yagami Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 Thanksgiving is coming up and me and my (BIO)dad always have long drawn out debates about government. So of course I have been thinking about a lot of the arguments I've been exposed to over the past year through Steph and started thinking about school and history. You know they always say if you dont know your history you are doomed to repeat it. Knowing what I know now I actually dont believe that is true. What seems to be most important is knowing how to think not what pitfalls to avoid that other people have experienced. At the same time something like government is so dangerous I would think it is important to teach children the danger that could come from having someone rule over you. It doesn't seem like a bad idea to teach children that wild bears can be dangerous. And if we accept that then what is the difference between teaching what would seem to be a conclusion that a bear is dangerous and the government is dangerous? I dont know what do you guy/gals think? Do you think history is an entirely useless waste of time in school or does history have a place somewhere? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PGP Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 What do you know that is not an artifact of history? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dsayers Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 "Government is dangerous" isn't history. I agree, yagami, that the "doomed to repeat history" mantra is fallacious. Look how much the US empire has been making the same mistakes as Nazi Germany and even the Roman Empire. The people in power are incentivized to perpetuate the myth of power and historical precedent cannot override such incentives. As for teaching children, it's the same with most things: It should be age-appropriate. The younger they are, the more it is the responsibility of the parent to protect the child. The older they are, the more it is the responsibility of the parent to help the child protect themselves. You wouldn't want to teach 3 year old that everything in the world is dangerous. That would be traumatic. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shirgall Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 I think it is more important to understand the implications of state actions than the deep history of them. There are two factors that hurt deep knowledge: unless you were there, nuances are lost or glossed over or impossible to confirm except by the official historians and there is just too much to absorb in a reasonable amount of time. The skills that must be developed are "connecting the dots" and "critical evaluation of claims". Of course, these are incredibly hard to teach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
powder Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 I went about it the other way around, started to see patterns in history and made the conclusions that any form of government is evil, not the most efficient way. I think it is more important to teach principles than history. I have studied lots of history and it can take many years to get even a decent grasp of a very narrow field of study. If you study enough history you can start to see patterns and 'connect dots' as shirgall says, and this may lead you to make some important conclusions based on patterns - but that dot connecting will be related to your particular prejudices and perspectives. If you are well versed in ethics, then that will help you quickly connect the 'important' dots and see the dangers of having a ruling class. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luxfelix Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 When I read the topic title, I thought you were referring to knowing your history, as in one's family history/tree/origins, and whether that was important. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesP Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 Knowing history is quite important, especially self-history. The more you know, the better you are able to understand how we [you] got to where we [you] are, and the better we [you] will be able to avoid the mistakes others (or we [you]) have made. Of course, having a reliable source is essential. History as taught in schools generally whitewashes past crimes of the parties in power, if they even ever touch upon them. Personal history, however, is written in your genes, on your bones, in your heart… and it is quite accessible. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yagami Posted November 23, 2014 Author Share Posted November 23, 2014 What made me think of this topic was realizing how much of a waste time most of school is these days. I mean kids are "taught" ( and I use that word loosely) Music, art, history, PE, and I would even go as far as to say science. These subjects I feel shouldn't be taught in school because they are branches off of the basic 4 skills needed to do anything. Reading, writing, math and logic. If we spent more time focusing on just those 4 skills kids would graduate school many years earlier and be able to begin pursuing their dreams earlier. I mean think of the amount of kids that are "taught" about history, art and science and actually end up doing something in that field when they are an adult. Then there are even fewer people who make money in those fields (expect maybe science). Seems like a huge investment with very few kids getting any benefit. When I read the topic title, I thought you were referring to knowing your history, as in one's family history/tree/origins, and whether that was important. Lol sorry wasn't trying to trick people into this post or anything. Knowing history is quite important, especially self-history. The more you know, the better you are able to understand how we [you] got to where we [you] are, and the better we [you] will be able to avoid the mistakes others (or we [you]) have made.Of course, having a reliable source is essential. History as taught in schools generally whitewashes past crimes of the parties in power, if they even ever touch upon them. Personal history, however, is written in your genes, on your bones, in your heart… and it is quite accessible. Im not entirely sure children need self knowledge. It seems something like self knowledge is only useful to those that put up emotional barriers to reality to survive traumatic childhoods. If you have a happy life with no trauma then what purpose does self knowledge hold? Knowing biological drivers I wouldn't say is the same as self knowledge which I think all children should know (when appropriate). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. D. Stembal Posted November 23, 2014 Share Posted November 23, 2014 Luxfelix makes a good point, though. Knowing and acknowledging your family's history is probably more important than discussing politics over Thanksgiving. I think it is important for children to have self-knowledge. Parents need to allow their children to explore and find out who they are, and who they want to become. Too often child self-knowledge is squelched at the behest of the parent. That's where the emotional barriers originate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dsayers Posted November 24, 2014 Share Posted November 24, 2014 Im not entirely sure children need self knowledge. It seems something like self knowledge is only useful to those that put up emotional barriers to reality to survive traumatic childhoods. If you have a happy life with no trauma then what purpose does self knowledge hold? Knowledge is power. There's nothing in the world that knowledge won't help you to do/use better. Anyways, I don't think you can separate the two. At the very least, peaceful parenting entails modeling for a child acceptance of their own capacity for error. This is the start of self-knowledge. Not just in learning about yourself, but also because knowing that it's okay to make mistakes makes for a safe environment to explore yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesP Posted November 24, 2014 Share Posted November 24, 2014 Im not entirely sure children need self knowledge. It seems something like self knowledge is only useful to those that put up emotional barriers to reality to survive traumatic childhoods. If you have a happy life with no trauma then what purpose does self knowledge hold? Knowing biological drivers I wouldn't say is the same as self knowledge which I think all children should know (when appropriate). What do you think self knowledge is? I'm asking because your statement makes about as much sense to me as, "I'm not entirely sure children need to know how to read." 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yagami Posted November 25, 2014 Author Share Posted November 25, 2014 Now that you have asked the question I dont really know the answer. I always assumed it was something knowing what your weaknesses were assuming these weaknesses were a effect of a traumatic past. But I guess you could say it could be something as simple as knowing you have a weakness for sweets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dylan Lawrence Moore Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 I didn't get a real appreciation for history until I started reading Carroll Quigley. Tragedy and Hope and the Evolution of Civilizations are incredible, as he is the one history professor i know that openly tries to impart understanding, not knowledge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts