Dean Gotcher

I have always told my children (who I homeschooled) and grandchildren that "Doing right and not wrong is more important than getting what you want. You can then set your head on your pillow and have a peaceful sleep." Otherwise, if they got what they wanted no matter what, they "might" have a restful sleep but only if they did not have a guilty conscience, i.e.,  feel guilty for doing wrong (for not doing right). It is more than likely they would be thinking about how they were going to respond to (cut off) others, who, thinking like them, will do them wrong (get even with them) in order to get what they want the following day. Homeschooling was about teaching children to do right and not wrong not matter what. That seems to be 'changing' as time goes by, with "having a better life," i.e., getting what they want, i.e., the approval of others (compromise), i.e., being-at-one-with (accepted by) the world—with a "Christian" vainer—taking first place. There is history behind why this is taking place—with homeschooling parents having been exposed to and their children being exposed to "better," "newer" methods of education, which are not really "new" or "better."

"[W]e recognize the point of view that truth and knowledge are only relative and that there are no hard and fast truths which exist for all time and places." (Benjamin S. Bloom, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives Book 1: Cognitive Domain)

"There are many stories of the conflict and tension that these new practices are producing between parents and children." (David Krathwohl, Benjamin S. Bloom, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives Book 2: Affective Domain)

During the mid 50's and early 60's "Bloom's Taxonomies" became the curriculum used in the classroom—which are being used by most if not all teachers in the classroom today. Curriculum is the method used by teachers to develop how students are to think or reason—with the students either reasoning from established commands, rules, facts, or truth, with an emphasis upon doing right, obeying, etc., i.e., not doing wrong, disobeying, or sinning or 'reasoning' from their own "feelings," i.e., from their own "sensuous needs" of the 'moment' and their "sense perception" of the situation, i.e., 'reasoning' from their own "sense experience," i.e., the child's carnal nature. (Karl Marx, MEGA I/3) "Bloom's Taxonomies" focuses upon the latter, i.e., "helping" the students 'reason' from their "feelings" of the 'moment' (in the "light" of the current situation or "environment," not only the "environment" of the world, the nation, the community, and the home but also the "environment" in the classroom). Today all "educators" are certified and schools accredited based upon their use of "Bloom's Taxonomies" in the classroom (from pre-school to postgraduate, in the public and private school, and as you will see, even being used in homeschooling material and organizations). Their 'logic' (agenda) is: if you can negate the father's/Father's authority structure in education, i.e., in the classroom, you can negate the father's/Father's authority structure and the guilty conscience which it engenders, not only in the child, but in the home, in the community, in the nation, and in the world as well. "Worldly peace and socialist harmony" can not be initiated and sustained while the father/Father is still in a position of authority, engendering a guilty conscience ("private convictions") for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning.

"[We] must develop persons who see non-influencability of private convictions [those holding onto established commands, rules, facts, and truth, doing right and not wrong according to them, obeying them, not sinning against them, holding others accountable to them as well] in joint deliberations [in the consensus process] as a vice [as being "negative," hateful, divisive, etc.,] rather than a virtue [as being "positive," affirming their own and everyone else's carnal nature]." (Kenneth D. Benne, Human Relations in Curriculum Change)

"Persons will not come into full partnership in the process until they register dissatisfaction [with authority]." (ibid)

"The school must make room for the deviant student." "How such persons can be discovered, and, above all, how such persons can be produced in greater number is the major problem for research in character formation." (Robert Havighurst and Hilda Taba, Adolescent Character and Personality)

The difference between traditional education and what is called transformational education is: in traditional education the father's/Father's authority (Hebrews 12:5-11), i.e., doing right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth is the method of learning being used in the classroom, while in transformational education the child's "feelings," i.e., the child's carnal nature, i.e., the child's love of pleasure and hate of restraint, i.e., the child's "lusting" after the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' (dopamine emancipation) which the world stimulates ('justifying' his dissatisfaction with, resentment toward, hatred of the father's/Father's authority for getting in the way) is the method being used instead. Chastening for disobedience is out and "tolerance of deviancy," i.e., "deviance in unity" is in.

"If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not? But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons. Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live? For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure; but he for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness. Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby." Hebrews 12:7-11

In traditional education the guilty conscience, which is subject to established commands, rules, facts, and truth is being developed, making the student resistant to 'change.' In transformational education the "super-ego," which is subject to the student's "feelings" (past and present) is being developed instead, making him readily adaptable to 'change.'

"The guilty conscience is formed in childhood by the incorporation of the parents and the wish to be father of oneself." "What we call 'conscience' perpetuates inside of us our bondage to past objects now part of ourselves: the superego 'unites in itself the influences of the present and of the past [the child's carnal "feelings" (resentment) toward authority in the past and in the present].'" (Norman O. Brown, Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History)

"The personal conscience is the key element in ensuring self-control, refraining from deviant behavior even when it can be easily perpetrated." "The family, the next most important unit affecting social control, is obviously instrumental in the initial formation of the conscience and in the continued reinforcement of the values that encourage law abiding behavior." (Dr. Robert Trojanowicz, The meaning of "Community" in Community Policing) Trojanowicz then goes on to explain how, since parents no longer are relevant, to be obeyed, in their children's eyes, community control, with community policing must become the means by which to initiate and sustain social order.

