Scott wrote:
"Values" as in value system, i.e. morals? I wouldn't want any school
to teach my son values. Pirsig called school indoctrination and I
heartily agree. Indoctrinating values is promulgating dogma, isn't it?
Whether the dogma is Christian morality and the Golden Rule, Satanism or
the MoQ, I don't want any school taking dogma and indoctrinating
students with it. I think public school should be mainly for learning
about math, history, science and literature; leave the values to us, as
parents.
As Pirsig wrote, everything is values. You can't escape it. Let me give
you a concrete example. Let's say your young son comes home from school
in tears. He says a group of older boys are bullying him. You complain
to the school. They reply, "Sorry, we don't teach values."
Concerning your belief that schools should teach history, well, they
don't do it. At least the public schools.
Let's take the Roman Republic. They had the beginnings of 'natural law.'
What I usually refer to as 'discovered law." I think a better term might
be 'societal law,' since it's part of society. Government expanded,
created whatever law they wanted (what I refer to 'created law,' but a
better term might be 'biological law.') It turned into the Roman Empire,
which of course collapsed, bringing on the 500 years of the Dark Ages.
As a result we are probably 1500 years behind where we should be, which
means I don't have my flying car so I can play golf on the moon during
the weekend.
Something else the public schools don't teach: almost every
'government' was the result of one tribe conquering another, setting
themselves up as rulers ('royalty'), and exacting tribute ('taxes'.)
After the Roman Empire collapsed, the various European tribes started
conquering each other and setting up 'governments.' (The term usually
used is 'State.') These are purely biological: might makes right.
The average citizen turned to clergymen to settle disputes. They slowly
'discovered' which laws worked and which did not. This was the beginning
of 'societal law.'
This is why I place States as burely biological and law as societal.
The laws 'discovered' were ones to protect 'life, liberty and
property.' Society is absolutely superior to 'government.'
Here's another concrete example. Assume that at the beginning of
America the courts had truly enforced 'natural law.' First thing to go:
slavery! A violation of liberty and property (your body 'naturally'
belongs to you.) All the problems associated with slavery: gone! Never
would have existed!
Second violation: it is a myth the Civil War was fought to free the
slaves. It was fought to keep the Union together. One of the main
reasons the South wanted to break away is the North was busy passing
'government' laws to crush the South economically. They were violating
the right of Southerners to freely and peaceably trade. They were
violating their liberty and propery rights.
Result: 600,000 dead. And scars that remain today.
I could go on and on, but won't.
Scott writes:
Many people I know have never heard of Robert Pirsig or his books.
Yet I believe his words have a lot of value.
Pirsig has sold millions of books. Lots of people know of him and his
ideas.
Scott writes:
One problem I have with your characterization of the free market is that
Jerry Springer and Rush Limbaugh are very popular. Are the products
they offer valuable?
Somebody thinks they're valuable. And who's to decide they're not?
Someone using the coercion and violence that is part of 'government'?
I know people who think Bill Clinton is semi-psychopathic hillbilly
white trash. Do you think they would agree he has the right to get rid
of Limbaugh and Springer because he is part of the 'government'?
Scott writes:
I think the judges would end up being the heads of
> whatever clique was best organized (think of student councils)... unless judges were chosen by random lot.
The outcasts should be the judges. Balance things out. Students choosing
is democracy, which is mob rule (biological 'might makes right') and
therefore an inferior form of government.
Scott writes:
Isn't that what we have? [a free market.]
Another myth. The popular economics writer Milton Friedman will dissuade
you of that notion.
Scott writes:
As Pirsig said (paraphrasing), "What people value can
never be contained in any formula."
Exactly right. I have a friend finishing his Ph.d in Economics. His
colleagues horrify him. They believe laws of math and physics (inorganic
level) can be pasted on top of economics (societal level.) The result
has been disaster. The only economics school that believes in values is
the Austrian school, which is routinely abused and ignored.
Scott writes:
Private schools have grown extraordinarily in
the past decade. I live in a town with more private schools than public
(three different parochial school systems and three secular private).
The socialized public school system has gotten so bad people are
deserting them. Good!
I also look foward to everyone's comments. They force me to clarify
exactly what I mean.
Bob
MOQ Online Homepage - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Unsubscribe - http://www.moq.org/md/index.html
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:59 BST