9 ms·

I will admit to a conspiratorial bias, but I curb it by asking basic feasibility questions, one of which I'll now ask you: how many people would need to be invo

I will admit to a conspiratorial bias, but I curb it by asking basic feasibility questions, one of which I'll now ask you: how many people would need to be involved, and to what degree? If the education system is torturing children, doesn't that require a large degree of cooperation from many teachers? Why would these teachers willingly torture children?

TheAceOfHearts 1y ago
I'll play devil's advocate. There could be many explanations: maybe the teachers don't consider it torture and they're true believers. Personally, I remember growing up sometimes teachers would start complaining about having to cover certain topics in specific ways that were mandated by the department of education, and being forced to stick to a strict curriculum that was sent down by faceless figures. If teachers aren't empowered to push back and execute on their conception of the best possible lesson plan, and any complaint puts their future pension at risk, they might just gradually lose interest in being an exceptional teacher while continuing to show up for the paycheck. This is a common occurrence in other domains, so it wouldn't surprise me if it's true about some teachers. Reflecting back on some of my most exceptional teachers, they would often invest a lot of their own money, extra time, and resources in order to give students the best possible educational experience. There is also a bit of diffusion of responsibility. Maybe no single act can be interpreted as particularly tortuous, so it's easily excused by the person doing it. But taken collectively, it adds up into a harmful outcome. This might vary depending on where you were educated, but a lot of my education growing up was lacking in epistemic exploration. We were often just fed a ton of facts by authority figures and expected to memorize and recite them at will, without diving into how those things were known or exploring concepts of epistemic uncertainty and the framing of historical contexts. Oftentimes this would result in people memorizing a bunch of facts for a test, after which the information was discarded, because there was no effort put into integrating newly acquired knowledge. One example for me was imaginary numbers in an early pre-calculus course, where we learned that these things existed and the basic rules for how they functioned, but it wasn't until many years later that I finally got to see how this concept could be applied and used.
trod1234 1y ago
> How many people would need to be involved. At a guess, at least 25% of any given year, given the sequential nature of education as a sieve. Knowingly or Unknowingly. The people that pass end up being selected for compliance, blindness, or deceit with the gifted/intelligent being weeded out or destroyed. > Doesn't that require a large degree of cooperation. Not when following a structured separation of objectionable concerns which the Stasi and Nazi's used quite effectively. If you train the teachers to use pedagogy which has been obscured but is based in torture to teach material, and the material is carefully selected (the textbooks), you get these emergently and its just chalked up to having difficulty learning the material (blaming the student) when the difficulty is in overcoming the torture not the material. The "Lying to Children" paradigm mirrors somewhat in structure to gnosticism. Students are taught initially flawed systems that are useless in practice which include both true and false elements that are learned to unconsious competence. They are then at the next iteration forced to learn new things and unlearn other things they were taught as true, and this creates an inconsistent state that imparts torture along with the other techniques, and this progresses in each iteration until you get to college growing as you do into gnosis but never quite as useful as if you followed a first-principled approach. The torture degrades the students abilities, and you can't ever really unlearn something that has been learned to such competency; it always adds some amount of interference/confusion later. There are also stages at which point induced failures can occur also as a function of structure. The Algebra->Geometry->Trigonometry sequence so common today as an example to gatekeep mathematic based structures and the PTSD inherent in students that fall victim to this. The gimmick relies on a undisclosed change in pass criteria between classes so you don't find out you have a problem until Trigonometry, but because you passed an intermediate unrelated class you can't go backwards. The change is in grading on whether the process was followed but the answer still incorrect. Those students that would follow the flawed process that was taught would pass initially, but then fail in Trigonometry when the correct answer was needed. This sequence was forced and adopted in the 90s at the request of the NEA. Similar other sequences have been adopted later on in college bottleneck/weed out courses for required GE (i.e. Economics, Physics, Ethnic Studies (Maoism/DEI)). The student is not sophisticated or reasoning enough at this point to mount any kind of effective defense, and the teacher suggests that if you can't do the material you should perhaps look at other professions which don't use math. It burns the bridges. This works because the systems are structured so that both; the student must overcome the torture, and the teacher must provide perfect instruction/effort, for a pass to occur. This inherently selects for only the blind (that can look at everything in isolation), and the corrupt/deceitful. Any student with intelligence/creativity would be destroyed under such circular and arbitrary trauma loops. Obviously the environment is a spectrum, but structure allows a few bad actors to influence the whole. > Why would these teachers willingly torture children. The point is the teachers aren't willingly doing it, they simply don't know any better. They believe what they are trained to do blindly parroting the techniques they were taught. The centralized nature of the structures involved with the inability to fire except for gross misconduct ensures that many competent teachers will be driven out through social coercion, because they make all the other teachers look bad. There is a natural pull to negative production value, and the ongoing educational requirements sponsored from NEA and the publishing industry (which seem to be in lock step), guarantee this happens emergently with plausible but incorrect reasons for why its not the material but the student. . The people who train and sponsor the majority of teachers, and who control the publishers/administration are the ones doing this.

