The Fraud Of Subject Divisions

Students need an aim, so that they can learn on their own, standardized lectures are just a trick.

Subject divisions artificially prolong education to maximize profits, and they are a way to control and limit the teachers, by setting the topic.

If you think I am wrong, tell me where the lectures against religious indoctrination are.

Where is the class that speaks about preventing people from fracturing into a life of crime, where are the lectures that speak about disproportionate mass incarceration of the uneducated.

Where is the class that speaks out against fighting in war, or mutually assured destruction.

Do you really think that CS50 is more important, than life changing education, wisdom, greatness and world peace...

Everybody knows that once divided into subjects, knowledge is rendered useless. everybody, except for students, that is.

But it gets worse, because subjects can be further diluted, by interjecting useless and off-topic information.

This is such a terrible thing, that it does not reveal evil, or arrogance, it simply shows the teachers, are just liars that landed the gig.

The better the liar, the more of a playable push around they have to be, and sine the real corruption begins above the teachers…

A push around, is the best kind of professor.

Like doctors who ignore the Hippocratic oath, and prefer treatment to prevention.

Teachers prefer to gag their students with interesting facts, instead of inspiring them, towards actual computer science.

CS50 is a tough example, to start with, but you just need to examine the results.

It is an opportunity to enable students to build and deploy small startups, that is wasted on Algorithms, Data Structures, and Artificial Intelligence.

These and other topics are pleasure fo the students, they are sunny Sunday afternoons, perhaps before getting out of bed.

They need to know how to deploy self scaling computer networks, that they cam program via VPLs, that all the graduates work on, and rely on.

In my philosophy class, which was strictly about Descartes, right before the finals a student asked “Who is this des-cartes guy?” that is going to be on the finals.

There was nothing wrong with the student, the teacher was fake, a liar, a pretender, a wannabe.

He scoffed at my index cards, with a smile told me Rand was not a philosopher, and destroyed a beautiful opportunity to inspire a classroom.

I would start with Socrates, who quite clearly, was forced into silence and death.

The stories are made up, he was told “it is either you, or your students”.

“And if you open your mouth one more time, it will be both, and your family.”

And Socrates, like always, chose the harderight, and as always, the victors wrote the history.

The father of philosophy, did not concern him self with the debt of a chicken, he passed away, so that his students could go on.

But Descartes it is, as both were taking on indoctrination, in as far as they could.

It is a filthy, old trick, Dawkins in his response to “What if you’re wrong?” undermine religion fro the correct angle.

And this is where the fool that taught philosophy in my college, should have been headed towards.

It is not that “I think therefore I am”, but that “I easily believe whatever I am born into, therefore I cannot be me”.

From here, Nietzsche and the death of god, and then, within moments, the class should have turned to criminals self indoctrinating into dead ends.

Today, like Socrates and no doubt Descartes, nobody can really speak out, without getting suspended of fired.

The class should have concluded with a classroom of angry kids, having for the first time in their lives seen a bigger picture.

That poverty, war, indoctrination, Mutually assured destruction, is an insult.

And that the words Philosophy Class, are an oxymoron – because if it was Philosophy the teacher would be fired.