Mal Education - System Design - Should Be VS Is

Those who are too smart to engage in politics are punished by being governed by those who are dumber.

~Plato, ancient Greek Philosopher

I can't tell you how many times over the past decdes I have voiced a similar lament. To find that someone famous felt the same way a long time ago is both encouraging (because it suggests that I am right) and disheartening (because it suggests that, even after 2300 years, such knowledge makes no difference).

Plato lived for about 80 years. So far I've found no indication of how old he was when he said this. But with age comes wisdom (did Plato say that?), so I'm going to guess that he must have said it when he was young (20s or 30s).

And I see a flaw in his argument.

***

Within the group of people who would govern others, not all are dumb. In fact many are quite bright.

Within the group of people who eschew things political, not all are smart. In fact many are quite dim.

(HEY! Think about this d*mn it. D*mn <u>you</u>. All of you. This is important.)

***

I now have the advantage of age (assuming I'm right about when he said the above[1]) - and the wisdom that is alleged to accrue to it - over Plato. Using that advantage I would amend his observation as follows:

"Those who are too good to engage in politics are punished by being governed by those who are more evil.

LB

[1]
If I'm wrong, and he was a geezer when he said it ... then he has no excuse for missing the obvious.

I'd venture to say Plato never said it at all and rather some later sage put that out. It was Francis Bacon (I believe) who explained how to influence people this way.

The consensus seems to be that he did.

I distrust the consensus less than I distrust the experts. But even the consensus is hardly trustworthy. Of course, when all is said and done you have to get some of your data from other people. You CANNOT do everything yourself.

***

Regardless, someone said those words a long time ago. And so did I (not verbatim, but close), just recently. In each case it was the product of a youthfully flawed understanding of the universe.

I see it as somewhat akin to the Peter Principle (which suggests that managers tend to be promoted to their level of incompetence) - rather than tension between smart vs dumb or good vs evil. Or, like HP used to advertise, "if you think good education is expensive, wait till you see the results of poor (ill-funded) education".

Re-stated: "If you think good government is expensive, wait till you see the results of poor (ill-funded) government".

It is interesting that this discussion of the design of an ideal educational system has drifted into a slinging of bromides about the difficulty of finding good politicians (good being a relative term). It seems that we concur implicitly, that the educational system is a government responsibility, and that it is a responsibility they are not going to happily relinquish.

Do you read Analog Science Fact & Fiction? The latest (Jan-Feb) issue has an editorial about the lamentable state of the US scientific educational system.

Gladwell's latest book (David and Goliath, Malcolm Gladwell) has a chapter about the lack of evidence that smaller class sizes result in better educational outcomes and how this unfounded conclusion (by parents who elect politicians) has resulted in the mis-spending of billions of dollars by governments around the world. He has found that there is an optimum class size (about 24 students) and significant variations either above or below this result in less desirable outcomes.

Whether it was Plato or someone else, the sentiment rings true. This suggests that education is too important to leave to the politicians. Parents who realize this and have the means will find more effective ways to have their children educated. For the rest of us, the internet is going to make doing this more affordable.

<b>[shando] "Do you read Analog ..."</b>

Yeah. My mom turned me on to it when I was around 10 or 12. Since I moved out on my own I have been a continuous subscriber (except for the 'Nam). Still have most of the back issues, somewhere around here. But now days with the archives on the internet that is not so important.

Over the years their editorial slant has tended to be mildly skeptical of government. And that includes government participation in the education of our children. I've always wished they would take a stronger position (either way). But, perhaps when you run a business that needs as many subscribers as possible to survive, you tend to pull some of your punches.

LB