"... the new set of values he is expected to accept does not assume in him the position of super-ego, and his re-education therefore remains unrealized." (Kurt Lewin in Kenneth Bennie Human Relations in Curriculum Change)

The father's/Father's authority system (traditional education)—whether the teacher is male or female, or the classroom is in the home ("in loco parentis"), public school, or private school—is when: 1) commands and rules are preached, to be obeyed as given, facts and truth is taught to be accepted as is, by faith, any questions those under authority have regarding commands, rules, facts, and truth are discussed at the one in authority's discretion (providing they have time, those under authority are able to understand, and are not questioning, challenging, defying, disregarding, attacking authority), 2) those obeying authority and doing things right are rewarded, 3) those disobeying authority and/or doing things wrong are corrected, reproved, and/or chastened, 4) and any who question, challenge, defy, disregard, attack authority are cast out (expelled), engendering a guilty conscience in the students for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning in the process (Romans 7:14-25).

"For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world." 1 John 2:16

In transformational education, the child's carnal nature, i.e., his love of pleasure and hate of restraint and his ability to "rationally" 'justify' it (called dialectic 'reasoning,' or 'reasoning' through dialogue, i.e., evaluating the world through "feelings," i.e., aufheben) is the focus of education. The student's "feelings" become, in this case, a major part of the curriculum, requiring the assistance of the "educator," acting as a psychologist, i.e., a "group psychotherapist," i.e., a facilitator of 'change,' i.e., a Transformational Marxist (Genesis 3:1-6) to "help" the child overcome (negate) the effect the father's/Father's authority has upon him—where he has to humble, deny, die to, control, discipline his "self" in order to do the father's/Father's will, thereby having a guilty conscience when he does wrong, disobeys, sins, preventing him from being his "self," i.e., from thinking and acting according to his carnal nature, i.e., preventing him from being in harmony, i.e., becoming at-one-with his "self" and the rest of the children of the world.

"For equality to take place the family as a unite must be weakened." "Equality of Opportunity becomes ever greater with the weakening of family power." "The family has little to offer the child in the way of training for his place in the community." "Strengthening the family to draw the adolescent back into it faces serious problems, as well as some questions about its desirability." (James Coleman, The Adolescent Society) James Coleman advised the Supreme Court on issues of education.

Transformational education, with its use of "force field analysis," "unfreezing, moving, refreezing," and "group dynamics," i.e., the "group grade" 'changes' the child's paradigm ("weltanschauung"), i.e., 'changes' his way of feeling, thinking and acting, i.e., how he relates with his "self," others, and the world as well as how he responds to authority. The dialoguing of opinions to a consensus is the method of education being used in this type of education—pressuring the students to choose between 'loyalty' to parental authority or 'loyalty' to "the group" (having to go through the emotional pain of cognitive dissonance) choosing "the group" for the "good" of "the group," i.e., for the "good" grade (team grade), making "the group" "good" and the father's/Father's authority, which gets in the way of group harmony (consensus) "bad" or "evil"—'liberating' the students "feelings" from the father's/Father's authority system, negating the guilty conscience for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning (which the father's/Father's authority engenders) in the process.

"The negative valence of a forbidden object which in itself attracts the child thus usually derives from an induced field of force of an adult." "If this field of force loses its psychological existence for the child (e.g., if the adult goes away or loses his authority) the negative valence also disappears." (Kurt Lewin; A Dynamic Theory of Personality) The father's/Father's authority engenders the guilty conscience (the "negative valance"). Dialogue negates it.

Simply putting the traditional minded child, who (as his parents) preaches, teaches, and tries to discuss commands, rules, facts, and truth with others—in order that he and they end up doing what is right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth—in an environment of dialogue—where commands, rules, facts, and truth has to be suspended, as upon a cross, in order to continue the dialogue, i.e., not hurt other's "feelings"—does the trick, pressuring the child to go into dialogue, i.e., into being "positive," negating his parents authority (negating "negativity," called "the negation of negation") in order to "get along," i.e., in order not to be the source of "controversy," "division," "disharmony," etc., i.e., in order not to be a barrier to group harmony, i.e., in order not to be rejected by "the group." Where the child is along this spectrum of 'change,' i.e., his adaptability to 'change,' i.e., where he is willing to compromise his parent's standards in order to be a "team player" determines his grade at any given moment, in any given situation.

"Individuals move not from a fixity through change to a new fixity, though such a process is indeed possible. But [through a] continuum from fixity to changingness, from rigid structure to flow, from stasis to process." "At one end of the continuum the individual avoids close relationships, which are perceived as being dangerous. At the other end he lives openly and freely in relation to the therapist and to others, guiding his behavior on the basis of his immediate experiencing – he has become an integrated process of changingness." "The qualities of the client's expression at any one point might indicate this position on this continuum, might indicate where he stood in the process of change."  (Carl Rogers, on becoming a person: A Therapist View of Psychotherapy)

There is a third form of "education," called transitional education, i.e., "lazes fair," where the students do pretty much as they please, with a "teacher" present doing little if any guidance in their learning, only chaperoning, i.e., "baby setting." It is the chaos of this form of "education" which tends to either lead to the abuse of traditional education, with the "educator" becoming a dictator in order to keep order or leads to transformational "education" in order to "create order out of chaos."

