100% Metal Forum (Death Metal and Black Metal)

Metal => Interzone => Topic started by: scourge on October 10, 2010, 10:02:09 PM

Title: Bad Students, Not Bad Schools
Post by: scourge on October 10, 2010, 10:02:09 PM
Quote
Bad Students, Not Bad Schools is an Emperor’s new clothes book—it openly speaks the unspeakable: America’s education woes are caused by intellectually mediocre, unmotivated students, not “bad schools,” rotten teachers, faculty curriculum, lack of sufficient funding and similar alleged culprits. Alter the student population and push students harder, even if this means lowering their self-esteem and America’s schools will thrive. If mischief-makers refuse to learn, let them drop out! Politicians and professional educators avoid this awkward reality and prefer instead to squander billions while lurching from one guaranteed-to-fail gimmick after the next.

http://badstudentsnotbadschools.com/

All of us were or are students at some point. We all have been or met the rotten apples and we know these ruin all the apples in the barrel to some extent.
Title: Re: Bad Students, Not Bad Schools
Post by: Parasite on October 10, 2010, 10:17:56 PM
Lowering someone's self esteem cant possibly be a good idea, instead teachers should be searching for the talents within the distracted unfocused kids.  I wasnt the best in school at all, i was never a shit disturber by any means, or a bad apple, but i lacked focus.  Great teachers angle your focus back to the important factors of education.  Alot of kids i knew hated school because it was another place to get abused, be it verbally and what not.  The kids that are just bad apples, well they should just be thrown into a more "disciplinary" school.  One less asshole kid, gives a teacher loads more attention to those who need the help, and less distraction for the ones who are easily distracted.
Title: Re: Bad Students, Not Bad Schools
Post by: Wolfgang on October 10, 2010, 10:35:42 PM
Many of the educators I have met have been rather simple, average people.
Title: Re: Bad Students, Not Bad Schools
Post by: nous on October 11, 2010, 12:49:26 AM
Lowering someone's self esteem cant possibly be a good idea, instead teachers should be searching for the talents within the distracted unfocused kids.  I wasnt the best in school at all, i was never a shit disturber by any means, or a bad apple, but i lacked focus.  Great teachers angle your focus back to the important factors of education.  Alot of kids i knew hated school because it was another place to get abused, be it verbally and what not.  The kids that are just bad apples, well they should just be thrown into a more "disciplinary" school.  One less asshole kid, gives a teacher loads more attention to those who need the help, and less distraction for the ones who are easily distracted.

All your points are valid. Discrimination according to character and merit--how could that be wrong? Yet it makes also sense to not force education on the stupid or unwilling. Maybe compulsory education wasn't such a good concept in the first place. Sure, the groundwork should be available to everyone; but beyond that, delight in knowledge should be the prime motivation for learning. Today, knowledge is too often a slave of industry or practicality, and for this reason alone many children and students lack focus.
Title: Re: Bad Students, Not Bad Schools
Post by: threads on October 11, 2010, 02:40:14 AM
My mother was an elementary school teacher briefly, and several of my current circle of friend teach from early childhood to college and the vast majority of their experiences lead me to believe this man's reaction isn't totally unwarranted, and is probably more sane of a reaction than the school board will allow him. (http://gawker.com/5659966/high-school-teachers-classroom-meltdown-caught-on-video)
Title: Re: Bad Students, Not Bad Schools
Post by: on October 11, 2010, 03:29:06 AM
Students are children. Children are not born with knowledge of the world, of life, of study. If the students are bad students, it is because there's is a bad school which has failed to teach them how to be good students. This is not a chicken-and-egg paradox.
Title: Re: Bad Students, Not Bad Schools
Post by: Veritas on October 11, 2010, 03:49:30 AM
Is equality to blame here?
Title: Re: Bad Students, Not Bad Schools
Post by: scourge on October 11, 2010, 08:03:00 AM
Equality and the compulsory nature of the arrangement as nous indicated.
Title: Re: Bad Students, Not Bad Schools
Post by: Conservationist on October 11, 2010, 08:43:51 AM
Quote
Bad Students, Not Bad Schools is an Emperor’s new clothes book—it openly speaks the unspeakable: America’s education woes are caused by intellectually mediocre, unmotivated students, not “bad schools,” rotten teachers, faculty curriculum, lack of sufficient funding and similar alleged culprits. Alter the student population and push students harder, even if this means lowering their self-esteem and America’s schools will thrive. If mischief-makers refuse to learn, let them drop out! Politicians and professional educators avoid this awkward reality and prefer instead to squander billions while lurching from one guaranteed-to-fail gimmick after the next.

http://badstudentsnotbadschools.com/

All of us were or are students at some point. We all have been or met the rotten apples and we know these ruin all the apples in the barrel to some extent.

I agree with this guy, but the problem is manifold at this point. Schools are also mediocre, because they're dumbed down to try to teach the impossibly dumb something. It's prole drift. And as others have mentioned, teacher's unions and school boards just thrust self interest into the situation, ruining it further.
Title: Re: Bad Students, Not Bad Schools
Post by: Tancred Hauteville on October 11, 2010, 09:11:40 AM
Problems with education:

1. Good students are used to teach the dumbest students.
2. Classes move as slow as the dumbest person in the class.
3. Not everyone should go to institutionalized, tax payer funded public schools.
4. Teachers are stupid, overly idealistic and have little regard for reality. Most teachers are liberals and comply with the overtly enlightenment esque agenda that "if we could just educate everybody the world would be better"
5. Schools are becoming leaders mainly in senstitivity training (See below) versus real world training. (Let the debates on what real world training should look like commence!)
6. There is a hidden politial agenda in schools, not recognized as political because it is commonly associated with "progress" (ie. multiculturalism, tolerance etc etc), that undermines the learning process.


Its neither solely bad students, nor solely bad schools.
Title: Re: Bad Students, Not Bad Schools
Post by: Wolfgang on October 11, 2010, 09:17:26 AM
I don't see the intrinsic harm in educating the dumb, or rather, I don't see a reason why they should be prevented from an education. A dumb person with an education is still of more value than a dumb person without one, right?

Hey maybe public education has brainwashed me but literacy can't be a bad thing.
Title: Re: Bad Students, Not Bad Schools
Post by: hoodwink on October 11, 2010, 09:29:01 AM
I don't see the intrinsic harm in educating the dumb, or rather, I don't see a reason why they should be prevented from an education. A dumb person with an education is still of more value than a dumb person without one, right?

Hey maybe public education has brainwashed me but literacy can't be a bad thing.

If, has been pointed out by others in this thread, education is impeded by the presence of morons in the classroom, than the end result is an impeded education.  When a curriculum is slowed down to a crawl by the least of the student body, less information is presented, and necessarily in less challenging ways.  Most of the football players you see on TV each weekend are college graduates, and yet hardly any of them evidence even basic English comprehension skills and diction.  There's little evidence of the supposed sophistication a higher education provides because although many of them are attending above average universities, they're being provided with a below average education.  College football players (unfortunately) aren't lumped into classes with nothing but other football players.  Since these universities are more interested in having competitive football teams than producing scholars, the non-athletes in their classes are the recipients of a lesser education, too.  So, yes, we've introduced a bunch of college graduates into the system, but apart from playing football, what skills do they have?  And for those who don't play a sport but were caught in the morass of athlete education, their educations are dubious as well. 
Title: Re: Bad Students, Not Bad Schools
Post by: metal on metal on October 11, 2010, 09:39:29 AM
I don't see the intrinsic harm in educating the dumb, or rather, I don't see a reason why they should be prevented from an education. A dumb person with an education is still of more value than a dumb person without one, right?

Hey maybe public education has brainwashed me but literacy can't be a bad thing.

Where I live, there's a problem of colleges allowing dumb people to enroll so they could earn more money from tuition fees. As some people have already mentioned, the quality of education went downhill.

But you can always educate yourself, which I didn't manage very well, at least as well as I could. While I was studying, there were some punk girls who got the message pretty quick. They cheated on the worthless exams and studied only what was relevant and needed. I never learned to cheat, but got stoned while they were finishing their education.  Now they have well payed jobs and do their "punk thing" organizing shows / managing the scene in their spare time. Some guys from my stoning circle eventually learned to cheat and got ahead. On the other hand, I'm a college graduate having a menial job and barely surviving.

