Volconvo Debate Forums - View Single Post

m5lange1 · Feb 17, 2004, 07:32 am

Leopard,

Good answers. Actually we are close to agreeing on many points. I too believe life is an education, therefore continues with or without any form of school (home or otherwise).

I too agree that any family that wants to home school their children should be allowed to. As I have said time and again I have nothing but respect for home schoolers.

When you say you believe I mean "formal" education I guess that depends on what you mean by "formal". For the sake of our discussion (so that we do not get bogged down in hair splitting) let us streamline it to literacy, since that was one of the first concerns of this topic. That is less apt to be learned just by living.

Therefore you are correct that my main concern with home schooling (NOT AS AN OPTION BUT AS THE ONLY RECOURSE) is many of the poor.
Not all of the poor, as you say. The vast majority of those care for their children and may well be better equipped to teach them than ANY other source.
But even the vast majority does not account for millions who's parents will shrug it off.

This is an area we may just agree to disagree. I cannot prove that there will be neglected and undetected children out there whith no method of checking since it is all speculation. But based on my expeiance of 25 years I have seen abusive situations discoverd at school that have gone undetcted in the years they have just lived at home with their parent(s).

Most people believe that there is always someone willing to help a family unable to teach thier children. I hold the belief that there are families who will never seek that help and,in fact, be hostile to it if it is offered.

Are they hostile to the schools that now exist? Most of the ones I am referring to are. The illiterate cannot teach literacy. Not even badly.

I totally agree with your point of phasing out. It is what I have advocated all along. In spite of the fact that many here seem to think I want to maintain government schools. It is even moving slower than I would like, which forms most of the basis of my wanting to support what we have in the interum.

Regarding my other point about demoralization.....
You may believe it is a good debate move to request examples of this "bashing" as I call it but when I was on the debate team in collage that was called the "Lions in Africa" ruse.

Question: Do lions in Africa eat Zebras?

Answer: Yes

Question: Can you give examples?

Answer: Well er.. how about this vidio of one being eaten?

Question: Do you really believe that one instance makes a universal truth?

Think about it. What would I have to do? Write down names and dates? I gave three examples (Probly in my deleted post) from this thread and was criticized for my lack of accuracy (quotes be damned) or begging the question when I failed to bring down the (lazy) quote. The point is not worth pages of:
so and so said ______ on _______.
Just to convince JB is not worth the work.
I believe it is one of those things that has become so common that people do not notice it anymore. But when you work with people who are on the reciving end it jumps out. If you care, as you listen to the news or read the paper start listening for it. You may be surprised.

Seeing the effect it has in the workplace is enough proof for me. If you are unconvinced... OK.

Anyway Leopard I think you and I are at least making some headway toward each other. You have constructive things to say.

I may even agree with you that LB is a good debater if I could see him provide some positive statement about something. In formal debate he would be required to support a proposal (affirmative) or some constructive alternative (negative (although this one usually defends the status quo)).

Since I am sort of under a microscope here I will clarify. While the negative postion usually defends the status quo there is a method called the affirmative negative where the negative team makes a couner proposal to the affirmiative instead of defending the status quo. In any case, in debate you have to support something, not just take shots. Note this is one of the biggest criticicms of the politicl debates.

He would lose points for spending so much of his time railing against logic and methodology of his opponents (a single mention of it to make the point then move on would be the way) while he should be making his own case.

When asked simply to state what would be your view of what would work, Leopard, you simpy resonded with what you believed would work.

LB said it was unfair if I requested that it be done without attacking another system. That would not win any debates. That says one is unable to make a proposal without building it on the wreckage of something else.

He obviously has a wonderful vocabulary. He is also an experienced critic. I will reserve my judgement of his debating ability when I see him defend something.

Feb 17, 2004, 07:32 am	#62 (permalink) (top)
m5lange1 Igneous Magma Posts: 650	Leopard, Good answers. Actually we are close to agreeing on many points. I too believe life is an education, therefore continues with or without any form of school (home or otherwise). I too agree that any family that wants to home school their children should be allowed to. As I have said time and again I have nothing but respect for home schoolers. When you say you believe I mean "formal" education I guess that depends on what you mean by "formal". For the sake of our discussion (so that we do not get bogged down in hair splitting) let us streamline it to literacy, since that was one of the first concerns of this topic. That is less apt to be learned just by living. Therefore you are correct that my main concern with home schooling (NOT AS AN OPTION BUT AS THE ONLY RECOURSE) is many of the poor. Not all of the poor, as you say. The vast majority of those care for their children and may well be better equipped to teach them than ANY other source. But even the vast majority does not account for millions who's parents will shrug it off. This is an area we may just agree to disagree. I cannot prove that there will be neglected and undetected children out there whith no method of checking since it is all speculation. But based on my expeiance of 25 years I have seen abusive situations discoverd at school that have gone undetcted in the years they have just lived at home with their parent(s). Most people believe that there is always someone willing to help a family unable to teach thier children. I hold the belief that there are families who will never seek that help and,in fact, be hostile to it if it is offered. Are they hostile to the schools that now exist? Most of the ones I am referring to are. The illiterate cannot teach literacy. Not even badly. I totally agree with your point of phasing out. It is what I have advocated all along. In spite of the fact that many here seem to think I want to maintain government schools. It is even moving slower than I would like, which forms most of the basis of my wanting to support what we have in the interum. Regarding my other point about demoralization..... You may believe it is a good debate move to request examples of this "bashing" as I call it but when I was on the debate team in collage that was called the "Lions in Africa" ruse. Question: Do lions in Africa eat Zebras? Answer: Yes Question: Can you give examples? Answer: Well er.. how about this vidio of one being eaten? Question: Do you really believe that one instance makes a universal truth? Think about it. What would I have to do? Write down names and dates? I gave three examples (Probly in my deleted post) from this thread and was criticized for my lack of accuracy (quotes be damned) or begging the question when I failed to bring down the (lazy) quote. The point is not worth pages of: so and so said ______ on _______. Just to convince JB is not worth the work. I believe it is one of those things that has become so common that people do not notice it anymore. But when you work with people who are on the reciving end it jumps out. If you care, as you listen to the news or read the paper start listening for it. You may be surprised. Seeing the effect it has in the workplace is enough proof for me. If you are unconvinced... OK. Anyway Leopard I think you and I are at least making some headway toward each other. You have constructive things to say. I may even agree with you that LB is a good debater if I could see him provide some positive statement about something. In formal debate he would be required to support a proposal (affirmative) or some constructive alternative (negative (although this one usually defends the status quo)). Since I am sort of under a microscope here I will clarify. While the negative postion usually defends the status quo there is a method called the affirmative negative where the negative team makes a couner proposal to the affirmiative instead of defending the status quo. In any case, in debate you have to support something, not just take shots. Note this is one of the biggest criticicms of the politicl debates. He would lose points for spending so much of his time railing against logic and methodology of his opponents (a single mention of it to make the point then move on would be the way) while he should be making his own case. When asked simply to state what would be your view of what would work, Leopard, you simpy resonded with what you believed would work. LB said it was unfair if I requested that it be done without attacking another system. That would not win any debates. That says one is unable to make a proposal without building it on the wreckage of something else. He obviously has a wonderful vocabulary. He is also an experienced critic. I will reserve my judgement of his debating ability when I see him defend something. Protester against the culture war!!!!