Running Head: A LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF "THE ROOTS OF STATE EDUCATION

A Logical Analysis of
George H. Smiths The Roots of State Education
By Andy Caldwell
Salt Lake Community College
Philosophy 1250 Reasoning and Rational Decision Making

A LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE ROOTS OF STATE EDUCATION

Abstract
This paper is a logical analysis of George H. Smiths article, The Roots of State Education.
George H. Smiths essay was originally published at Libertarianism.Org as a three part essay.
Smith identifies himself as a Libertarian, and gives the history of State Education from a
Libertarian perspective reinforced with varied historical anecdotes. This paper takes the
components, and historical evidence provided by Smith, and formulates a diagram and an
argument analysis from the various facts and statements provided throughout the essay. The next
criteria of this paper is to write a simulated letter to the author of the article criticizing his
argumentation, reasoning, and challenging his conclusions. Then simulate the author responding
back by constructing a simulated letter back to the original authored letter critiquing the faulty
logic and fallacies deliberately put forth in the original letter. Lastly included is a personal
reflection reviewing my personal position on the subject, then an evaluation of the strength of my
own counter-argument.

A LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE ROOTS OF STATE EDUCATION

Introduction

George H. Smith authored The Roots of State Education, which was published at
Libertarianism.org as a three part essay. In the essay Smith conveys the history of state education
using historical examples that range from Plato and Aristotle in Ancient Greece, to the early
American Progressive movement of the late 19th and 20th centuries. From these historical
examples we can piece together a convergent argument for state education, which is also known
today as public, or government schooling.
George H. Smiths audience is mainly, and most likely, Libertarians visiting the
Libertarian.org website. I am also positive that he, and the website have many other readers from
various diverse backgrounds, namely Republicans and Democrats. The context of this article is
related to the current thought and debate going on within that of various Free Marketeer circles,
which is: Which is superior, a private education, or that of a public/government education?

The Issue

The main theme youll encounter in George H. Smiths essay is the question, or
perspective of, is state education required for civic virtue? Smith is a Libertarian, so he is
providing the opposing argument and views to what he actually believes, which would be
considered, and more closely represent the leftist or statist position. I should provide some
disclosure of myself, as I am giving an analysis of this essay, that as a student of Philosophy I am
also a student of Objectivism, and would most closely identify myself as an Objectivist.

A LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE ROOTS OF STATE EDUCATION

Smith offers what some could consider rather convincing reasoning for the virtues of a
state education, but as far as giving a definite conclusion on the issue, he leaves that up to the
readers to think about, reflect on, and decide for themselves.
The burden of proof is on Smith to prove the soundness of the virtues of a state
education. He does give a very good representation of the arguments, however the arguments do
have some major shortcomings, as well as some perceived strengths, but my own conclusion is
that the soundness of the argument cannot be validly reasoned from the premises in all cases, as
the premises are dependent on each separate individuals value hierarchy, meaning that, what is
true for some in some instances, is not true for all in all instances, and whats good for some, is
in no way good for all.

Argument One: The Spartan Model

In part one of the essay Smith gives the history of the Greek city state of Sparta and
Spartas view of the citizen in relation to the state. The Spartans were a warlike militarist
civilization, as Smith says, An austere militaristic culture where individuals were compelled to
serve the state (Smith, 2012) In Sparta citizens subordinated to the state in strict obedience from
birth, as one could expect to find in a militaristic culture. Service to the state was one of the
highest virtues and honors one could achieve in Sparta. A system of uniform statist education
logically followed from this Ideology.
Smith delves into the various admirers of the Spartan model, namely post-renaissance
intellectuals, and the Greek philosophers Plato and Aristotle. The main premises can be derived
throughout this essay, and the conclusion I developed is as follows:

A LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE ROOTS OF STATE EDUCATION

#1. State Education is Necessary for Civic Virtue. It does not, more or less, explicitly state
this conclusion, but it is implicit and apparent throughout the reading.

