Originally Posted by Galt
I can guarentee you that in the two years students would study economics they wouldn't be able to cover all of the influencial economists. They'd probably just teach you about Bartlett, Diamond and Hardin. They probably wouldn't even mention Sowell and Simon.
One more thing, there already is an economics elective in most Australian public schools. The only public schools that don't have an economic class would probably just have a lack of teachers. I've got a few friends of mine doing that economics class, I'll ask them tommorow what they study in it.
The economics taught in schools is not taught so people understand the different standpoints of every economist, its taught so they understand the applicable theories and economic practices and solutions used in their countries. Maynard Keynes is the founder of that school of economic thought but his work isn't solely used in our economy, also his work has been improved by many other economists.
The philosophy thing, well, there is a lot to learn but I do think that perhaps an introduction to it in order to ignite a spark could be a good thing. I will be 18 soon and it has taken me until now, really, to discover philosophy at all. Surely I have found it at a young age by comparison to some. I would assume that as people grow older and change the way they see the world they may have become interested in philosophy as they got older, but if they had known of it earlier perhaps they would have become interested in it earlier or known where to start when they did finally gain an interest.
Sure enough, the Philosopher kings may spring to mind when talking of educating everyone in philosophy, but tbh I feel that we have been unfortunate in the selection of those whom have been called Philosopher Kings and through further education, we may get a good one.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
ALL HAIL THE METAPHOR!!
ALL HAIL THE METAPHOR!!
Originally Posted by Murmayder
The economics taught in schools is not taught so people understand the different standpoints of every economist, its taught so they understand the applicable theories and economic practices and solutions used in their countries. Maynard Keynes is the founder of that school of economic thought but his work isn't solely used in our economy, also his work has been improved by many other economists.
Ergo, the govt. would clearly be teaching students all about Keynesian economics. Diametrically opposed to, ofcourse, Friedman.
Originally Posted by Murmayder
The philosophy thing, well, there is a lot to learn but I do think that perhaps an introduction to it in order to ignite a spark could be a good thing. I will be 18 soon and it has taken me until now, really, to discover philosophy at all. Surely I have found it at a young age by comparison to some. I would assume that as people grow older and change the way they see the world they may have become interested in philosophy as they got older, but if they had known of it earlier perhaps they would have become interested in it earlier or known where to start when they did finally gain an interest.
Whether the Australian govt. decides to teach them about Pluto or Rand it doesn't really matter. Does the m/b/illions that go into supplying the schools with new philosophy textbooks and educating teachers about the various ideologies justify the end result? A bunch of pretentious philosoraptors? Or even worse, the students don't pay any attention to it at all? Try teaching an kid with an IQ of 70 about Nietsche's Zarathustra.
Regardless, in no way is philosophy as important as the core subjects and economics.
Admittedly though, it would be fun.
[doc]
Originally Posted by Galt
Ergo, the govt. would clearly be teaching students all about Keynesian economics. Diametrically opposed to, ofcourse, Friedman.
But it defeats the point in terms of the teachers or government deciding that Keynesian economics is better than that of Reaganomics simply because they like it better. The students should only be taught what is relevant to their economy. This is not to say that we aren't taught about Friedman btw, we are, but the point is that is rambling on about economic theory, no matter how interesting, is pointless if it isn't relevant to the student. Surely those who do have an interest in the theories and speculations of other economists will look into that in their own time, but those who are sticking to the mandatory course and the school curriculum will not be disadvantaged in terms of their economic understanding, but only their exposure to different ideas.
Originally Posted by Galt
Whether the Australian govt. decides to teach them about Pluto or Rand it doesn't really matter. Does the m/b/illions that go into supplying the schools with new philosophy textbooks and educating teachers about the various ideologies justify the end result? A bunch of pretentious philosoraptors? Or even worse, the students don't pay any attention to it at all? Try teaching an kid with an IQ of 70 about Nietsche's Zarathustra.
Regardless, in no way is philosophy as important as the core subjects and economics.
Admittedly though, it would be fun.
Perhaps we can only dream
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
ALL HAIL THE METAPHOR!!
ALL HAIL THE METAPHOR!!
Originally Posted by Galt
Whether the Australian govt. decides to teach them about Pluto or Rand it doesn't really matter. Does the m/b/illions that go into supplying the schools with new philosophy textbooks and educating teachers about the various ideologies justify the end result? A bunch of pretentious philosoraptors? Or even worse, the students don't pay any attention to it at all? Try teaching an kid with an IQ of 70 about Nietsche's Zarathustra.
Regardless, in no way is philosophy as important as the core subjects and economics.
Well the school I go to, and I believe my entire city (the education system, aside from federal exams, is done mostly by the states in germany - and Hamburg is both a city and a state), has the choice between RE (It's basically the same thing as Philo though, but easier) and Philosophy mandatory from grade 8 to 12, and in those years I've had (8 to 11 atm) we've covered only very few specific philosophers. Sure, Kant and Hume get name dropped there and there, and we some times have lessons based around reading an excerpt of usually Kant. We sometimes get a brief overview of their philosophical doctrines and then are asked to state our opinion to them based on certain examples. The rest of the time, it's what can be summarized as a "logic debate class", which is just really an open class-wide debate about some issue, political, philosophical, etc. The main point of the class is thus not to explain philosophical concepts to students, but rather to hone the logical thinking processes and debating skills of said students. The goal would be to take your 70 IQ student and attempt to make him 80 IQ.
Out of experience, I find that this format has really helped several of the students, and it can get quite interesting at certain points.
tl;dr: deprived is spergin'
Originally Posted by Deprived
Well the school I go to, and I believe my entire city (the education system, aside from federal exams, is done mostly by the states in germany - and Hamburg is both a city and a state), has the choice between RE (It's basically the same thing as Philo though, but easier) and Philosophy mandatory from grade 8 to 12, and in those years I've had (8 to 11 atm) we've covered only very few specific philosophers. Sure, Kant and Hume get name dropped there and there, and we some times have lessons based around reading an excerpt of usually Kant. We sometimes get a brief overview of their philosophical doctrines and then are asked to state our opinion to them based on certain examples. The rest of the time, it's what can be summarized as a "logic debate class", which is just really an open class-wide debate about some issue, political, philosophical, etc. The main point of the class is thus not to explain philosophical concepts to students, but rather to hone the logical thinking processes and debating skills of said students. The goal would be to take your 70 IQ student and attempt to make him 80 IQ.
Out of experience, I find that this format has really helped several of the students, and it can get quite interesting at certain points.
If only we had such a system here.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
ALL HAIL THE METAPHOR!!
ALL HAIL THE METAPHOR!!
