Re[2]: DSM: On Hybrid schools . . . Our Trojan Horse?

From: David Rovner (rovners@netvision.net.il)
Date: Sun May 13 2001 - 09:23:13 EDT


There is an exact definition of what makes up a Sudbury School:
See Sudbury Valley School writings.

David Rovner rovners@netvision.net.il

--------- Original Message ----------

>From: Martin Wilke <martin.wilke@gmx.net>
>To: discuss-sudbury-model@sudval.org
>Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 20:13:38 +0200
>Subject: Re: DSM: On Hybrid schools . . . Our Trojon Horse?

>Joe Jackson schrieb:

>> therefore, the
>> distinction of a hybrid school is not semantic to me. It's either Sudbury
>> or it's not.

>But there is no exact definition of what makes up a Sudbury School.

>Martin Wilke

>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: owner-discuss-sudbury-model@sudval.org
>> > [mailto:owner-discuss-sudbury-model@sudval.org]On Behalf Of Ardeshir
>> > Mehta, N.D.
>> > Sent: Friday, May 11, 2001 12:35 PM
>> > To: discuss-sudbury-model@sudval.org
>> > Subject: Re: DSM: On Hybrid schools . . . Our Trojon Horse?
>> >
>> >
>> > Hi everyone:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Scott David Gray wrote:
>> >
>> > > ...
>> > >
>> > > The very thing that has made Sudbury Schools successful is
>> > > the fact that the trust and freedom are COMPLETE. ...
>> >
>> > I wonder to what extent the arguments for and against "hy-
>> > brid" schools are merely semantic rather than basic.
>> >
>> > One of my loves is logic, and I have found that in logic,
>> > whenever one employs terms such as "absolute", "total",
>> > "infinite", "complete", etc., one gets into absurd situations.
>> >
>> > Thus, for instance, a hypothetically All-Powerful Being
>> > must have the power to ask a question that He Himself
>> > cannot possibly answer! This is of course quite absurd.
>> >
>> > Similarly, if one gives others COMPLETE freedom, that
>> > must include the freedom to take away the freedom of oth-
>> > ers, and to keep it that way for ever and ever!
>> >
>> > In that case, freedom cannot really be COMPLETE, now
>> > can it. It can only be *nearly* complete. *Totally* com-
>> > plete freedom entails also the total *lack* of freedom --
>> > which is a paradox.
>> >
>> > These "paradoxes", however, like the "Liar Paradox" and
>> > the "Berry Paradox" -- i.e., the paradoxes of saying "This
>> > sentence is false" (which is false even if it is true, and true
>> > even if it is false!) and claiming that "The undefinable can be
>> > defined as <That which cannot be defined>" (which allows
>> > one to actually define the undefinable!) -- are merely seman-
>> > tic, and have nothing to do with reality. They come about
>> > because of the limitations of language. One can *enunciate*
>> > them, but one cannot have them in reality: i.e., one cannot
>> > bring them to others "on a platter", as it were.
>> >
>> > Likewise, I think arguments about "TOTAL freedom", etc.,
>> > are also merely semantic, and have nothing to do with real-
>> > ity. The human mind, being incomplete and finite, just can-
>> > not tackle the concept of completeness and totality. It
>> > sometimes *thinks* it can do so, but that's an illusion.
>> >
>> > Best wishes,
>> >
>> >
>> > Ardeshir
>> >
>> > Home Page: <http://homepage.mac.com/ardeshir/education.html
>> >
>> > ************************************************
>> >
>> > BTW: If anyone is interested in exploring this "paradox
>> > problem" further, I have discussed it in detail in my book
>> > *Critique of Gödel's Theorem*, available for download
>> > from my Home Page.
>> >
>> > A.

===========

If you wish to be removed from this mailing list, please send an email TO
majordomo@sudval.org with the following phrase in the BODY (not the
subject) of the message:

unsubscribe discuss-sudbury-model [the-subscribed-email]

If you are interested in the subject, but the volume of mail sent is too much,
you may wish to consider unsubscribing from this list and subscribing to
"dsm-digest"

This mailing list is archived at http://www.sudval.org/~sdg/archives



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Mon Nov 05 2001 - 20:24:29 EST