Sorry to bump this up, was reading Molyneux opinions.
In regards to NAP, the statement that retro-active consent means NAP has not been violated is false.
retro-active consent is forgiveness of a crime. Simple as that.
I came across this presentation. It’s a very comprehensive and deep analysis of unschooling, and basically the best all-around presentation of it I have seen so far:
The point she gets across well: you have to learn to discover your own values and set your own goals.
The problem with those ideas of schooling is that unguided learning will get random results.
The problem with a free economy is that you will get random results.
I guess what you are saying is that it is somehow immoral to teach kids specifically. I guess that is cool if you don’t mind your kids failing at life.
I think you both misunderstand each other. The point of unschooling is not simply let kids to educate themselves (I did not watch the video above btw) on their own (aka random), but to not force them choose one specific field if they don’t want to. Maybe they will want to learn about it after 5 or 10 years. Maybe they do not need it at all etc. The key poijnt is to gently guide them, help them, but not use “arguments from authority”, like “you need MATH or you will become a LOSER”.
From my personal experience, I hated ethics. It was boring and I would rather drink beer (literally I did it) with my classmates than sit and listen to boring lectures. But after about 5 years (and after finished school) I become very interested in this field and actually learned more (in 1 year) than in 3 or 5 years in school.
But you must learn the basics, reading, writing, math, physics, history, geography, a language maybe. Plus whatever you want.
There are no “musts”. Yes, you have to be able to read in order to read. So semantically it can be said it is “must”, but there is no need to learn history or physics. Only if person is interested in that field. Or only if the person who guides the children succeeds in “making him interested” so to speak.
So I would agree, that only musts there are is reading and calculus abilities. From then kids can go on their own or (I would suggest) use the guidance of a person, who is a professional.
Children don’t usually know what is best for them in the long run. And those things are necessary to live a virtuous life.
how do you calculate what is necessary for other person? I believe one can only guide children in education process.
They use the word “unguided”. It’s no misunderstanding. Talk like that comes off as crackpot.
We also shouldn’t overlook the fact that, thanks to our participation in and exposure to government schooling, we are used to kids being bored with subjects in which they might otherwise show interest if not forced into the awful public school format.
Sure, parents might also turn off their kids to certain subjects, but that’s just saying they’re bad parents. There will always bad parents. Under the system we have know, fewer parents have the incentive to actually parent and educate their children, being themselves products of the system. From k-12, the real parent of the child is an institutional bureaucracy controlled through the state.
The point is that the child chooses their own guide. Neither the State nor parents should force their guidance onto children.
Give an example of a parent using “force” to teach.
“Complete this maths workbook or you don’t get any dinner.” It is whenever there an implicit or explicit threat of violence or deprivation. Learning happens best when such threats are absent.
I guess I’m the only one here who has never been impressed with any of these guys (Arron, Molyneux, Xomniverse, etc.).
Work for this low wage or you don’t get a job to buy dinner. Where have I heard this before? Sounds familiar…
What’s your point?
I guess we are establishing your position.