It would be really interesting for me to ask you,
what do you think about home education?
This matter seems to me important, because if the
institutional science is lying, or, at least, we can't
trust them completely, where should we take our
knowledge?
Also, what do you think about discursive and non-
-discursive knowledge? I mean that non-discursive
one requires using of a private language and
about the last one there are still some speculations
are holding. Usually, for to make our knowledge
about the subject to be objective we're discussing
with each other (exactly as what we're doing now).
If we discursive techniques were chosen, then little
groups of people would need to speak with each for
not to collect some data in a correct way only, but
to make theories which were build on data be much
representative and profound.
Home-schooling is vastly preferred to institutionalist brain-washing
whose only purpose is to meld minds into subservient obedience.
This is especially true in terms of the www. Of course there is the
likelihood that some home-schooling will itself have such a sad result.
There are numerous reasons to counter that. Firstly, institutions are already
entirely rotten and are the primary mode for which to train young minds
into nationalist militancy such as apartheid, fascism, nazism and trumpism.
Secondly putting all the eggs in one basket is the surest way to ruin them all.
Variety of ideas is the best way for innovation to be achieved - to counter dogma
of all varieties, but most especially the awful horrors that materialist institutions
are corrupting in the minds of the youth. Already we are faced with anti-spiritual
institutional dogmas which can only lead to neo-fascism.
Thirdly, in the age of the www, it is optimal for learners to access all potential
points of reference regarding any topic. So long as home-schooling itself reflects
its products into the public www domain, an open communication can be sustained.
-------------------
The wonder of language is that it is infinite. So the idea of non-discursive
knowledge is simply a matter of utility. Sometimes ideas can just be more
easily explained or augmented with music, for example, like emotional knowledge.
Language and knowledge evolves in a spirit of its own, and individuals
are better equipped to keeping it objective than institutions, which have
proven themselves capable only of making lies and corruption universal.
There is always a trade-off between the creative results of liberty and the
problems some individuals face with more liberty than they can handle.
But systems do not make people smart. Individuals make themselves smart
when they are confronted with tasks they must survive. Institutions just
make people into a mindless mob. Institutionalism stifles the best achievements
even if they offer the promise to protect the weakest from the worst disasters.
They seldom achieve this, and mostly just ensure that the weaker minds -
those that can withstand the most mindlessness - then take power of the mob,
and to do this, they habitually exclude the better minds as a matter of crass
democracy.
Objectivity is not the domain of the institution.
Objective truth is attained by the freedom to discover it.
So long as schools perpetuate uniforms and hairstyles as a faux
foundation to education they paint themselves as fascist mobs.