3 ms·

Public school kid here. From my experience, the writer is clearly coming from a place of elite Hollywood unreality: http://carolblack.org/about/ http://carolbl

Public school kid here. From my experience, the writer is clearly coming from a place of elite Hollywood unreality: http://carolblack.org/about/ http://carolblack.org/about/ Most of the "wildness," or more to the point, "hatefulness" clearly came from the parents. The racism, the homophobia, the Disneyesque self-absorption, the intolerance for anything outside of the present iteration of pop culture and regional sport -- all seeded, fostered, and fed by the family. The kids were barely old enough to even understand any of this stuff, let alone hate someone for it, yet they did! I doubt that the Thoreau experience is going to have much effect on damage inflicted outside of the classroom, and this is a big thing. It's why we have "good" school districts and "bad" school districts within the same county -- expenditure per pupil is the same, buildings are the same, teachers are mostly the same, but the upbringing is not.

ZenoArrow 10y ago
> "I doubt that the Thoreau experience is going to have much effect on damage inflicted outside of the classroom, and this is a big thing. It's why we have "good" school districts and "bad" school districts within the same county -- expenditure per pupil is the same, buildings are the same, teachers are mostly the same, but the upbringing is not." The author addresses this... "But the truth is we don’t know how to teach our children about nature because we ourselves were raised in the cinderblock world. We are, in the parlance of wildlife rehabilitators, unreleasable." We can't teach what we don't already know, the best we can do is give the kind of support that is conducive to self-education. If that support is not being provided at home, then it's worthwhile providing it elsewhere. So in other words, the concept of schools aren't necessarily bad, but the way in which learning takes place at those schools could be improved by greater emphasis on self-discovery.
- jstewartmobile 10y ago
  "Addresses" is probably putting it too strongly. She phrases it as a "how to" problem. It would probably be better phased as a "what not to do" problem. If you have an active indoctrination of mental bile in the home environment -- especially among society's "losers" who see everything as some other group's fault (blame it on the Mexicans, hipsters, blacks, yuppies, Jews, etc...), and the only thing countering it is some kind of vague free-range schooling, the results will more closely resemble the barbarism of previous centuries. For every Abraham Lincoln the nineteenth century produced, it produced brigands of no account by the dozens. Of course if you come from an enlightened family of academics, Hollywood producers, or some other group of high-minded winners with a magnanimous bent, then everything she writes sounds just fine.
  - ZenoArrow 10y ago
    The point you're missing is that the "vague free-range schooling" promotes self-reliance, which is exactly what you need to escape a toxic background. Furthermore, it's not completely without structure. Consider the difference in approach between a teacher and a guide, the guide still helps the student find their way but let's them see the answers for themselves, instead of telling them the answers and asking the student to memorise them. I understand the lack of standardised testing is scary to those who want to measure everything, but in my opinion measurement breeds mediocrity, I don't think we get the best out of ourselves by chasing exam scores.
    - jstewartmobile 10y ago