So there you go. You can always get smart, even if you get stoned.
Title: Re: Bad Students, Not Bad Schools
Post by: Wolfgang on October 11, 2010, 12:12:38 PM
Don't get me wrong, I am absolutely not advocating No Child Left Behind type nonsense where the entire herd is slowed so we can protect the weakest and least valuable from the lions at the expense of our healthiest, but a strong society should educate all of its members. There can be no harm that comes from that as long as excellence isn't stifled.
Title: Re: Bad Students, Not Bad Schools
Post by: Parasite on October 11, 2010, 12:17:40 PM
Back when i was in high school there was certain classes for those who slowed down the learning process of their peers in regular classes.  Kind of the same with different math classes, there is the regular one, and one that is practically the bare minimum( easiest to pass).  Which in the end attracts the distracteed, and "dumber" kids, which keeps the other classes learning at the rate they are supposed to.  I dont think it is fair to say though that if there is one slow kid in the class, the entire class suffers, that has just never been the case in the schools i have been in.  The class proceeds at the pace it is supposed to be at, and for those who are left behind(if they give a shit) come in for extra work,help, after school help etc.  I guess the problem is the ones who dont value education, the ones who just stay in the class and fuck everything up on purpose(messing with the teacher etc.).  If you have kids like this that dont want to learn, and cant accept the help that is offered, then they shouldnt even be in school.  They should be placed  in, like i said before, more disciplinary schools.
Title: Re: Bad Students, Not Bad Schools
Post by: Tancred Hauteville on October 11, 2010, 08:27:08 PM
Regarding:

"Hey maybe public education has brainwashed me but literacy can't be a bad thing."

Some, like Savitri Devi, argue that universal literacy can indeed be a bad thing:

It is easier to brainwash people when they can all read as they are more susceptible to subtle forms of propaganda. The inherent power in language alone is often overlooked.

Additionally, Why the supposed link between literacy and education? Being able to read and being able to read with care, discrimination, insight and wisdom are two different things of which the latter is usually something that can not be taught, although it can be groomed in those who show a propensity for such skill.
 
Can it be bad to educate everyone? Perhaps...... If by doing so the dumb (but clever) can pretend to be WISE or knowledgeable.....

Title: Re: Bad Students, Not Bad Schools
Post by: Spectrum on October 11, 2010, 08:50:28 PM
Quote
Bad Students, Not Bad Schools is an Emperor’s new clothes book—it openly speaks the unspeakable: America’s education woes are caused by intellectually mediocre, unmotivated students, not “bad schools,” rotten teachers, faculty curriculum, lack of sufficient funding and similar alleged culprits. Alter the student population and push students harder, even if this means lowering their self-esteem and America’s schools will thrive. If mischief-makers refuse to learn, let them drop out! Politicians and professional educators avoid this awkward reality and prefer instead to squander billions while lurching from one guaranteed-to-fail gimmick after the next.

http://badstudentsnotbadschools.com/

All of us were or are students at some point. We all have been or met the rotten apples and we know these ruin all the apples in the barrel to some extent.

I agree, but only somewhat.  As a current student, I can safely say that the idiots and apathetic slobs make everyone's job more difficult.  Poor teaching IS an issue though.  Many of them are intellectually challenged and/or suffer from the very same apathy that the jerkoffs who stagnate collective learning display.  I agree that US schools are funded enough already, and money is constantly being wasted.  It is unacceptable.  Poor students are not the only ones to blame, and the government doesn't seem to give a shit.
Title: Re: Bad Students, Not Bad Schools
Post by: Dissent on October 11, 2010, 09:00:42 PM
I never saw how sitting people in a classroom and talking at them for an hour was effective in the education process. It wasn't for me, and I often found myself distracted by other things on my mind for the majority of the school day.

If you ask me, teaching yourself material is far more effective. Not only do you learn at your own speed, but you don't have the stress of being adequately prepared for the next test.
Title: Re: Bad Students, Not Bad Schools
Post by: Spectrum on October 11, 2010, 09:19:27 PM
I never saw how sitting people in a classroom and talking at them for an hour was effective in the education process. It wasn't for me, and I often found myself distracted by other things on my mind for the majority of the school day.

If you ask me, teaching yourself material is far more effective. Not only do you learn at your own speed, but you don't have the stress of being adequately prepared for the next test.

It works for me, but I know people who are in a dire need of being taught.  That's centralized education's biggest issue: how do you address all students equally under a linear, heavily bureaucratic  system?  The issue is the goal itself in my opinion.
Title: Re: Bad Students, Not Bad Schools
Post by: Veritas on October 11, 2010, 09:24:02 PM
A few ideas I've had.

