MM>how to cook, how to tie his shoes, how to work, how to have a family, how
MM>to be socially graceful from their friends.  No one learns that stuff
MM>from school. 
I didn't say people learn NOTHING out of school, YOU said
they learn EVERYTHING they need out of school...  Btw, most
people do a lousy job of learning how to RAISE a family -
HAVING a family is easy and requires little in the way of
learning.  As for "socially graceful", there isn't a whole
lot of THAT going on these days either!
MM>You don't learn how to survive from school.
RM> Without the training I received IN school, I would not be
RM> working in my present occupation.  Seems to me that it was
RM> necessary for MY survival?!
 
MM>If you didn't go to school, you'd be surviving by doing something
MM>else, I guarantee you that.
Yep, the government seems perfectly willing to ensure that
I wouldn't starve, and I guess I could live in a tent or
something, maybe beg... This is beginning to sound a bit
like the early Christians - You know, consider the Lillies
of the field who neither toil.... and yet GOD provides for
them....
RM> I learned SOME stuff from my family, and SOME of the stuff
RM> that people learn from THEIR families is hurtful!
 
MM>But most of it isn't.
Depends on the family....
MM>If it was, we would be a completely dysfunctional society.
Uh huh....
MM>I mean, we wouldn't be where we are today.
Oh yeah... We're doing just ducky....
MM>We'd be back in the Stone Age.
With high-tech weapons... Much like our inner cities...
MM>Weeding out people is not the definition of learning.
No... It's the consequence of FAILING to learn...
MM>You say "semantics" because we are ingrained in this process, to the
MM>point where we think that's what learning is.
No, I say semantics because you are playing at word games..
You define a term as you wish it defined, ignore equally
valid definitions, spout generalities, and take positions
which are unrealistic...
MM>What is the definition of learning?  Does it have anything to
MM>do with being weeded out?  No, of course not.
Learning is an internal process; it is dependent on the
individual.  It can be facilitated, and teaching can be 
done, but learning depends upon the individual.  Whether
an individual is (or should be) excluded or precluded from 
something on the basis of his/her FAILURE to learn, is
another issue entirely...
MM>The greatest feat of every human on this planet is not learned in
MM>school:  learning your first language.
RM> Which can be done by memorization and mimicry; two of the
RM> lowest of the cognitive processes...
 
MM>Oh contrare.  Learning a language is an incredible feat.  We are the
MM>only species on the planet that does it.  Memorization and mimicry
MM>doesn't teach a chimp to speak and understand one of our languages.
There are so many half truths and misunderstandings in what 
you've written here that I scarcely know where to begin...
Language in humans is initially mimicry, and then becomes a
matter of memorizing words and phrases as well as appropriate
responses.  It requires some intelligence to do the last 
part.  
We are NOT the only species which has a language; whales and 
dolphins come immediately to mind as having one.  Honeybees
have a limited, but quite effective "language" which conveys
the concept of distance and heading to a food source.  Etc.
Chimps and some apes, while lacking the vocal equipment to
SPEAK, have shown themselves able to engage in OUR language

.
--- Silver Xpress Mail System 5.4P1a
---------------