"No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon." Matthew 6:24

These two systems of education, i.e., traditional and transformational education (which includes transitional "education") are antithetical to one another. While parent's knew (discerned) that something was wrong with education, they did not know what it was. All they knew was their children were no longer respecting their authority when they got home from school and it had something to do with their education.

"What we call 'good teaching' is the teacher's ability to attain affective objectives ['liberating' the student's from their parent's authority, i.e., from their parent's commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., from their parent's "prejudices"] through challenging the student's fixed beliefs and getting them to discuss issues." (David Krathwohl, Benjamin S. Bloom, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives Book 2: Affective Domain)

In the "light" (pressure) of the current situation, i.e., the students desire for approval, i.e., group affirmation (which includes their fear of rejection) the "teacher" is able to quickly 'change' the students way of thinking. By encouraging the students to dialogue with one another (Bloom used the word "discuss" in order to deceive you, i.e., you discuss facts and truth, you dialogue issues, i.e., personal-social issues, i.e., "feelings"—by treating "feelings" as facts and truth, making facts and truth subjective, i.e., subject to the child's personal "feelings" instead of objective, i.e., subject to external authority, he was able to, deceitfully, use the word "discuss"), i.e., to openly share their "feelings," i.e., their desires (to enjoy the carnal pleasures of the 'moment,' which the world stimulates) without fear of being judged or put down by authority, i.e., by the teacher and "the group," i.e., by the other students, the students are 'liberated,' i.e., freed to question, challenge, defy, disregard, attack their parent's commands, rules, facts, and truth and thereby are 'liberated,' i.e., freed to question, challenge, defy, disregard, attack their parent's authority structure, thereby 'liberated' to express their dissatisfaction with, resentment toward, hatred of parental authority. By being "open ended," i.e., allowing students to freely share their "feelings" and "thoughts" (opinions) of the 'moment,' as well as "non-directive," i.e., not telling them what they can or can not say, other than not to be close minded, judging others, i.e., being negative, i.e., insisting upon obeying their parent's commands, rules, facts, and truth ("prejudices"), insisting upon others doing the same—sustaining the father's/Father's authority system and the guilty conscience for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning in the classroom, thereby preventing 'change'—the students' paradigm, i.e., way of thinking is 'changed.'

"For, whatever else it may include, a change in the curriculum is a change in the people concerned—in teachers, in students, in parents and other laymen,. in administrators. This means change in their knowledge, change in their values, changes in their skills—changes in the relations of people." (Kenneth D. Benne, Human Relations in Curriculum Change)

This 'change' in curriculum—adding the affective domain, i.e., the student's "feelings" of the 'moment' (in the "light" of the current situation or crisis of the 'moment,' which includes the students desire for approval, i.e., affirmation by "the group," and his fear of rejection—if he goes against "the group") to the curriculum—not only affects how the student responds to authority in the classroom it directly affects how he responds to authority when he gets home. The educator does not have to tell the students to question, challenge, defy, disregard, attack their parent's authority when they get home (if they are not already doing it), they will do that automatically after participating in this "new" method of education, i.e., in this curriculum of 'change.'

"The affective domain is, in retrospect, a virtual 'Pandora's box [a box full of evils, which, once opened, can not be closed] .'" (David Krathwohl, Benjamin S. Bloom, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Book 2: Affective Domain)

Homeschooling grew as a popular way to educate children because of this attack upon the father's/Father's authority structure in the home. What homeschooling parents did not know was that, despite their efforts, the father's authority in the home (the negation of it) was at the heart of this 'change' taking place not only in education but in the "church" as well. Dialogue, i.e., 'change' had replaced or injected itself in how the Word of God was being studied in the "church," affecting the students attitude toward authority as well—challenging their parent's authority when they got home from "church." Many parents learned this the hard way, loosing their children to "the youth group" and the "youth group" leader. Instead of preaching, teaching, and discussing the Word of God, making the children's thoughts and actions subject to it, the Word of God was being dialogued, i.e., everyone was sharing their opinion on it instead, making it subject to the children's "feelings," i.e., opinions of the 'moment.'

"The child takes on the characteristic behavior of the group in which he is placed. . . . he reflects the behavior patterns which are set by the adult leader of the group." (Kurt Lewin in Wilbur Brookover, A Sociology of Education)

"Change in methods of leadership is probably the quickest way to bring about a change in the cultural atmosphere of a group." "Any real change of the culture of a group is, therefore, interwoven with the changes of the power constellation within the group." (Barker, Dembo, & Lewin, "frustration and regression: an experiment with young children" in Child Behavior and Development)

While in traditional education, despite there being a "group" of children present, the emphasis is upon each individual student obeying commands and rules and learning facts and truth, doing right and not wrong—being personally accountable for their actions (as in a traditional home)—in transformational education the emphasis is upon "group cohesiveness." Therefore in transformational education "feelings," i.e., the students desire for group approval (affirmation), becomes the driving force for 'change.' By 'shifting' the classroom learning environment from preaching, teaching, discussion, rewarding, chastening, and casting out to the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus, traditional education (individualism, under authority, i.e., God) is negated—with transformational education (socialism) having taken its place.