Have half grades/half semester grade changes. If a student has achieved the set requirements for a school year by halfway through, they move up a whole grade instead of a half grade. For example, suppose the 7th grade syllabus requirements are A and B, and 8th grade is C and D, then grade 7.5 is B and C. (this particular alternative has the advantage that the syllabi won't need to really change, which should make it a relatively simple change to make)

Normal student: A+B -> B+C -> C+D (time = 1.5 years)

Advanced student: A+B -> C+D (time = 1 year)

Smart kids will go to selective schools, where the average student there might finish high school level education at about 15, at which point the students learn at a university level until they're 18, and can then progress to university education at the honours or masters level if they so choose, or at least have a significant amount of credit towards a bachelor's degree.

There will also be classes based on age, so that age-based grades can be kept allowing for a more normal social development (based on the argument that kids who skip grades have a harder time socially because of it)

For the normal students, practical skills are to be taught moreso than academic ones (skills relevant for the trades). Apart from the very basic skills (3 R's in primary school), and maybe some broad headings like "cultural education", "exposure to scientific knowledge" there won't be a compulsory syllabus, though there will be recommended ones. The schools can ultimately decide for themselves. Schools will generally specialise in practical, academic, or creative pursuits, with children attending institutions accordingly.

Main idea here: having a single path of education for all students, regardless of ability is ridiculous. Provide alternatives so that students can more easily progress at a suitable pace, and specialise based on their natural strengths and inclinations.
Title: Re: Bad Students, Not Bad Schools
Post by: JewishPhysics on October 12, 2010, 06:14:48 AM
I think the educational system is just plain fucked up all around.  Bad students are a serious problem, but that doesn't change the fact that there are terrible teachers everywhere, and bloated school bureaucracies that create inefficient and stupid structuring of schools.  Not to mention the problem of teachers' unions and excessive political oversight.  The whole thing is a mess.  Though I have been saying for years that they should simply decriminalize truancy.  If the kid doesn't want to go to school, let him fuck off and do whatever.  If he ends up successful, good for him.  If he ends up a failure, then it's a good thing he wasn't in the class fucking things up for everyone else.
Title: Re: Bad Students, Not Bad Schools
Post by: chv on October 13, 2010, 12:24:08 AM
What we need to teach our children is one static principle, and that is: it is up to them to make something positive of themselves, and no moral filter will change that. No matter what they want to believe about the universe. From this principle a sense of identity, purpose, and discipline is born.

You cannot teach anyone if you allow them to believe in things that contradict the lesson.
Title: Re: Bad Students, Not Bad Schools
Post by: Spectrum on October 13, 2010, 12:32:41 PM
There is another issue, though, which follows from the Cardinal Principle.

Its called Line.

Yeah, but maybe it wouldn't be so bad.
Title: Re: Bad Students, Not Bad Schools
Post by: Reginald Gillette on October 14, 2010, 09:04:31 AM
Brunhilde: nobody cares.
Title: Re: Bad Students, Not Bad Schools
Post by: Reginald Gillette on October 14, 2010, 09:36:43 AM
Brunhilde: nobody cares.
Title: Re: Bad Students, Not Bad Schools
Post by: Willard on October 15, 2010, 07:11:08 PM
I wasted three years of my school life because I had no direction. I wish somebody had told me the point of university: to become a rich fucker.
Title: Re: Bad Students, Not Bad Schools
Post by: Spectrum on October 15, 2010, 08:41:02 PM
I wasted three years of my school life because I had no direction. I wish somebody had told me the point of university: to become a rich fucker.

Well all you can do is work from there.  Unfortunately the apathy in these shit schools is always lurking.  Politicians and those in charge are too ignorant or inactive to address the issues causing the apathy. 
Title: Re: Bad Students, Not Bad Schools
Post by: scourge on October 15, 2010, 11:49:10 PM
Bad breeding and demography neglect results in a Third World USA unable to solve any of the problems:

Quote
A 60-page review of the scientific evidence, some based on state-of-the-art magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of brain size, has concluded that race differences in average IQ are largely genetic.

http://www.news-medical.net/news/2005/04/26/9530.aspx

that it is unaware it has foisted upon itself::

Quote
For those who fear the “browning” of America or the loss of some Anglo-Saxon “cultural” identity, all I can say is, sorry. Between now and 2050, the vast majority of population growth will come from racial minorities. By 2050, the America that many on the right are so nostalgic about will be a thing of the past.

