3 ms·

You are completely missing the point here. If you know "why empires fall" (nobody does) then you could just teach that, the historical context would be almost i

You are completely missing the point here. If you know "why empires fall" (nobody does) then you could just teach that, the historical context would be almost irrelevant and even the premise of a cyclical history, which can be broken by voting, seems completely insane. >Thankfully you did all those things, so now you can write a well-written letter to the correct person in government, citing the parallel problems with the current education system and the fall of Rome, and stop children being taught this stuff (-: Okay, that was funny. I think what you are trying to articulate is education as a hollistic system, not with the goal of expertese, but with the goal of offering some moral foundation and grounding in the world and society. But if you believe in that the utilitarian stance of education immediately becomes irrelevant and "when am I ever going to use this" becomes a non-sensical question, which misses the point.

robertlagrant 3y ago
> If you know "why empires fall" (nobody does) I said see how they fall. Not every way, and not necessarily why, but how. > then you could just teach that, the historical context would be almost irrelevant I don't think you can see how they fall without historical context. That is the how. > even the premise of a cyclical history, which can be broken by voting, seems completely insane I didn't mention a cyclical history. Some things repeat, but that doesn't mean in general history is cyclical. I don't mean to comment in a way that's too much on the nose, but I've just broken out various statements of yours and shown how they didn't follow from what I said. Spending time studying literature in a controlled environment, can help train children to read what's being said, as opposed to what they guess is being said. It's not perfect, but it can help a lot.

robertlagrant 3y ago

> If you know "why empires fall" (nobody does) I said see how they fall. Not every way, and not necessarily why, but how. > then you could just teach that, the historical context would be almost irrelevant I don't think you can see how they fall without historical context. That is the how. > even the premise of a cyclical history, which can be broken by voting, seems completely insane I didn't mention a cyclical history. Some things repeat, but that doesn't mean in general history is cyclical. I don't mean to comment in a way that's too much on the nose, but I've just broken out various statements of yours and shown how they didn't follow from what I said. Spending time studying literature in a controlled environment, can help train children to read what's being said, as opposed to what they guess is being said. It's not perfect, but it can help a lot.