The Premises are as follows:

#2. Civic virtue requires/required a planned, well-ordered society where individual goals were
subordinated to the common good, a society where education was controlled by the state and
where civic virtues were instilled in children at an early age. (Smith, 2012)

#3. Plato, and Aristotle, though by no means unqualified admirers of Sparta, endorsed the
Spartan principle of state education. (Smith, 2012)

#4. Education requires a central authority. Platos blueprint of an authoritarian society called for
a state system of centralized education supervised by a minister of education. (Smith, 2012)

#5. Education is, if possible, to be as the phrase goes, compulsory for every mothers son, on
the ground that the child is even more the property of the state than of his parents. Plato The
Laws (Smith, 2012)

#6. Aristotle also preferred the Spartan approach over Athenian free-market education Although
Aristotle criticized Platos obsession with uniformity in some respects he agreed that uniformity
is good because it promotes civic virtue: The Citizen should be molded to suit the form of
government under which he lives, wrote Aristotle, which means that education should be one
and the same for all. (Smith, 2012)

A LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE ROOTS OF STATE EDUCATION

#7. Neither must we suppose that any one of the citizens belongs to himself, for they all belong
to the State, and the care of each part is inseparable from the care of the whole. In this particular
as in some others the Lacedaemonians are to be praised, for they take the greatest pains about
their children, and make education the business of the state. Aristotle (Smith, 2012)

#8. Without state education, the responsibility would most likely fall under the control of the
Catholic church and other religious authorities. (Smith, 2012)

#9. The Spartan model, suitably revised, would provide a better foundation and more security
for a free society than educational laissez-faire ever could. (Smith, 2012)
The premises are summarized below in standard form:
P1: #2. A well planned society requires the state to instill virtue.
P2: #3. Plato and Aristotle were admirers of the Spartan model.
P3: #4. Education requires a central authority.
P4: #5. Education must be compulsory.
P5: #6. Education must be uniform.
P6: #7. Children/Citizens belong to the state.
P7: #8. Without a state education, religion would be the worse alternative of the options.
P8: #9. The Spartan model would provide better security for the state than laissez-faire

#1. State education is necessary for civic virtue.

Part One Premises Explained

A LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE ROOTS OF STATE EDUCATION

This is basically the first argument Smith puts forth for the reasoning behind state
education. Most of these premises may or may not be self-explanatory depending, on each
individual readers interpretation. For context, reasoning, and also in justifying some these
premises we can go through a few of the important ones.
For the first premise, the reasoning is that if state does not instill virtue in the citizenry
the task would be left up to the childrens individual parents, relatives, or church. These options
may not be in line with the interests of the state. The state can ensure that the right values are
instilled through means of state controlled education.
Premise four states that education must be compulsory. This means that for every child in
the state, attendance of school should be mandatory. The consequences of not requiring
compulsory education are in an uneducated, ignorant, and possibly unruly society. Premise 6
declares that education must be uniform. This must mean that the students are given the same
indoctrination, socialization, taught the same subjects, the same languages, skills, and also could
be interpreted as citizens all having the same opportunities in education as any other citizen
within the state.
Premise six is probably the most controversial premise, as it claims that children belong
to the state, that they are the property of, and in service, solely to the state. This belief is that
public education is not primarily established to serve the wants, needs, aspirations, and interests
of the individual, but that public education is first and foremost set up to serve and ensure the
needs of the state. Citizens must subordinate themselves to the collective interests of the state.
Next, premise six is somewhat predicated on Premise four, which is, that education must be
overseen by a central authority. A central authority is required to make sure the needs of the state

A LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE ROOTS OF STATE EDUCATION

are being fulfilled, for instance, filling specific professions, finding and training specific talent to
meet the demands of the state, all while ensuring the spread of the statist ideology.
Premise eight is to ensure that the citizenry have the proper ideals instilled to want to
fight for and defend the interests of the state. The argument for the last premise is, if these ideals
are not implanted in early ages, through the means of government education, the citizens of a
country may not have the will to fight, if a situation ever arose that required the response of
military action.
Most of these premises are for the most part self-explanatory, especially if you are a
student of Platonic, Kantian, and Hegelian philosophy, or even later Marxist theory. It is clear
that the premises all logically lead to the justification of state education.

A LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE ROOTS OF STATE EDUCATION

A LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE ROOTS OF STATE EDUCATION

10

Argument Two: Platos Case Against Free-Market Education

In part two of the essay, George H. Smith next takes us to Ancient Athens and
summarizes Platos view of the Sophists and their free market approach to selling knowledge at a
premium. Smith retells Platos account of a dialogue between Socrates and Hippocrates where
the two share a discussion on the dangers of the Sophists educational services.
One of the basic issues at hand in the dialogue is the question of whether it is
ethical for the Sophists to sell their knowledge to those that may not be properly prepared to
receive it, or if those receiving the information could potentially abuse it. Part two follows up
with a debate of the superiority of state education vs. private education. Below is the conclusion,
premises, and argument placed in standard form:
Conclusion:
#1. State Education is Necessary for Civic Virtue.