"It is usually easier to change individuals formed into a group than to change any one of them separately [their desire for group approval, i.e., affirmation drawing them into participation]." "The individual accepts the new system of values and beliefs by accepting belongingness to the group." (Kurt Lewin in Kenneth Benne, Human Relations in Curriculum Change)

"One of the most fascinating aspects of group therapy is that everyone is born again, born together in the group." (Irvine D. Yalom, Theory and Practice and Group Psychotherapy)

"In the dialogic relation of recognizing oneself in the other, they experience the common ground of their existence [their carnal human nature, 'liberated' from the father's/Father's authority and the guilty conscience for doing wrong, disobeying sinning]." (Jürgen Habermas, Knowledge & Human Interest, Chapter Three: The Idea of the Theory of Knowledge as Social Theory)

It is through the use of dialogue that the child's way of thinking, i.e., paradigm is 'changed.' While we all dialogue our preferences, i.e., our "feelings," i.e., our desires, when it comes to established commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., to the father's/Father's authority, i.e., to doing right and not wrong according to the father's/Father's will we discuss things (at the father's/Father's discretion, i.e., whether there is time, the child can understand, and/or is not challenging his/His authority) resulting in the father's/Father's authority remaining in place, i.e., unchallenged, with the father's/Father's position being the final word—whether the father is right or wrong (regarding the earthly father). It is in the act of dialogue, i.e., in the child's "Why?" (in response to the father's/Father's commands or rules that get in the way of the child's desires of the 'moment') that those who want 'change' are interested. This is especially true when the father/Father cuts off dialogue, i.e., the child's challenge to his/His authority, using "Because I said so" or "It is written" in order to retain his/His authority. By going into dialogue, regarding established commands, rules, facts, and truth the father has to abdicate his authority.

"For to accept that solution [where parents must dialogue, i.e., set aside, i.e., suspend, as upon a cross established commands, rules, facts, and truth in order to "get along," i.e., "build relationship with their children," i.e., continue dialogue, i.e., participate in the dialoguing of opinions to a consensus process], even in theory, would be tantamount to observing society from a class standpoint [from the child's perspective, from the child's carnal nature] other than that of the bourgeoisie [from the parent's authority]. And no class can do that-unless it is willing to abdicate its power freely." (György Lukács, History & Class Consciousness: What is Orthodox Marxism?)

"Once the parent can in any way imagine his own orientation to be a possible liability to the child in the world approaching, once uncertainty is created in the parent how best to prepare the child for the future, the authoritarian family [traditional family] is moribund, regardless of whatever countermeasures may be taken." (Warren Bennis, The Temporary Society)

Only through dialogue (there is no father's/Father's authority in dialogue, all are "equal" in dialogue), i.e., focusing upon the child's "feelings,' can the child be 'liberated' from "the fear of God," i.e., from the father's/Father's authority (which, according to this 'logic,' the child "created" by having faith in and obeying the father/Father in the first place), i.e., can the child' become "of and for self" and the world only instead. While traditional education is based upon the father's/Father's authority, i.e., preaching, teaching, discussing, rewarding, chastening, and casting out, restraining the child's carnal nature, transformation education is based upon the child's carnal nature, i.e., dialogue, negating the father's/Father's authority, negating the guilty conscience for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning in the process.

"The child, contrary to appearance, is the absolute, the rationality of the relationship; he is what is enduring and everlasting, the totality which produces itself once again as such [once he is 'liberated' from the father'/Father's authority to become as he was before the father's/Father's first command, rule, fact, or truth came into his life (separating him from his "self" and the world), of (and now for) "self" and the world only]." (Georg Hegel, System of Ethical Life)

"Authoritarian submission [children humbling, denying, dying to, controlling, disciplining their "self" in order to do the father's/Father's will] was conceived of as a very general attitude that would be evoked in relation to a variety of authority figures—parents, older people, leaders, supernatural power, and so forth." "God is conceived more directly after a parental image and thus as a source of support and as a guiding and sometimes punishing authority." "Submission to authority, desire for a strong leader, subservience of the individual to the state [parental authority, local control, Nationalism], and so forth, have so frequently and, as it seems to us, correctly, been set forth as important aspects of the Nazi creed that a search for correlates of prejudice had naturally to take these attitudes into account." "The power-relationship between the parents, the domination of the subject's family by the father or by the mother, and their relative dominance in specific areas of life also seemed of importance for our problem ['liberating' children from their parent's authority, i.e., 'liberating' citizens from nationalism, i.e., 'liberating' "human nature" from Godly restraint—all being one and the same—'liberation' from Hitler; when in truth Hitler, i.e., Fascism, i.e., National Socialism (as does Global Socialism, i.e., Common-ism, i.e., Globalism) has to destroy the father's/Father's authority in order to control "the people"]." (Theodor Adorno, The Authoritarian Personality)