      > The point you're missing is that the "vague free-range schooling" promotes self-reliance, which is exactly what you need to escape a toxic background. Self-reliance does not make a person civilized. Self-reliance does not make a person fit to coexist peacefully and productively with persons outside of their own familial or tribal group. > I understand the lack of standardised testing is scary to those who want to measure everything... I have no beef with the academic angle. From a cost-benefit perspective, it would be hard to do any worse than we already do. My beef is that we have a lot of people who need to be civilized, and that walks in the forest are not up to the task.
      - ZenoArrow 10y ago
        > "Self-reliance does not make a person civilized." Sure it does, because self-directed learning means you are less divorced from the consequences of your mistakes. You become better at interacting with others by doing so, rather than being told what to do without fully appreciating why. > "My beef is that we have a lot of people who need to be civilized, and that walks in the forest are not up to the task." That really depends on your definition of civilised. Some behaviour of 'civilised' people is abhorrent compared to the 'noble savages' that the article occasionally alludes to. If our only goal is emotionally-stunted automatons then perhaps you'd have a point, but I'd rather take a walk through a forest with someone who can appreciate the wildness of nature than someone who sees it as unruly chaos that should be straightened out. As an aside, our notion of what's socially acceptable has shifted over time, it's not a single ideal we have to live up to. I enjoy the contrast Nietzsche made between Apollo and Dionysus in Greek society, I do think there's still room for what they both represented. http://youtu.be/ldj0RX3CqXA http://youtu.be/ldj0RX3CqXA
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
guard-of-terra 10y ago
You try to spin this as a class issue. Me, I've went to early post-Soviet schools in small towns. Didn't really have upper class there, neither suppressed minorities - everybody were equally poor. Yet all the points of parent article resound greatly with my experience. I did experience apathy and unability to focus on material pushed at and thru me, great deal of it.
- jstewartmobile 10y ago
  Not really talking about economic class or money. Some of the most hateful examples came from perfectly comfortable homes.
shiven 10y ago
Sorry to say, but your take on the article reeks of your bias. Where and how did this become a race/class issue? If the "strangling of inherent wildness" is also a class restricted issue, then I am at a loss to understand what isn't. Or perhaps, those with an axe to grind will see a grindstone everywhere.
- jstewartmobile 10y ago
  Never attributed uncivilized behavior to a race or a class. I did attribute some uncivilized behavior to "losers". Taking this into race/class/economics is on you. Let me give you my definition of "loser" by way of comparison. I know one guy, B, married, college-educated, decent income, lives in a big house in a nice neighborhood. Get him alone, get a few beers in him, and his resentment towards almost every conceivable social, ethnic, religious, or political group (outside of his own) gushes to the surface. B's fundamental problem is that everything he has is insecure. He would have a hard time finding a job that pays as well as the one he has, he doesn't kill it with the ladies, he isn't fit, he's old and looks it, his wife bleeds him dry because cash is the only thing he has that makes him desirable (it sure as hell isn't his personality). I shudder to think of the baggage he has unloaded upon his children. Know another guy, A, also married (to a hot asian girl half his age), not college educated, spotty income (fixes houses for a living), lives in a modest house in a so-so neighborhood. Get him alone, get a few beers in him, and he is every bit as friendly and agreeable as he is in public, stone-cold sober. He lives simple, keeps fit, has no trouble rounding up another gig if the current one insists that he suck the big one. He's not angry at anyone because he has nothing to really be angry about. This dude is a winner, and unless his wife is a resentful harpy, his children will also be winners.