Premises:
#2. Most consumers are poor judges of educational quality, so they need experts to dictate their
educational choices. (Smith, 2012)

#3. We must see that the Sophist in commending his wares does not deceive us, like the
wholesaler which of the wares they offer is good or bad for the body, but in selling them praise
all alike, and those who buy from them dont know either, unless one of them happens to be a
trainer or a doctor. So too those who take the various subject of knowledge from city to city, and
offer them for sale. But it may be my dear Hippocrates, that some of these men also are ignorant

A LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE ROOTS OF STATE EDUCATION

11

of the beneficial or harmful effects on the soul of what they have for sale, and so too are those
who buy from them, unless one of them happens to be a physician of the soul. If then you chance
to be an expert in discerning which of them is good or bad, it is safe for you to buy knowledge
from Protagoras or anyone else. But if not take care you dont find yourself gambling
dangerously with all of you that is dearest to you. Indeed, the risk you run in purchasing
knowledge is much greater than that in buying provisions Socrates (Smith, 2012)

#4. The Sophist panders to the motley multitude. He must give the public what it likes, but
will public demands coincide with what is really good and honorable? No, says Plato; and such
notion is simply ridiculous. (Smith, 2012)

#5. Athens lacked the political unity of Sparta. & It was principally because of these flaws,
Plato believed, that Athens had suffered a devastating defeat at the hands of Sparta during the
Peloponnesian Wars. (Smith, 2012)

#6. No Central Authority overseeing education causes the state to erode into tyranny.

#7. A stable system of law (including custom, a kind of unwritten law) demands that members
of a society be imbued with uniform and unchanging values. (Smith, 2012)

#8. Education, broadly conceived, includes everything that influences the character of human
beings. Thus, if education is a vital and indispensable function of the state then the state has a
right indeed, a duty to supervise every aspect of a persons life. (Smith, 2012)

A LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE ROOTS OF STATE EDUCATION

12

#9. The secret in the superiority of state over private education lies in the fact that in the former
the teacher is responsible solely to society, as in private, so also in public education, the calling
of the teacher is a profession, and his personal success must depend upon his success in
accomplishing the results which his employers desire accomplished. But the result desired by
the state is a wholly different one from that desired by parents, guardians, and pupils. Of the
latter he is happily independent. Lester Frank Ward (Smith, 2012)
Standard Form:
P1:#2. Most consumers are poor judges of educational quality.
P2:#3. There is risk associated with a private education.
P3:#4. Private education may not provide a good and honorable education.
P4:#5. Athens didnt have the political unity of the Spartan system, and the Athenians attributed
the loss of the Peloponnesian Wars to lack of unity within the state.
P5:#6. The lack of an educational central authority causes a state to erode into tyranny.
P6:#7. Stability requires that the citizenry have unchanging values.
P7:#8. Education is a function of the state thus the state should oversee education.
P8:#9. The Educational requirements of the state differ from the educational requirements of the
individual.

#1. State education is necessary for civic virtue.

Part Two Premises Explained.

A LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE ROOTS OF STATE EDUCATION

13

The most important premises in part two are one and two. These premises are stating that
education can be potentially dangerous in the wrong hands, and that the state must dictate who is
able to learn any given subject or skill as to guard against any perceived abuse. The risk
associated in a free market education is that there is no central authority presiding over the
educational methods being distributed, and thus no one to ensure the content being administered
is correct, safe, that the teachers/consultants are really competent, and the customers not being
taken advantage of. Another controversial component of these premises is that consumers cant
decide what is really best for them in making their educational decisions, according to the
premises this would best be decided by a paternal central authority.
Another major premise in this chain of reasoning is that, due to the lack of political unity
within the Ancient Athenian state, the Athenians did not have the will of the citizens to achieve
victory in the Peloponnesian War. It would next follow that if the citizens values that were
implanted in state education were all unified and unchanging, then the state would achieve the
will to ensure its ends in war or other ventures.
In explaining premise 9, if we hold the altruistic premise that the collective needs and
requirements of the state differ from that of the individual in regard to education, then the
individual must subordinate his talents and skills to the areas in which the state can make the best
use of the individual to serve the whole. This would mean that if the individual wanted to pursue
an area of study that was deemed dangerous, or not in demand, the state could restrict the
individuals educational aspirations.

A LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE ROOTS OF STATE EDUCATION

14

A LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE ROOTS OF STATE EDUCATION

15

Argument Three: Aristotle and Civic Virtue

Part three of the essay begins by primarily describing Aristotles view on education,
uniformity, and state and private property. As the essay claims, Aristotle thought that the proper
role of the state should be to Promote the Good Life. (Smith, 2012) In Aristotles view, it is the
states responsibility to also actively promote civic virtue. Thus Aristotle thought that the state
should be responsible for a childs health, education, overall wellness, and to protect from
corrupting influences. (Smith, 2012)
The next part of the essay picks up where Aristotle left off with St. Thomas Aquinas
elaborating more on the role of the state in relation to the individual. Aquinas went on to claim
that the state is responsible for the peace, law, and order of the state as a continuation of
promoting the good life and civic virtue.
The last part of the essay goes into the political and philosophical thought of later more
contemporary thinkers on education, such as Rousseau, and Montesquieu. This last part
essentially reiterates what the ancients thought on education in more modern terms. Below are
the conclusion, premises, and argument of part three placed in standard form:
Conclusion:
#1. State education is necessary for civic virtue.
Premises:
#2. According to Aristotle, The State should actively promote the good life. In order to
promote the good life and maintain social order, the state should inculcate civic virtue. Those
who care for good government take into consideration virtue and vice in states. Whence it may

A LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE ROOTS OF STATE EDUCATION

16

be further inferred that virtue must be the care of the state which is truly so called. (Smith,
2012)

#3. The physical health of children should be closely supervised.

#4. The fundamental purpose of education should be to form valuable citizens to the state
Baron dHolbach (Smith, 2012)

#5. If a democratic republic is to survive, it must imbue its citizens with civic virtue a love of
laws and of our country, a love that elevates the public interest above private interests.
Everything therefore depends on establishing this love in a republic; and to inspire it ought to be
the principal business of education. Montesquieu (Smith, 2012)

#6. The State should not abandon to the intelligence and prejudices of fathers the education of
their children, as that education is of still greater importance to the state than to the fathers.
Public education is needed to ensure that citizens will do nothing contrary to the will of the
society. J.J. Rousseau (Smith, 2012)

#7. Let our pupil be taught that he does not belong to himself, but that he is public property.
Benjamin Rush (Smith, 2012)

A LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE ROOTS OF STATE EDUCATION

17

#8. A system of national education, argued Noah Webster (of dictionary fame) in 1790, will
implant in the minds of American youthan inviolable attachment to their own country.
(Smith, 2012)

#9. Schools, should be conceived, designed and carried out with direct and persistent reference
to the maintenance and stability of the existing political order of the government. a 19th
century Illinois Schools Superintendent (Smith, 2012)

#10. The public schools exist primarily for the benefit of the state rather than for the benefit of
the individual.

#11. Free Schooling is not so much a right granted to pupils as a duty imposed on them for the
public good. If they do not voluntarily attend the schools provided for them for the public good,
they may be compelled to do so. While most people regard the public schools as the means of
great advantage to the pupils, the fact is too often overlooked that they are governmental means
of protecting the state from consequences of an ignorant and incompetent citizenship. New
Hampshire Supreme Court 1902 (Smith, 2012)

#12. To collect little plastic lumps of human dough from private households and shape them on
the social kneading board, exhibits a faith in the power of suggestion which few people ever
attain to, And so it happens that the role of the schoolmaster is just beginning. Edward Ross
(Smith, 2012)

A LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE ROOTS OF STATE EDUCATION

18

Standard Form:
P1:#2. The state should actively promote the good life.
P2:#3. The physical health of children should be closely supervised
P3:#4. The fundamental purpose of education is to form valuable citizens to the state.
P4:#5. Civic virtue is necessary for a democratic republic to survive.
P5:#6. The education of children is more valuable and important to the state than to the value and
importance to the childrens fathers.
P6:#7. Students are public property.
P7:#8. National education implants an inviolable attachment to their country.
P8:#9. Schools should be set up to ensure the maintenance & stability to the existing order of the
existing political order.
P9:#10. Schools exist for the state not the individual.
P10:#11. Schooling is not a choice, it is a duty.
P11:#12. School masters have a specific job, to shape and mold the students.

