George W. Bush Must Answer to the People

I was going to post a link to international a.n.s.w.e.r. [a group that organizes protests] but they seem to have a couple of serious problems with their approach [ 1 ] [ 2 ].

the sad story of saddam and the bionic chimp
an anti-morality tale

war:

• in this case, unnecessary.

• Why a War in Iraq is Unnecessary


• How Mainstream Media Become the Pro-war Propaganda Machine


• What Can Be Done?

also, see Gerard ;)

amateur ::
definition 1: One lacking the skill of a professional, as in an art.
definition 2: Lover, devoted friend, devotee, enthusiastic pursuer of an objective.

professional ::
definition 1: A skilled practitioner; an expert.
definition 2: Conforming to the standards of a profession.

educated learning?

:: preliminary ruminations

i am bored; i have nothing to do.

i have something to do, actually... schoolwork.

why bother? i have to. if not, i will fail out of school.

:: the question

what would happen if i failed out of school?


:: thoughts
no more school friends, no more school environment, no more camaraderie of suffering under school rules, no more structured learning process, no more pre-accepted yardstick for achievement. without the yardstick, no one would know how to accurately prejudge my skills or intelligence. every meeting with someone new would put me back at the bottom of the barrel with the "drop-outs" and the ones who couldn't make it, couldn't take the "responsibility".

society only recognizes those who play a role that is easily identifiable. the cult of experts who presume to own the world of ideas cannot allow their authority and their process to be undermined. either i am a professional or an amateur: in everday meaning, _amateur_ means "self-taught, hobbyist", whereas _professional_ means "well-trained, educated". to be un-professional is to exist in a nebulous grey area far below the crisp, serious dedication of the formally educated.

the strange fact in all this is that if everyone is 'educated' in the same way, the vast majority will see the same things and be guided to the same truths. even rickety hypotheses become accepted dogma, as blind repetition creates fact from empty words. a nose buried in books of prescribed knowledge naturally succumbs the noxious indoctrination of those who create the curriculum. how can independent thought be founded on the starched and pressed mentality of the steel factory?

it is this problem that has been burning holes into my perception, distorting my view of this educational process. for a long time all i could see was the threat of "accept the artificial reward of a diploma or be burned by the brand of those who didn't measure up: either mold your mind to our specifications, or be considered a failure in the eyes of the world." it is a difficult image to work around, one that has been continually reinforced throughout my life as a student. there seems to be no middle path. there seems to be an assumption that unless it is certified by some accepted authority figure, learning will never progress beyond the level of vague interest.

of course, my first reaction to this is "that's bullshit..." i have already been on a career track as a web development and computer networking professional. many of the computer-enthusiast amateurs that i know have far more technical knowledge than the terminally bored professionals who couldn't be bothered to do more than go through the pre-approved motions. an unfortunate result is my current low level of interest in following the dictates of professors and others who pretend that knowledge can be given and assimilated rather than found and learned.

the provisional solution is this: to only way to avoid indoctrination is to find as many intelligent viewpoints as possible and submit these viewpoints to the test of my own critical thought. my previous rebellion against the knowledge given in classrooms was, and still is, an expression of distrust for authority that exists for its own sake. this kind of authority presumes that it can create order out of the creative process of learning, and direct the proper path on which entire generations of so-called 'educated' people will embark in the search for coherence in the chaotic universe of discourse. i find this to be a ridiculous simplification of the myriad directions that the mind can take in its search for understanding, a stultifying insult to the ability of the individual to use reason in his or her own learning process.

the only way, at present, that i can see to bridge the gap between education and learning is to give oneself the ability to choose between ideas. the goal is to become and remain adaptable in spite of the regimented, industrialized assembly line of thought that is inevitably insisted upon by formal education.

how will i do this? i'm not entirely sure, but i suppose the first step is that for every concept introduced, organize my mind regarding possible alternative viewpoints, as one would arrange the three-hundred and sixty degrees of variation along the circumference of a circle. for each idea, find its antithesis. from there, identify and evaluate as many relevant diametrically oppositional variations as possible along the same continuum of debate and explore them deeply enough to meaningfully grasp their fundaments.

the difficulty of exploring ideas this deeply seems self-evident, but as i see it, this is the only way to maintain any kind of distance from a crudely polarized sense of right, wrong or false objectivity. if nothing else, continuous exposure to various perspectives will help to reinforce the understanding that objectivity is largely a question of he who sees it.