The truth is that the changes taking place are not something to fear. They only will make America stronger.

http://www.dailyiowan.com/2010/04/12/Opinions/16657.html
Title: Re: Bad Students, Not Bad Schools
Post by: Willard on October 16, 2010, 01:24:04 AM
I wasted three years of my school life because I had no direction. I wish somebody had told me the point of university: to become a rich fucker.

Well all you can do is work from there.  Unfortunately the apathy in these shit schools is always lurking.  Politicians and those in charge are too ignorant or inactive to address the issues causing the apathy. 

Oh yes, most certainly. I'm studying at the moment and next year I will be in university.
Title: Re: Bad Students, Not Bad Schools
Post by: nether on October 16, 2010, 04:48:15 PM
What of the fact that years of teaching apathetic, uninterested students makes for apathetic teachers?

Most of my teachers in high school were wrecks.  That is, they had been ruined by the reality they could not bear; namely that their students did not care, and did not have the capacity to care.
Title: Re: Bad Students, Not Bad Schools
Post by: Spectrum on October 16, 2010, 07:40:49 PM
What of the fact that years of teaching apathetic, uninterested students makes for apathetic teachers?

Most of my teachers in high school were wrecks.  That is, they had been ruined by the reality they could not bear; namely that their students did not care, and did not have the capacity to care.

Did the apathetic teacher come first or did the apathetic student?  The stupidity of the bureaucracy came later; I know that much.  Both teachers and students are the issue.  My school is shit, and no one tries to prepare us for university/college although it is their responsibility.  It's not only ruined students, but that certainly attributes to the issue.  Lack of competition within the system is a negative as well.  The system is cracked, and a lot will have to been done to rectify the plethora of problems (even though many are simple fixes, humanism stands in the way too).
Title: Re: Bad Students, Not Bad Schools
Post by: scourge on October 16, 2010, 10:29:04 PM
What of the fact that years of teaching apathetic, uninterested students makes for apathetic teachers?

Most of my teachers in high school were wrecks.  That is, they had been ruined by the reality they could not bear; namely that their students did not care, and did not have the capacity to care.

You've nailed it down. This is what those who teach have to say about the arrangement and I am inclined to agree with them and the Bad Students author. Liberal permissiveness and fairness bears a cost that cannot be recovered.
Title: Re: Bad Students, Not Bad Schools
Post by: chv on October 17, 2010, 10:43:18 AM
The society must have higher standards as a whole, which means that the teachers must be harder on the parents, which in this comfort dominated society cannot do.

Title: Re: Bad Students, Not Bad Schools
Post by: nether on October 17, 2010, 11:47:04 AM
The society must have higher standards as a whole, which means that the teachers must be harder on the parents, which in this comfort dominated society cannot do.

Well, a lot of parents have the idea that the school system is corrupt, or useless, and somehow out to ruin their kids.  So #1 they don't listen to the teachers and #2 they stick up for the apathy and misbehavior of their children.

I've seen this happen; a lot of parents like nothing more than a reason to fight with their child's teachers.
Title: Re: Bad Students, Not Bad Schools
Post by: Spectrum on October 17, 2010, 11:59:55 AM
The society must have higher standards as a whole, which means that the teachers must be harder on the parents, which in this comfort dominated society cannot do.

Well, a lot of parents have the idea that the school system is corrupt, or useless, and somehow out to ruin their kids.  So #1 they don't listen to the teachers and #2 they stick up for the apathy and misbehavior of their children.

I've seen this happen; a lot of parents like nothing more than a reason to fight with their child's teachers.

I agree, there is a lot of disrespect.  Teachers sometimes do it for themselves, but in the end no one (including students, teachers, parents, politicians, staff) wants to create a holistic and smooth system.
Title: Re: Bad Students, Not Bad Schools
Post by: mandrake on November 21, 2010, 04:47:36 AM
quote:

The new dumbness is particularly deadly to middle- and upper-middle-class kids already made shallow
by multiple pressures to conform imposed by the outside world on their usually lightly rooted parents.
When they come of age, they are certain they must know something because their degrees and licenses
say they do. They remain so convinced until an unexpectedly brutal divorce, a corporate downsizing in
midlife, or panic attacks of meaninglessness upset the precarious balance of their incomplete humanity,
their stillborn adult lives.