#1. State education is necessary for civic virtue.

Part Three Premises Explained.

A lot of the premises in part three are recycled and rearticulated premises from the other
essays. Some of the premises that I can elaborate on are premise one and premise two. Premise

A LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE ROOTS OF STATE EDUCATION

19

one says that the state should actively promote the good life. This means that the government
should intervene in the lives of its citizens to ensure that they are living (what the state would
consider,) the good life. To achieve this the state would have to maintain its citizens health,
comfort, safety, food, etc. one of the crucial places that this could be monitored and controlled is
within the public schools.
Premise five is an interesting statement. It could be meant to have multiple meanings. As
some parents may not want their children to attend school, they would rather have them go
straight into the workforce, even at early ages. They may look at education as an unnecessary
irrelevant luxury. Or they could want their children to not receive an education for many, many,
other countless personal reasons that have nothing to do with the wants of the child or the state,
but the premise says, that developing the child to serve the state should be the top priority, as if
the childs potential is maximized, the benefits to the state are a maximum net gain on an
investment. This premise could also be interpreted as, the state may have more pride in its
citizens and their capabilities than any father ever could, but I would say Rousseau was intending
his original statement to mean an indication of a more subordinate and loyal population.
The remaining premises are mostly just regurgitations of early statements in the essay,
such as, citizens belong to the state not themselves, that an education is for the benefit of the
state not the individual, and that public education is set up mainly for indoctrination and
socialization purposes, more so than teaching students hard skill sets or fields of study. All of
these premises are controversial, while also open to debate and different interpretations. Some
are explicitly stated and harder to refute, while others may be more ambiguous.

A LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE ROOTS OF STATE EDUCATION

20

A LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE ROOTS OF STATE EDUCATION

21

Simulated Letter/Response
(Not an actual dialogue with the author)
Dear Author,
Im writing in response to your essay that I had just recently read on the internet. First
off, I would like to commend you for a brave and courageous attempt on tackling a very
unpopular and dangerous subject. Few minds can endeavor to entertain the ideas you are
challenging and researching. I thank you. Now I must address the primary reason I am writing
you, I would assume most of the quotes, anecdotes, and historical examples from the philosopher
Aristotle were derived from his Politics within your essay. There is some controversy in this
work as it being authentically attributed directly to Aristotle. Many historians share the view that
Politics were two of Aristotles students work on a research project, not that of Aristotle
himself. In which the work describes the political system and laws of the Ancient Athenians.
There are inconsistencies in the Politics from Aristotles other great works. The Politics has a
very Platonic element to it. I am not sure if you were aware of this in the writing of your article.
Secondly, my Bishop is a Theologian and he told me that the one and only true
Philosopher is Jesus Christ. More people believe in Jesus Christ than any other God, therefore
Jesus Christ is my Lord and savior. Your article is incorrect, in the sense that you are not a
Christian. You are an Atheist, and unfortunately, you will find out that Hell is for real, unless
you repent of your sinning and accept the savior as your true master and King. I enjoyed reading
your work, but I am told by my religious authorities, (whom I cannot question) that I must
disregard your writing because it does not mention Christian views on education, and because of
your blasphemy.
Regards, The Reader

A LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE ROOTS OF STATE EDUCATION

22

Dear Reader,
Thank you for reading my essay on education. I appreciate your kind words, and the
appeal to flattery. To answer your first comment in relation to the Aristotle writings, yes, I am
aware of the controversies surrounding the works of Aristotle. Another example of one of these
controversies is that portions of Aristotles Eudemian Ethics differ from his work in the
Nicomachean Ethics. The Eudemian Ethics carries a very Platonic tone, in parts, that is not
present in other works, suggesting errors in the Latin translation, or various other issues.
However these issues are all being debated, and the jury, so to speak, is still deliberating.
As to the second part of your letter, I can only answer by decrying, what utter absurdity!
First off you make a false appeal to authority, your Theologian should only be speaking on issues
of religious philosophy. Next you commit Argumentum ad populum saying that Christianity is
true because the majority of the population believe it. There was a time when the majority of
officials and the population believed the Earth was flat too. You commit an ad hominem fallacy
in the very next sentence. Next, it definitely sounds like an appeal to fear when you speak of
Hell being for real. My writing is well researched and backed up by numerous examples,
youre wrong to disregard it because we may not see eye to eye on an issue that is irrelevant.
I appreciate letters from my readers, such as yourself, but it seems you need to work your
reasoning a little better. You should begin by starting to question your widely held beliefs a little
more critically. A little introspection could go a long way in doing us all a little good, and Ill
leave you with the words that a wise man once spoke, the unexamined life is not worth living.
Sincerely, The Author

A LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE ROOTS OF STATE EDUCATION

23

Final Reflection
My view on this topic is that the premises are dependent on each individuals
philosophical framework and beliefs for the argumentation to be valid. If you hold collectivism
and altruism as virtues then this argument may very well appear valid, and in many cases the
truth of the premises would guarantee the truth of the conclusion, but not in all cases.
Government education may be a very good thing for some individuals, but certainly not all
individuals.
The first fallacy I would be willing to point out in the line of reason for state education is
the fallacy of composition. What is true of the whole is not true of all its individual parts. State
education may not be at all necessary for civic virtue. For example, one could obtain civic virtue
without a system of state education in place.
The next fallacy I would bring up is the fallacy of a false alternative. Usually in talk of
education there is only one or two options discussed for education, that of government education
or a religious education, and in some cases home schooling, but there are actually infinitely
endless possibilities for education and educational methods. The fallacy of composition and the
fallacy of a false alternative are the most blatant fallacies that strike me when critiquing the
argument for state education. Other possible fallacies could be the appeal to fear, false attribution
fallacy, and an appeal to tradition, in dealing with the argument for state education.
My own personal view is, that I am in favor of private education. I have heard really
great things when it comes to certain private schools, although they do come with a hefty pricetag. I have heard things such as children learning and mastering calculus while still in the eighth
grade. I have heard of children reading and discussing great works of literature, when alternately
in government schools, the children are still struggling to get a grasp on basic reading skills. In

A LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE ROOTS OF STATE EDUCATION

24

private schools there is more of a focus on mathematics and science starting as early as the
kindergarten.
From what I have heard, if government schools were defunded, it would create a demand
for more of the top achieving private schools like the ones just mentioned. As we have seen in
any economic sector when government detaches itself within a sector, the costs always go down
and quality always goes up, due to market forces. This would lead to things such as higher
teacher pay and smaller classroom sizes. I would abolish compulsory education also. If a child
doesnt want to be in school there is no reason why someone should force them to be there. The
disinterested pupils always end up being a burden on the faculty, and any students that are there
to learn.
The one issue I have with abolishing government education is, that children who are not
yet of age, are also not yet responsible for themselves. I they wanted to attend school, they would
not have the opportunity to do so until they could afford to pay for it themselves. There is
probably a lot of young potential out there that wouldnt have parents that would provide them a
chance to properly develop. So there are negative trade-offs in the libertarian view that I havent
quite come to terms with, but In the end I would say that the fault would be solely on the parents
for not providing their children an education. On the reverse end, I also dont think it is right to
force someone else to involuntarily pay for someone elses education, which is what is occurring
currently through taxation. I would also be weary if government stepped off the scene and
religion took its place. Within the religious schools, or some home schooling, I would worry
about the institutions not teaching science and critical thinking skills, putting in its place Bible
study, and thus receiving an opposite kind of indoctrination from that of government schooling.

A LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE ROOTS OF STATE EDUCATION

25

I personally have attended government schooling throughout my whole educational

career. I ultimately feel that I dont need to be brainwashed to love America. Ive also seen that
most children nowadays can see right through the indoctrination of egalitarianism. I know you
can teach respect for others, and respect for others fundamental rights, without teaching that we
are all the same, when in fact we really are not. Ill end in saying that no matter what options or
choices we have available for schooling, public or private, that the ultimate success of an
education depends almost entirely on the individual, and the individuals capacity, willingness,
and self-motivation to learn and push themselves forward to acquire educational excellence.

A LOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE ROOTS OF STATE EDUCATION

References
Smith, G. H. (2012) The Roots of State Education pts. I-III. Libertarianism.org
http://www.libertarianism.org/publications/essays/excursions/roots-state-education-part-1spartan-model

26