Here is a great op-ed by Thomas Sowell, one of the great african american thinkers in America... Artificial Stupidity A woman with a petition went among the crowds attending a state fair, asking people to sign her petition demanding the banning of dihydroxymonoxide. She said it was in our lakes and streams, and now it was in our sweat and urine and tears. She collected hundreds of signatures to ban dihydroxymonoxide -- a fancy chemical name for water. A couple of comedians were behind this ploy. But there is nothing funny about its implications. It is one of the grim and dangerous signs of our times. This little episode revealed how conditioned we have become, responding like Pavlov's dog when we hear a certain sound-- in this case, the sound of some politically correct crusade. People are all born ignorant but they are not born stupid. Much of the stupidity we see today is induced by our educational system, from the elementary schools to the universities. In a high-tech age that has seen the creation of artificial intelligence by computers, we are also seeing the creation of artificial stupidity by people who call themselves educators. Educational institutions created to pass on to the next generation the knowledge, experience and culture of the generations that went before them have instead been turned into indoctrination centers to promote whatever notions, fashions or ideologies happen to be in vogue among today's intelligentsia. Many conservatives have protested against the specifics of the things with which students are being indoctrinated. But that is not where the most lasting harm is done. Many, if not most, of the leading conservatives of our times were on the left in their youth. These have included Milton Friedman, Ronald Reagan and the whole neoconservative movement. The experiences of life can help people outgrow whatever they were indoctrinated with. What may persist, however, is the lazy habit of hearing one side of an issue and being galvanized into action without hearing the other side-- and, more fundamentally, not having developed any mental skills that would enable you to systematically test one set of beliefs against another. It was once the proud declaration of many educators that "We are here to teach you how to think, not what to think." But far too many of our teachers and professors today are teaching their students what to think, about everything from global warming to the new trinity of "race, class and gender." Even if all the conclusions with which they indoctrinate their students were 100 percent correct, that would still not be equipping students with the mental skills to weigh opposing views for themselves, in order to be prepared for new and unforeseeable issues that will arise over their lifetimes, after they leave the schools and colleges. Many of today's "educators" not only supply students with conclusions, they promote the idea that students should spring into action because of these prepackaged conclusions-- in other words, vent their feelings and go galloping off on crusades, without either a knowledge of what is said by those on the other side or the intellectual discipline to know how to analyze opposing arguments. When we see children in elementary schools out carrying signs in demonstrations, we are seeing the kind of mindless groupthink that causes adults to sign petitions they don't understand or-- worse yet-- follow leaders they don't understand, whether to the White House, the Kremlin or Jonestown. A philosopher once said that the most important knowledge is knowledge of one's own ignorance. That is the knowledge that too many of our schools and colleges are failing to teach our young people. It takes a certain amount of knowledge just to understand the extent of one's own ignorance. But our "educators" have given assignments to children who are not yet a decade old to write letters to members of Congress, or to Presidents, spouting off on issues ranging from nuclear weapons to medical care. Will Rogers once said that it was not ignorance that was so bad but "all the things we know that ain't so." But our classroom indoctrinators are getting students to think that they know after hearing only one side of an issue. It is artificial stupidity.
Speaking of pragmatic, it is my old favorite writer, Sowell! (not just a great american thinking, but a great african american thinker!) Well, he sorta got through an article without comparing Obama to Stalin or Hitler.
The op-ed is artificially stupid. It proposes blaming educators without really quantitatively (or even qualitatively) identifying why this is a legitimate manuever, much like the fictitious woman demanding a ban on dihydrogen monoxide. Rather funny, actually.
I agree with the author that we have a problem with education but I find blaming it on political correctness to be a needless ideological shot that ignores that stupidity crosses party lines. Consider many of the arguments and claims put forward at the Tea Parties, like "Keep Government out of Medicare!", and its pretty obvious that it isn't political correctness that is making Americans stupid.