TheAceOfHearts 1y ago

I'll play devil's advocate. There could be many explanations: maybe the teachers don't consider it torture and they're true believers. Personally, I remember growing up sometimes teachers would start complaining about having to cover certain topics in specific ways that were mandated by the department of education, and being forced to stick to a strict curriculum that was sent down by faceless figures. If teachers aren't empowered to push back and execute on their conception of the best possible lesson plan, and any complaint puts their future pension at risk, they might just gradually lose interest in being an exceptional teacher while continuing to show up for the paycheck. This is a common occurrence in other domains, so it wouldn't surprise me if it's true about some teachers. Reflecting back on some of my most exceptional teachers, they would often invest a lot of their own money, extra time, and resources in order to give students the best possible educational experience. There is also a bit of diffusion of responsibility. Maybe no single act can be interpreted as particularly tortuous, so it's easily excused by the person doing it. But taken collectively, it adds up into a harmful outcome. This might vary depending on where you were educated, but a lot of my education growing up was lacking in epistemic exploration. We were often just fed a ton of facts by authority figures and expected to memorize and recite them at will, without diving into how those things were known or exploring concepts of epistemic uncertainty and the framing of historical contexts. Oftentimes this would result in people memorizing a bunch of facts for a test, after which the information was discarded, because there was no effort put into integrating newly acquired knowledge. One example for me was imaginary numbers in an early pre-calculus course, where we learned that these things existed and the basic rules for how they functioned, but it wasn't until many years later that I finally got to see how this concept could be applied and used.

trod1234 1y ago

> How many people would need to be involved. At a guess, at least 25% of any given year, given the sequential nature of education as a sieve. Knowingly or Unknowingly. The people that pass end up being selected for compliance, blindness, or deceit with the gifted/intelligent being weeded out or destroyed. > Doesn't that require a large degree of cooperation. Not when following a structured separation of objectionable concerns which the Stasi and Nazi's used quite effectively. If you train the teachers to use pedagogy which has been obscured but is based in torture to teach material, and the material is carefully selected (the textbooks), you get these emergently and its just chalked up to having difficulty learning the material (blaming the student) when the difficulty is in overcoming the torture not the material. The "Lying to Children" paradigm mirrors somewhat in structure to gnosticism. Students are taught initially flawed systems that are useless in practice which include both true and false elements that are learned to unconsious competence. They are then at the next iteration forced to learn new things and unlearn other things they were taught as true, and this creates an inconsistent state that imparts torture along with the other techniques, and this progresses in each iteration until you get to college growing as you do into gnosis but never quite as useful as if you followed a first-principled approach. The torture degrades the students abilities, and you can't ever really unlearn something that has been learned to such competency; it always adds some amount of interference/confusion later. There are also stages at which point induced failures can occur also as a function of structure. The Algebra->Geometry->Trigonometry sequence so common today as an example to gatekeep mathematic based structures and the PTSD inherent in students that fall victim to this. The gimmick relies on a undisclosed change in pass criteria between classes so you don't find out you have a problem until Trigonometry, but because you passed an intermediate unrelated class you can't go backwards. The change is in grading on whether the process was followed but the answer still incorrect. Those students that would follow the flawed process that was taught would pass initially, but then fail in Trigonometry when the correct answer was needed. This sequence was forced and adopted in the 90s at the request of the NEA. Similar other sequences have been adopted later on in college bottleneck/weed out courses for required GE (i.e. Economics, Physics, Ethnic Studies (Maoism/DEI)). The student is not sophisticated or reasoning enough at this point to mount any kind of effective defense, and the teacher suggests that if you can't do the material you should perhaps look at other professions which don't use math. It burns the bridges. This works because the systems are structured so that both; the student must overcome the torture, and the teacher must provide perfect instruction/effort, for a pass to occur. This inherently selects for only the blind (that can look at everything in isolation), and the corrupt/deceitful. Any student with intelligence/creativity would be destroyed under such circular and arbitrary trauma loops. Obviously the environment is a spectrum, but structure allows a few bad actors to influence the whole. > Why would these teachers willingly torture children. The point is the teachers aren't willingly doing it, they simply don't know any better. They believe what they are trained to do blindly parroting the techniques they were taught. The centralized nature of the structures involved with the inability to fire except for gross misconduct ensures that many competent teachers will be driven out through social coercion, because they make all the other teachers look bad. There is a natural pull to negative production value, and the ongoing educational requirements sponsored from NEA and the publishing industry (which seem to be in lock step), guarantee this happens emergently with plausible but incorrect reasons for why its not the material but the student. . The people who train and sponsor the majority of teachers, and who control the publishers/administration are the ones doing this.