Only by providing an opportunity for the child to dialogue ('justify') his "feelings," i.e., his desires and dissatisfactions with others—in defiance or in indifference to the father's/Father's commands and rules—affirming ('justifying') the child's desires over and therefore against the father's/Father's authority (restrains), can the child switch ('shift') from 'loyalty' to the father's/Father's authority, i.e., doing right and not wrong according to established commands and rules to 'loyalty' to "the group" affirming his "human nature," i.e., 'justifying' his love of pleasure and hate of restraint, making his "feelings," which are subjective (informal), instead of facts and truth, which are objective (formal) the means by which he from then on 'reasons,' i.e., determines what is right and what is wrong. "Make me feel good," i.e., "good in my eyes and I will like you," i.e., "I will listen to (respect) you", i.e., "You are right." "Hurt my feelings," i.e., "Make be feel bad," i.e., "bad in my eyes and I will not like you," i.e., "I will not listen to (respect) you," i.e., "You are wrong." Doing it in a group setting, with group approval, i.e., affirmation is nothing less than "self" on steroids, intoxicating, addictive, and possessive. "Self" 'liberated' from the father's/Father's authority (restraint), 'justifying' itself, makes the child God, i.e., "good" in his eyes— who can do no wrong—making any who defy him wrong (evil) for getting in his way.

"Concern for man [who seeks 'change,' i.e., pleasure] replaces concern about pleasing God [who is unchanging, i.e., righteous]." (Lenard Wheat, Paul Tillich's Dialectic Humanism: Unmasking the God above God)

"Re-education must be clever enough in manipulating the subjects to have them think that they are running the show." "The objective sought will not be reached so long as the new set of values is not experienced by the individual as something freely chosen." "An outright enforcement of the new set of values and beliefs is simply the introduction of a new god who has to fight with the old god, now regarded as a devil." (Principles of Re-education Kurt Lewin and Paul Grabbe "Conduct, Knowledge, and Acceptance of New Values"; The Journal of Social Issues)

  "We know how to change the opinions of an individual in a selected direction, without his ever becoming aware of the stimuli which changed his opinion." "We know how to influence the ... behavior of individuals by setting up conditions which provide satisfaction for needs of which they are unconscious, but which we have been able to determine." "If we have the power or authority to establish the necessary conditions, the predicted behaviors [our potential ability to influence or control the behavior of groups] will follow." "We can choose to use our growing knowledge to enslave people in ways never dreamed of before, depersonalizing them, controlling them by means so carefully selected that they will perhaps never be aware of their loss of personhood."
   "'Now that we know how positive reinforcement works [affirming the child's carnal nature, 'justifying' his desire for the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world stimulates], and why negative doesn't' [demanding that he obey the father's/Father's commands and rules as preached and accept his/His facts and truth as taught, by faith]... 'we can be more deliberate and hence more successful in our cultural design. We can achieve a sort of control under which the controlled [the seduced, deceived, and manipulated] though they are following a code much more scrupulously [more regulations and oversight (sight based management)] than was ever the case under the old system, nevertheless feel free. They are doing what they want to do, not what they are forced to do. That's the source of the tremendous power of positive reinforcement—there's no restrain and no revolt. By a careful design, we control not the final behavior, but the inclination to behavior—the motives, the desires, the wishes. The curious thing is that in that case the question of freedom never arises." (Carl Rogers, on becoming a person: A Therapist View of Psychotherapy)

The student is seduced (drawn) into participation in the process of 'change' by his "self interest," i.e., by his own carnal desires ("lusts"), i.e., by what he "covets," i.e., by those things he is talking to (dialoguing with) his "self" about (that he wants to do) that his parent's will/would not let him do. In creating a "safe zone, place, or space" in the classroom, where he can express his desires without fear of being reprimanded, he has confidence in doing things or relating with people his parents would not approve of. In the so called "safe zone, place, space" he is deceived into believing that he will not be judged, reprimanded, or rejected when in truth he is already being "graded," i.e., judged according to his willingness or refusal to participate in the 'change' process itself. By going into dialogue with "the group" he is manipulated into participation, 'justifying,' supporting, defending, etc., the process of 'change,' negating the father's/Father's authority in the process, replacing it with the voice of "the group," i.e., "the group" leader. It is the role of the "group leader," i.e., the facilitator of 'change,' i.e., the 'change' agent to seduced, deceive, and manipulate all who come under his influence, turning them into "human resource" so they can be used (bought and sold) for his own pleasure and gain.

"And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you." 2 Peter 2:3

"But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death." James 1:14, 15

It is the father's/Father's restraints that teaches the child to humble, deny, die to, control, discipline his "self"—in order (as in the old world order) to do right and not wrong—that detoxes the child, i.e., that gets the child off the drug of "self" 'justification.' It is in dialogue, with group approval, that 'change,' i.e., rejection of the father's/Father's authority takes place. If the child is still dialoguing with his "self" after being corrected, reproved, chastened by the father/Father he is still 'justifying' (dialoguing with) his "self." In this way "Make me feel good" becomes the measure for being "right" or "good," i.e., moral and "Hurt my feelings" becomes the measure for being "wrong" or "evil," i.e., immoral. If the child is discussing with his "self," evaluating his "self" from the father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth, he has learned to humble, deny, die to, control, discipline his "self" in order to do right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., according to the father's/Father's standards, doing the father's/Father's will—he is manifesting signs of maturity. In therapy, dialogue is the means to the end, i.e., to the act of dialogue itself, i.e., the means to negating the father's/Father's authority in the thoughts and actions of all participants (again: there is no father's/Father's authority in dialogue). It is what makes psychology and Marxism one and the same.