Texas Conservatives Seek Deeper Stamp on Texts By JAMES C. McKINLEY Jr. Published: March 10, 2010 AUSTIN, Tex. — Even as a panel of educators laid out a vision Wednesday for national standards for public schools, the Texas school board was going in a different direction, holding hearings on changes to its social studies curriculum that would portray conservatives in a more positive light, emphasize the role of Christianity in American history and include Republican political philosophies in textbooks. The hearings are the latest round in a long-running cultural battle on the 15-member State Board of Education, a battle that could have profound consequences for the rest of the country, since Texas is one of the largest buyers of textbooks. The board is expected to take a preliminary vote this week on a raft of changes to the state’s social studies curriculum proposed by the seven conservative Republicans on the board. A final vote will come in May. Conservatives argue that the proposed curriculum, written by a panel of teachers, emphasizes the accomplishments of liberal politicians — like the New Deal and the Great Society — and gives less importance to efforts by conservatives like President Ronald Reagan to limit the size of government. “There is a bias,” said Don McLeroy, a dentist from College Station who heads up the board’s conservative faction. “I think the left has a real problem seeing their own bias.” The three-day meeting is the first time the board has met since voters in last week’s Republican primaries voted to oust Dr. McLeroy and another conservative and threw the future makeup of the board up in the air. Two other members — a conservative Republican and a moderate Democrat — are not seeking re-election, and it is unclear what the balance of power will be after the general election. At present, the seven hard-core conservatives are often joined by one or more moderate members in votes on curriculum questions. Dr. McLeroy still has 10 months to serve and he, along with rest of the religious conservatives on the board, have vowed to put their mark on the guidelines for social studies texts. For instance, one guideline requires publishers to include a section on “the conservative resurgence of the 1980s and 1990s, including Phyllis Schlafly, the Contract with America, the Heritage Foundation, the Moral Majority and the National Rifle Association.” There have also been efforts among conservatives on the board to tweak the history of the civil rights movement. One amendment states that the movement created “unrealistic expectations of equal outcomes” among minorities. Another proposed change removes any reference to race, sex or religion in talking about how different groups have contributed to the national identity. The amendments are also intended to emphasize the unalloyed superiority of the “free-enterprise system” over others and the desirability of limited government. One says publishers should “describe the effects of increasing government regulation and taxation on economic development and business planning.” Throughout the standards, the conservatives have pushed to drop references to American “imperialism,” preferring to call it expansionism. “Country and western music” has been added to the list of cultural movements to be studied. References to Ralph Nader and Ross Perot are proposed to be removed, while Stonewall Jackson, the Confederate general, is to be listed as a role model for effective leadership, and the ideas in Jefferson Davis’s inaugural address are to be laid side by side with Abraham Lincoln’s speeches. Early in the hearing on Wednesday, Mr. McLeroy and other conservatives on the board made it clear they would offer still more planks to highlight what they see as the Christian roots of the Constitution and other founding documents. “To deny the Judeo-Christian values of our founding fathers is just a lie to our kids,” said Ken Mercer, a San Antonio Republican. The new guidelines, when finally approved, will influence textbooks for elementary, middle school and high school. They will be written next year and will be in effect for 10 years. In other testimony Wednesday, Hispanic activists asked that more Latino figures be written into the social studies curriculum, particularly early residents of Texas who fought the central government in Mexico when Texas still was part of Mexico. American Indians complained that their history had been given short shrift. Many other people came to the meeting to support the conservative slate of amendments, including some people enraged at what they saw as socialist tendencies in Washington. One man asserted that the Tea Party movement should be included in the textbooks. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/11/us/politics/11texas.html?hp
I think you just proved his point.... And for the record the tea party has no "political offiliation"....and neither do the comments in the op-ed.
What the hell is he talking about? It's fine to state your opinion, I guess, but cooking up another vast black-helicopter conspiracy (in this case, the varied and underpaid masses of K–12 educators, hilariously and against all logic lumped in with the completely different, less varied, and well-paid college professors), but offer one shred of supporting evidence for "indoctrination". I often disagree with Sowell, but usually he can sort of string together an argument. Maybe his point is to offer up his own essay as proof that our education system is completely screwed. That kind of works, actually, in a brilliant and subtle way, but it still doesn't show a vast conspiratorial "indoctrination." Talk with ANY K-12 teachers, get to know them, seriously, and then reread this Sowell piece. Like these people have time to consider endoctrinating kids when they desperately want the kids to quit hitting each other, impregnating each other, and playing video games long enough to learn to add and read.
I think he's really talking about the parents of those kids who are doing the hitting, impregnating and texting. Things weren't quite so bad a generation ago.
Speaking of indoctrination... Unfreaking believable. I really don't want to pay for private shooling but - good grief - this is just becoming a bit too common for my liking. And a big WTF to Mrs Dunbar. how the **** did you become a law professor?
According to her wiki it's Liberty University, Jerry Falwell's diploma mill -- not Liberty college, wherever that is. She got her law degree from Pat Robertson's "University," Regent U.
school is part indoctrination always has been It is the passing on of the culture of your society HOWEVAH they is a part where one should be taught to think for yourself. The problem is the hypocrazy of our society we celebrate the individual . .we punish the individual We will pay millions of 'stars' because of their individuality but will punished the ***** out of any 'common' man that does the same thing [i.e. wouldn't hire them, probably belittle them, etc] Individuality maybe a bit of the Luxury of Wealth and Fame School are becoming conformity mills and PLAY IT SAFErs You don't want your kid to shoot for the stars you just want him to not hit the bottom that is what we look to teach Teach your kid to NOT FAIL . .. don't teach them to SUCCEED! Rocket River