ZenoArrow 10y ago

> "I doubt that the Thoreau experience is going to have much effect on damage inflicted outside of the classroom, and this is a big thing. It's why we have "good" school districts and "bad" school districts within the same county -- expenditure per pupil is the same, buildings are the same, teachers are mostly the same, but the upbringing is not." The author addresses this... "But the truth is we don’t know how to teach our children about nature because we ourselves were raised in the cinderblock world. We are, in the parlance of wildlife rehabilitators, unreleasable." We can't teach what we don't already know, the best we can do is give the kind of support that is conducive to self-education. If that support is not being provided at home, then it's worthwhile providing it elsewhere. So in other words, the concept of schools aren't necessarily bad, but the way in which learning takes place at those schools could be improved by greater emphasis on self-discovery.

jstewartmobile 10y ago
"Addresses" is probably putting it too strongly. She phrases it as a "how to" problem. It would probably be better phased as a "what not to do" problem. If you have an active indoctrination of mental bile in the home environment -- especially among society's "losers" who see everything as some other group's fault (blame it on the Mexicans, hipsters, blacks, yuppies, Jews, etc...), and the only thing countering it is some kind of vague free-range schooling, the results will more closely resemble the barbarism of previous centuries. For every Abraham Lincoln the nineteenth century produced, it produced brigands of no account by the dozens. Of course if you come from an enlightened family of academics, Hollywood producers, or some other group of high-minded winners with a magnanimous bent, then everything she writes sounds just fine.
- ZenoArrow 10y ago
  The point you're missing is that the "vague free-range schooling" promotes self-reliance, which is exactly what you need to escape a toxic background. Furthermore, it's not completely without structure. Consider the difference in approach between a teacher and a guide, the guide still helps the student find their way but let's them see the answers for themselves, instead of telling them the answers and asking the student to memorise them. I understand the lack of standardised testing is scary to those who want to measure everything, but in my opinion measurement breeds mediocrity, I don't think we get the best out of ourselves by chasing exam scores.
  - jstewartmobile 10y ago
    > The point you're missing is that the "vague free-range schooling" promotes self-reliance, which is exactly what you need to escape a toxic background. Self-reliance does not make a person civilized. Self-reliance does not make a person fit to coexist peacefully and productively with persons outside of their own familial or tribal group. > I understand the lack of standardised testing is scary to those who want to measure everything... I have no beef with the academic angle. From a cost-benefit perspective, it would be hard to do any worse than we already do. My beef is that we have a lot of people who need to be civilized, and that walks in the forest are not up to the task.
    - ZenoArrow 10y ago
      > "Self-reliance does not make a person civilized." Sure it does, because self-directed learning means you are less divorced from the consequences of your mistakes. You become better at interacting with others by doing so, rather than being told what to do without fully appreciating why. > "My beef is that we have a lot of people who need to be civilized, and that walks in the forest are not up to the task." That really depends on your definition of civilised. Some behaviour of 'civilised' people is abhorrent compared to the 'noble savages' that the article occasionally alludes to. If our only goal is emotionally-stunted automatons then perhaps you'd have a point, but I'd rather take a walk through a forest with someone who can appreciate the wildness of nature than someone who sees it as unruly chaos that should be straightened out. As an aside, our notion of what's socially acceptable has shifted over time, it's not a single ideal we have to live up to. I enjoy the contrast Nietzsche made between Apollo and Dionysus in Greek society, I do think there's still room for what they both represented. http://youtu.be/ldj0RX3CqXA http://youtu.be/ldj0RX3CqXA
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

guard-of-terra 10y ago

You try to spin this as a class issue. Me, I've went to early post-Soviet schools in small towns. Didn't really have upper class there, neither suppressed minorities - everybody were equally poor. Yet all the points of parent article resound greatly with my experience. I did experience apathy and unability to focus on material pushed at and thru me, great deal of it.

jstewartmobile 10y ago
Not really talking about economic class or money. Some of the most hateful examples came from perfectly comfortable homes.

shiven 10y ago

Sorry to say, but your take on the article reeks of your bias. Where and how did this become a race/class issue? If the "strangling of inherent wildness" is also a class restricted issue, then I am at a loss to understand what isn't. Or perhaps, those with an axe to grind will see a grindstone everywhere.

jstewartmobile 10y ago
Never attributed uncivilized behavior to a race or a class. I did attribute some uncivilized behavior to "losers". Taking this into race/class/economics is on you. Let me give you my definition of "loser" by way of comparison. I know one guy, B, married, college-educated, decent income, lives in a big house in a nice neighborhood. Get him alone, get a few beers in him, and his resentment towards almost every conceivable social, ethnic, religious, or political group (outside of his own) gushes to the surface. B's fundamental problem is that everything he has is insecure. He would have a hard time finding a job that pays as well as the one he has, he doesn't kill it with the ladies, he isn't fit, he's old and looks it, his wife bleeds him dry because cash is the only thing he has that makes him desirable (it sure as hell isn't his personality). I shudder to think of the baggage he has unloaded upon his children. Know another guy, A, also married (to a hot asian girl half his age), not college educated, spotty income (fixes houses for a living), lives in a modest house in a so-so neighborhood. Get him alone, get a few beers in him, and he is every bit as friendly and agreeable as he is in public, stone-cold sober. He lives simple, keeps fit, has no trouble rounding up another gig if the current one insists that he suck the big one. He's not angry at anyone because he has nothing to really be angry about. This dude is a winner, and unless his wife is a resentful harpy, his children will also be winners.