[UncleMeat]

> It's not really taught.

It is. This is one of the major outcomes of a strong history curriculum. Interpreting sources and narratives. Every single major university offers a four year degree that is basically nothing but this sort of thing. And engineers consistently yell and scream that it isn't real education.

[meekmind]

That's a fair point, however we don't reach university until after 12 years of compulsory state-run education in the U.S.

By that time, many developmental windows have been missed, a persons personality is already solidified.

University is too late for these fundamentals, which IMHO ought to be taught in primary school. I think we horribly underestimate the ability of children to do this. Which I attribute to the assembly-line education that appeals to the lowest common denominator.

[rualca]

> University is too late for these fundamentals, which IMHO ought to be taught in primary school.

There are so many fundamentals that are skipped throughout compulsory education. Stuff like basic taxes and home economics and labour law, which is the kind of stuff we all have to endure throughout our lives.

School is not designed from the point of view of the citizen. It's designed from the point of view of the elites running the nation.

[notahacker]

I'd add that the UK history curriculum taught us about interpreting sources from the age of 11. Which also goes to show that teaching has its limits.

(I'm not sure how much this has been eroded since 2010 by the Gove reforms aimed at teaching history as chronology)

[kortilla]

It shouldn’t take 4 years to learn those skills though. Just the fundamentals of identifying what the biases of the authors and institutions are is something that should be taught for a year in high school.

It’s not complex and doesn’t require 4 years of classes, but it does require practice and it’s better to start early before you develop a bunch of political views and ideological blind spots.

[UncleMeat]

> It shouldn’t take 4 years to learn those skills though.

No skill is binary. You can learn some of this in a single class. You get more practice if you take two dozen classes. You get even more practice if it is your profession.

Quality humanities education teaches empathy and the ability to analyze and judge sources created by humans, especially written text. That can absolutely happen at an earlier age. I'm certainly on board with increasing the amount of history education offered to high schoolers, though I suspect that many people are not.

[kortilla]

I would posit that 4 years is way too long and much of that 4 years is too much inward facing bullshit based on a huge pile of flawed science (social psychology).

My friends that went down the 4 year history/literature path appear to be just as susceptible to spreading biased bullshit full of logical fallacies on social media as anyone else.