anything has been served but spiritual correctness.