"The individual may have 'secret' thoughts [dialoguing with his "self," his carnal desires and his resentment toward authority which gets in his way] which he will under no circumstances reveal to anyone else if he can help it [out of fear of being reproved, chastened, or cast out]. To gain access [through getting him or her to dialogue, i.e., to share his or her "feelings" of the 'moment' with others] is particularly important, for here may lie the individual's potential [for 'change,' i.e., to become of and for his or her "self" and the world only'liberated' from the father's/Father's authority; Genesis 3:1-6]." (Theodor Adorno, The Authoritarian Personality)

"Prior to therapy the person is prone to ask himself, 'What would my parents want me to do?' During the process of therapy the individual come to ask himself, 'What does it mean to me?'" (Carl Rogers, on becoming a person: A Therapist View of Psychotherapy)

Karl Marx wrote: "The life [authority] which he [the child] has given to the object [to the parent, to the teacher, or to God—when the child humbles, denies, dies to, disciplines, controls his "self" in order to do their will, thus "empowering" them] sets itself against him as an alien and hostile force." (Karl Marx, MEGA I/3)

Karl Marx wrote: "Once the earthly family [with the children having to submit to their father's authority, i.e., having to humble and deny their "self" in order to do their father's will] is discovered to be the secret of the holy family [with the Son, and all following Him having to submit to His Heavenly Father's authority, i.e., having to humble and deny their "self" in order to do His will], the former [the earthly father's authority system, with children having to trust in and obey the father] must then itself be destroyed [vernichtet, i.e., annihilated, called negation] in theory and in practice [in the children's personal thoughts and social actions—no longer "fellowshipping" with others based upon the father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth (customs, traditions, doctrine) but, through dialogue, "building relationship" upon common "'self interests'" (carnal desires of the 'moment') instead]." (Karl Marx, Feuerbach Thesis #4)

Karl Marx wrote: "It is not individualism [the child subject to the father's/Father's authority, doing the father's/Father's will instead of his own, having a guilty conscience for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning] that fulfills the individual, on the contrary it destroys him. Society ["human relationship based upon self interest," i.e., finding one's identity in "the group," i.e., in society] is the necessary framework through which freedom [from the father's/Father's authority] and individuality [being "of and for self" and the world only] are made realities." (Karl Marx, in John Lewis, The Life and Teachings of Karl Marx)

"Freud speaks of religion as a 'substitute-gratification'—the Freudian analogue to the Marxian formula, 'opiate of the people.'" "Freud commented that only through the solidarity of all the participants could the sense of guilt [the guilty conscience for disobeying the father/Father] be assuaged." (Norman O. Brown, Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History)

Sigmund Freud's history of mankind is not of God's love of man but is of man's "hatred against patriarchal suppression—a 'barrier to incest,' ... the desire (for the sons) to return to the mother—[which] culminate[d] in the rebellion of the exiled sons, the collective killing and devouring of the father, and the establishment of the brother clan [society]." (Herbart Marcuse, Eros and Civilization: A philosophical inquiry into Freud) Thus Herbart Marcuse could write: "The 'original sin' must be committed again: 'We must again eat from the tree of knowledge in order to fall back into the state of innocence,'" Normal O. Brown could write: "To experience Freud is to partake a second time of the forbidden fruit;" and Irvin Yalom could write: "Freud noted that patricide and incest [the children killing the father so they could have sensual (sexual) relationship with the mother and with one another, i.e., praxis abomination without having a guilty conscience] are part of man's deepest nature." (Irvin Yalom, The Theory and Practice of Group Psychotherapy) This is the praxis of psychology.

"Marxian theory needs Freudian-type instinct theory [Freud considered all children sexually active] to round it out. And of course, vice versa." "Third-Force psychology is also epi-Marxian in these senses, i.e., including the most basic scheme as true-good social conditions ['liberation' from the father's/Father's authority so children can be their "self"] are necessary for personal growth, bad social conditions [children having to accept the father's/Father's authority, doing the father's/Father's will] stunt human nature,... This is to say, one could reinterpret Marx into a self-actualization-fostering Third- and Fourth-Force psychology-philosophy. And my impression is anyway that this is the direction in which they are going now." Manifesting Freud's view of the child's carnal nature Maslow wrote: "Nakedness is absolutely right. So is the attack on antieroticism, the Christian & Jewish foundations." (Abraham Maslow, The Journals of Abraham Maslow)

"To enjoy the present reconciles us to the actual." (Karl Marx, Critique of Hegel's 'Philosophy of Right')

"Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God." Hebrews 12:21

Capitalism in essence is the capitulation (setting aside) of pleasure (as well as the enduring of pain) in order to enjoy something in the future, i.e., to receive a reward, to make a living, and/or to get ahead. Doing right and not wrong, according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth often requires the setting aside of pleasure in the present, in order to gain the reward of doing good work (keeping your job and getting paid) and the benefits (pride) which come with doing it right. Socialism on the other hand demands that work be enjoyable in the present if it is to be of value ("actual"), whether it is done right or not. In socialism when a person does the work wrong, he actually did it "badly," which is not a crime unless he was doing it for himself (capitalism), then he was doing it wrong, which is a crime—the idea being, do it in a group then you can blame the group or someone else for not supporting you, thus getting you off the hook. The lessons of history have taught us that capitalism rewards good work,. socialism bad. Traditional education emphasis the value of capitalism, i.e., doing good work, when it is done with compassion toward others. Transformational education pushes socialism. Robert Owens was the founder of socialism. His son, Robert Dale Owens, after observing his father's works, defined it as having only produced and rewarded the "improvident, unskilled, and vicious."