The individual has no chance to exercise his judgment either on principal questions or on their
implication; this leads to the atrophy of a faculty not comfortably exercised under [the best of]
conditions....Once personal judgment and critical faculties have disappeared or have atrophied,
they will not simply reappear when propaganda is suppressed...years of intellectual and
spiritual education would be needed to restore such faculties. The propagandee, if deprived of
one propaganda, will immediately adopt another, this will spare him the agony of finding
himself vis a vis some event without a ready-made opinion.

Once the best children are broken to such a system, they disintegrate morally, becoming dependent on
group approval. A National Merit Scholar in my own family once wrote that her dream was to be "a
small part in a great machine." It broke my heart.

What kids dumbed down by schooling can’t do is to
think for themselves or ever be at rest for very long without feeling crazy; stupefied boys and girls
reveal dependence in many ways easily exploitable by their knowledgeable elders.

According to official reports, only a small fraction of the
population is capable of what you and I call mental life: creative thought, analytical thought,
judgmental thought, a trio occupying the three highest positions on Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational
Objectives. Just how small a fraction would shock you. According to experts, the bulk of the mob is
hopelessly dumb, even dangerously so.

Perhaps you’re a willing accomplice to this social coup which
revived the English class system. Certainly you are if your own child has been rewarded with a "gifted
and talented" label by your local school.

The shocking possibility that dumb people don’t exist in sufficient numbers to warrant the careers
devoted to tending to them will seem incredible to you. Yet that is my proposition: Mass dumbness first
had to be imagined; it isn’t real.

If you obsess about conspiracy, what you’ll fail to see is that we are held fast by a form of highly
abstract thinking fully concretized in human institutions which has grown beyond the power of the
managers of these institutions to control. If there is a way out of the trap we’re in, it won’t be by
removing some bad guys and replacing them with good guys.

end of quote
Title: Re: Bad Students, Not Bad Schools
Post by: Levy_Spearmen on November 21, 2010, 12:27:35 PM
quote:

The shocking possibility that dumb people don’t exist in sufficient numbers to warrant the careers
devoted to tending to them will seem incredible to you. Yet that is my proposition: Mass dumbness first
had to be imagined; it isn’t real.

If you obsess about conspiracy, what you’ll fail to see is that we are held fast by a form of highly
abstract thinking fully concretized in human institutions which has grown beyond the power of the
managers of these institutions to control. If there is a way out of the trap we’re in, it won’t be by
removing some bad guys and replacing them with good guys.

end of quote

This guy does not understand that there is a problem of too many stupid people, but his point on the "lost" folk is valid. There are the people that are intelligent to make an ounce of success, but are trapped in the false morality. That is a reason sites like ANUS are running. Whoever Mandrake quoted also dodges any solution, but hints that a rigid system underlies this false morality and it must must be abolished.
Title: Re: Bad Students, Not Bad Schools
Post by: mandrake on November 22, 2010, 11:23:36 PM
quote

Kenneth Freeman concluded his unique study The Schools of Hellas in 1907 with this summary, "There were no schools in Hellas." No place boys and girls spent their youth attending continuous instruction under command of strangers. Indeed, nobody did homework in the modern sense; none could be located on standardized tests. The tests that mattered
came in living, striving to meet ideals that local tradition imposed. The word sköle itself means leisure, leisure in a formal garden to think and reflect.
The word pedagogue is Latin for a specialized class of slave assigned to walk a student to the
schoolmaster
And yet we often refer to the science of modern schooling as pedagogy.

end of quote

@LevySpearmen: I guess the issue is that  the dumb mass is not a natural one ( but it would really be a "mass" when completely natural? i wonder, cause nature does not know or need to level down enybody) when it's number grows by those dumbed down, or should i say educated (perfect for modern political means and goals, of course). It's not a shame or a fault when an intellect it is not as capable as another but when capable kids are reduced by the regular educational system (ie public, compulsory, official what have you) to good servants, when they could have been great individuals just by being left alone, to learn from their mistakes, from their parents, following their natural directions, instincts, talents etc Also, i see no shame in being good only at simple things, i see no fault to let's say the ancient uneducated simple folk that knew only their work (agriculture, crafts, hunting etc, and they knew it good, cause their life depended on it). It is healthy for an individual to be no more and no less than what he can be.This is possible only by learning from life, facing it,  thinking, fighting to survive.The modern effort of "enlightenment through culture and science" alters this order of things beyond recognition, simply through schooling.

There is no modern view of society that is not based on re-education (with everything it implies), since there is no social order to be called both modern and natural.