Hacker News Reader

Comment by analog31 | Hacker News Reader

Man, I could almost take that as a manifesto, which probably means that I need to carefully re-examine my beliefs yet again. Just about one thing:

>>> encouraging kids to learn advanced math whenever they’re ready for it.

I think the actual number of kids who are likely to be super advanced in math and continue with that interest past high school is so small that encouraging that interest will have absolutely no measurable effect on how the rest of us fare in school or life. Yet it could have a great effect on the quality of life for those kids, and for the future welfare of society. In fact, being great at math, given the tiny number of people who are, is a drop in the bucket compared to being great at computer programming. Likewise for kids who develop an aptitude for playing classical music.

View on HN

That's right! Letting gifted kids pursue their interests has essentially no cost to anyone else... except the Envious Levelers, who cannot stand the idea that someone might be reaching a level inaccessible to them because of a difference in talent and/or effort.

I am in a constant state of shock and disgust at how many Envious Levelers there are in society, and their planet-engulfing sense of entitlement to drag everyone down to their level.

Harrison Bergeron was written because it is a real possibility.

The problem is some people honestly believe people are all capable of the same level of achievement. That the only thing that differentiates outcome is external to the individual. So if some children outperform others in Math it's because the system around the underperforming child failed that child. The reality is that all are not equal in ability but all should be free to choose the path they want. Some will become elite mathematicians, others trades men. They can both have great lives who are we to judge who is better off. Let the individual pick their own path and judge their outcomes for themselves.

Precisely. Inequality does not damn the world because there is no universal scale of human value, and everyone has value. Diversity is good, even the diversity that the DEI politburo doesn't like.

Part of it is leveling, but another part is trying to tone down the tournament aspect of K-12 education, that places undue stress on kids without necessarily making them any smarter in the long run. How many AP classes is your kid taking? That's a huge drag on the kids who enjoy learning more than they enjoy competition.

And the kids who are "advanced" in math greatly outnumber those who are still doing anything with math by age 25, which is close to zero, even in supposedly technical fields. I was not an exceptional math student in high school, but became a math major and still use math today.

And it distorts the subject matter itself. 40 years ago, my high school didn't offer calculus because it would be "elitist," though we did have an elite hockey team. But at the same time, we got more interesting material in math, including proofs and problems that had no answer. Today: No proofs, but lots of drill work. Proofs were what made math come alive for me.

Some people like to compete. Others don't. Are we to understand that the latter can't tolerate the existence of the former?

>>> Are we to understand that the latter can't tolerate the existence of the former?

I'd need to see evidence for such a thing.

We know the Envious Levelers can't, but they ruin everything and shouldn't dictate how everyone else lives.

I would need to see far less emphasis on competition sports and extracurricular activities in American schools before I could credibly entertain an argument that it’s academics that is creating unreasonable pressure on kids to succeed.

It’s a school. You are literally there to learn things.

The worst kind of Envious Levelers are the hypocrites. They want to compete in the arenas they believe they can win in, like sports. They only want to stifle competition in areas where they feel lesser and don't want anyone potentially looking better than them.

> Envious Levelers

Do better.

I think it's quite good to be honest. But if I may make my own suggestion -- try harder to earn your moral authority, barking orders at strangers doesn't impress.

Many gifted kids have the entirety of the global internet as a resource for learning.

I don’t have a strong opinion about how much advanced education a public school system should provide, though I might suggest those educations which require specialized machines or equipment that can be shared among many students might deserve priority over those that just require a talking head and chalkboard.

For a large fraction of gifted students, all American schools have to do is stop forcing them to waste their time on things they already know or pick up 10 times faster than the average student. Let them read a book on the topic being taught in the back of the class.

A couple of my best teachers did let me do this, but it was quite clear that it was the exception rather than the rule, and it depended entirely on their idiosyncratic and countercultural sense of concern for the well-being and development of all students, even gasp the talented ones.

There is absolutely zero effort involved, and the idea that this takes away from other students is just good old Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt (FUD).

Don't FUD the conversation without evidence, please.

Children should be encouraged to advance as far as they can in any subject they show aptitude and interest, including art, literature, biology, engineering, etc.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com