"Self-actualizing people have to a large extent transcended the values of their culture. They are not so much merely Americans as they are world citizens, members of the human species first and foremost." (Abraham Maslow, The Farther Reaches of Human Nature)

The re-educative process has to fulfill a task which is essentially equivalent to a change in culture." (Kurt Lewin in Kenneth Bennie Human Relations in Curriculum Change)

Some refer to this as a "culture war," i.e., a war against the tradition of doing right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., a war against the father's/Father's "top-down" authority system.

"Bypassing the traditional channels of top-down decision making, our objective centers upon transforming public opinion into an effective instrument of global politics." "Individual values must be measured by their contribution to common interests and ultimately to world interests transforming public consensus into one favorable to the emergence of a stable and humanistic world order." "Consensus is both a personal and a political step. It is a precondition of all future steps." (Ervin Laszlo, A Strategy for the Future: The Systems Approach to World Order)

The dialoguing of opinions to a consensus process, when used in a classroom 'changes' how the teacher responds to the students. The teacher no longer honors the obeying of commands and rules as preached, the learning of facts and truth as taught, by faith, etc., but accentuates the "positive," i.e., the child's carnal nature, i.e., "human nature" over and therefore against the father's/Father's authority system, negating (attacking with the intent of destroying) the "negative," i.e., the fathers'/Fathers' authority system, i.e., nationalism so all students can become 'liberals,' socialists, i.e., "of and for self" and the world only, thinking and acting without having a guilty conscience for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning, so that all "the people," including the facilitators of 'change' can do wrong, disobey, sin with impunity instead.

"I have found whenever I ran across authoritarian students [those who honor the father's/Father's authority] that the best thing for me to do was to break their backs immediately." "The correct thing to do with authoritarians is to take them realistically for the bastards they are and then behave toward them as if they were bastards." (Abraham Maslow, Maslow on Management)

Welcome to the contemporary classroom, i.e., what your homeschooled child is more than likely going to face when they go off to college. All vocations and professions are now being made subject to what is called "group think," i.e., the consensus process. If your child resists and/or exposes "the group," i.e., holds to the truth instead of suspending it, as upon a cross, i.e., condoning a lie (being "tolerant of ambiguity") in order to be a part of "the group," he will be martyred, i.e., he will be labeled (as was/is done in the soviet union) as being negative, divisive, hateful, intolerant, prejudiced, a "lower-order-thinker," maladjusted, not a "team builder," "psychological," mentally ill, "in denial," a sociopath, a Fascist, a Nazi, a racist, neurotic, phobic, unreasonable, irrational, etc., i.e., he will become irrelevant, i.e., like his traditional minded parents. The object is to wash the father's/Father's authority system from the brains so that all can do wrong disobey, sin with impunity, believing the lie that man is "good" or can become "good" by doing "good deeds," i.e., making man "feel good."

"For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;" Romans 3:23

"For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables." 2 Timothy 4:3, 4

"This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;" 2 Timothy 3:1-4

"There is a way that seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death." Proverbs 16:25

When adults, through dialogue, attempt to create a world of their own making, i.e., a world as it "ought" to be, according to their carnal nature, i.e., a world of pleasure (utopia), they have become like children riding broomsticks, pretending they are riding horses, which in their mind "seem" to be real. Unable to deal with the real world, i.e., with the cost and responsibility (and inconvenience) that comes with having to take care of a real horse and deal with the risks which come with being around one, they force everyone to support them, i.e., not hurt their "feelings," i.e., not spoil their fun (by telling them the truth), 'justifying' their illusion. We will all be held accountable, before God, for our thoughts and actions. even if we pretend like it will not happen, doing our "own thing" in this life until death.

"So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God." Romans 14:12

Homeschooling material has also become subject to the process of 'change.' Since many developing the homeschooling material have come through the system of 'change,' i.e., "feelings" based education (having embraced it) they are applying it in the homeschooling material they are writing, moving the lessons from discussion (facts and truth) to dialogue (feelings and thoughts, i.e., opinions and theories, i.e., "fables").

"And I will give children to be their princes, and babes shall rule over them. And the people shall be oppressed, every one by another, and every one by his neighbour: the child shall behave himself proudly against the ancient, and the base against the honourable." "As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths." Isaiah 3:4-5, 12

The greatest concern is the lack of the father's involvement in the homeschooled child's education. It is not that the father has to teach a class. It is that when mom says "Wait till dad gets home," when "dad gets home" he does his business as the head of the home, i.e., as the head of the classroom. Otherwise, if the mother does not chasten the child herself or tell her husband when he gets home, letting him do it instead, "feelings," i.e., the affective domain, i.e., the child rules the nest, with mom vicariously living through the child, establishing "feelings," i.e., human relationship over and therefore against the father's/Father's authority, negating doing right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., doing the father's/Father's will. The very essence of 'limited' government, unalienable rights, private convictions, private property, private business, inheritance, posterity, individualism (under God), sovereignty, "rule of law," etc., is founded upon the father's authority in the home, i.e., upon the Father's authority over mankind, judging the child's/man's thoughts and actions according to His Word.

"Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. 1 John 2:15

The difference between the child's love and the father's/Father's love is, the child's love is for his "self" and anything that brings him pleasure, being unable to separate his hate of missing out on pleasure and hatred toward the one causing him to miss out on it. The father/Father, on the other hand, loves the child even when he does wrong, disobeys, sins, hating the wrong or evil the child does, judging him according to his actions while still loving the child, willing to forgive him, show him mercy and grace if he repents and turns from his wicked ways. When the child's "love" rules (the children of disobedience rule) over the world, there is no mercy or grace, only a "lusting" after any and all things that initiate and sustain pleasure—abomination—and a destroying of anything that and anyone who gets in the way, with God's judgment (wrath) to follow.

"For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet." "And even as they did not like to retain God in [their] knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them." Romans 1:26-32

Prior to the twentieth century there was a general desire among parents to train up their children to do right and not wrong—where they will spend eternity was of concern. From then on the focus was for them to have a "better life," what can I get out of this situation for my "self." Not that we do not want our children to have a "better life," it is that doing right and not wrong has to come first, whether they have a "better life" or not. The attitude on marriage reflects this 'changed'—"for better or for worse" now includes "till something better comes along." Without the father's/Father's love and restraints, all we have is our carnal nature, i.e., our love of "self," i.e., our love of the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world stimulates, hating anything that gets in the way.

"It is not in man that walketh to direct his steps." Jeremiah 10:23

"Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise." "I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me." "For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak. And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak." John 5:19, 30; 12:47-50

"For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother." Matthew 12:50

It is this father's/Father's authority structure that contemporary education is most adamant in destroying. All efforts are being made to bring the homeschooling "movement" back into line, i.e., subject to socialist ("What about your children's' social life") education—even "pro" homeschool organizations are doing it (through deceit, saying one thing to get you on board then doing another, i.e., doing the dialectic, i.e., dialogue process). If "human relationship" for your children is your concern then you are a Marxist.

It is not that relationship is not a part of our life, it is, actually it is "fellowship." This includes in the home. God created the woman, not "the group" or "Steve," for Adam, with two, i.e., husband and wife becoming one because of it, with the husband caring for, providing for, protecting, loving his wife, and the father caring for, providing for, protecting, loving his children, with his wife being a "helpmeet" to him and the mother being an instructor to the children, reinforcing the father's authority. If you look at what happened in the garden in Eden from a systems standpoint, the first thing the master facilitator of 'change' did, through the use of dialogue, was come between the "Father" and the "children" and between the "husband" and the "wife," 'liberating' the "children" from the "Father's authority" and the "wife" from her "husband's authority," resulting in the "husband" following after the "wife" instead of obeying the "Father"—ruling his "home" well, i.e., doing the "Father's" will. Contemporarily education, i.e., transformational education applies this same method or formula in the classroom. There really is nothing new under the sun.

While dad and mom are not perfect, they may be, or may have been down right tyrants, using the office of authority God gave them for their own childish carnal desires, the office itself is perfect. Doing right and not wrong according to the Father's will must come first in our lives, including in the home or all we are are "humanists," i.e., "of and for self" and the world only, living for the carnal pleasures of the 'moment,' seeking affirmation ("self" 'justification') from others, dying in our sins.

"And he said unto them, Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God." Luke 16:15

"The heart is deceitful above all things [thinking pleasure is the standard for "good" instead of doing right and not wrong according the Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., having to set aside pleasure, i.e., having to humble, deny, die to "self" in order to do God the Father's will], and desperately wicked [hating God the Father and His authority which "gets in the way," i.e. which prevents, i.e., inhibits or blocks it from enjoying the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world stimulates]: who can know it?" Jeremiah 17:9 Those of dialectic 'reasoning,' as a children of disobedience 'justifying' their "self" can not see their hatred toward God the Father as being evil because their love of "self," i.e., their love of pleasure—which the world stimulates—is "in the way," blinding them to the truth, i.e., to the deceitfulness and wickedness of their heart.

"And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever." 1 John 2:16

"And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven." Matthew 23:9 It is not that Jesus negated the father's/Father's authority system. It is that our Heavenly Father's authority is above all authority, i.e., must come first.

After all the gospel message is all about the Father, sending His only begotten Son, Jesus Christ, to 'redeem' us from His judgment (wrath) upon us for our sins, His Son covering our sins with His shed blood on the cross, imputing His righteousness to us by faith, with the Father raising Him from the grave in order to 'reconcile' us to Himself. The gospel message is the Son saying 'I want you to know my Father,' 'I want you to know my Father's love for you.'

"Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." John 14:6

"and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ." 1 John 1:3

The home schooling movement, whether it understood it or not, was an effort to restore this order, i.e., the Father's authority. The agenda of contemporary education is to negate it. Homeschooling is not about academics, as some homeschoolers are making it. It is spiritual, having to do with the soul of the child, where he or she will spend eternity. If that is not first and foremost in the child's education, than their education is of and for the world only, no matter how many scriptures are "thrown in," in order to make it seem right.

"For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ." Galatians 1:10

© Institution for Authority Research, Dean Gotcher 2019