>> All good stuff, but the "trouble" is you still have to make the effort to apply the knowledge.
Yes, of course, to achieve something one has to make an effort ( that, in the best case, he would consider as “fun”, not an “effort” ). But the
“knowledge” found in such books is different from “knowledge” you can get in schools.
In school you mostly get facts ( some call it “dead knowledge” ) that, for example, green plants contain chlorophyll

or that water is H2O, yet, if
you’re not going to become a chemist or a biologist, this info is of no use to you, it does not benefit you in any way other then you can say, “see, I
know what water is made of and why plants are green!”
But the info you get in such books is more practical – like if you do that and that you would achieve a state of internal creativity and happiness.
Being able to get yourself into such state, I believe, is more valuable then knowing that acid is H2SO4.
>> People will continue to go down the "daily grind" route...I'm just not sure that "liberal" education is the key to changing that.
It depends on the school, of course. In my school there were only 2-3 teachers that really wanted to help kids, by teach them something they might
need. The other 15 teachers were just angry at themselves, hated their job and the kids and only were trying to teach them that “life is hard”.
>> Sounds like utpoia....and don't get me wrong, I truly hope we get there, but we ain't there yet.
Yet all people I know who are happy are doing that they love to do. But all that are unhappy truly believe that life is hard and that they can’t do
what they want.
>> just that if his "thing" had been basket weaving we never would have heard of him.
I believe then we all would know of the biggest basket weaving company and would use his baskets.
>> Which makes me wonder why you decided to take issue with the original poster. As far as we know, he/she is a decent teacher.
I just don’t think that a decent teacher would even get an idea of using “corporal punishment”.
When I was in collage we had one teacher. Whenever he came into the class, everybody turned to him and listened.
Because he had not only personal charisma, but was also telling things that are interesting.
>> And, as far as I can tell, the human brain is capable to storing a practically unlimited amount of data.
No, I believe that our brain is designed the way that it would not store any big amount of useless date. “Useless date” mean date that we do not use
all the time. For example, I learned chemistry for 10 years in school and, as long as I have used it in class, I remembered it. But now, after not
using it for a few years, I don’t remember anything more then H2O, O2, H2SO4 and HCl of it and that if I suddenly need it, there is a book in the
library.
So this basic knowledge of every subject, that stays in the head, I believe can be received within a few month of learning at most.
But then what were we doing in school for 10+ years???
Correct, we were training to
1. Listen to what the teachers tell us and not to question it.
Therefore, after graduating, we would go looking for someone who would keep telling us what to do.
2. Use logical thinking. 2 + 2 = 4
So dumbing down creative and intuitive thinking.
For example, most grownups can not simply close their eyes and relax, they would hear a never-ending internal dialogue that kids ( under about 7 years
) do not have.
Intuitive thinking? What is it? Let me give you a little, little hint – try remembering how you felt time when you were 2-3 years old ( it’s not very
easy, of course ). I’m sure that it was somehow different from the way you feel it now.