sound_in_silence

I am not a philosopher or a psychologist. I am simply a writer doing research on rationalizations. I have taken philosophy courses and psychology courses. I have read many books in all subjects. I do not claim to know a lot. I like and respect Ayn Rand ("The Fountainhead" happens to be my all-time favorite book.) I have read this entire arguement. I have no intention of rehashing its original intent, but I did not know where else to ask this question: How is it that the public school system is the sole factor in creating this movie? How is it that public schooling can be responisible for "Fahrenheit 9/11" and not "Star Wars"? Why is it that you claim that if it were not for the existance of public schooling, "Fahrenheit 9/11" would not exist but "Star Wars" would? I have read and re-read your arguements and I can not find one assertation that is based in fact and not opinion. You have not backed your statements with proof. This is why you have been accused of rationalizing your entire arguement. As far as I understand (see above) rationalization is about justifying to yourself that something you have done, will do, want to do, or think is moral, ethical and correct. ie -- You did not go to class. True, this is not what you would consider to be immoral, but it is not considered "good" and "correct" behaviour. You justify your actions to yourself by saying the class was beneath you, a waste of your time, you learned more by staying at home reading the text than by showing up to class. As far as I remember, an arguement can be considered rationalizing if it continuously asserts opinions and not fact. I cannot find these facts in your arguements. As a result, I do not see how public school is solely responisble for "Fahrenheit 9/11". You have not drawn the connecting line to show how this movie would not be possible if the entity known as the public school system did not exist. The only thing I can think of is that by the non-existance of public school, everyone would be in private school. But then I cannot find the connection that the movie would not exist, as it seems to me that a privately educated individual would in fact be capable of making such a film. Would people not do documentaries? Would they then stay clear of current events and hot topics? Or would they no longer make movies? The other arguement is that no one would go to school, in which case it is very easy to see why the movie would not have been made as no one would have that kind of knowledge. But I highly doubt you are advocating the abolishment of the education system as a whole, only the abolishment of the public school entity. I am not being deliberately stupid, but you have not given this forum proof or fact -- only opinion. And while opinions are fine things, and everyone is entitled to them, it stands upon logic that an arguement can start from opinion, but inevitably, in order to be valid, needs to have fact to back it up. Your arguement is solely assertations and opinions and no fact and therefore, invalid. If you have a valid arguement for my above questions, I would be very interested in hearing them, as the subject is intriguing. I appologize if this was the wrong place to broach this subject. It is not my intention to insult or offend anyone.