Book Review: Schooling in Capitalist America

Book Review:

Bowles, Samuel, and Herbert Gintis. Schooling in Capitalist America. New York: Basic Book, Inc., 1976. 1-340.

I read the book, Schooling in Capitalist America, written in 1976, by Samuel Bowles and Herbert Gintis. Bowles and Gintis present their argument that American schooling systems inhibit social mobility by encouraging social growth. They believe that the schooling systems promote capitalism in the work force because children are being groomed for the capitalist economy throughout their entire schooling career. The book outlines the distinct characteristics of a capitalist economy and proves how America is becoming more totalitarian and molding its citizens into working capitalists.

Throughout the book, Bowles and Gintis try to prove their correspondence principle, “…Schooling has contributed to the reproduction of the social relations of production largely through the correspondence between school and class structure.” (130) They believe that the school systems force their students to become a part of the economy by preparing them for the work force. They suggest that teachers represent a manager over the students much like a boss controls their employees. The authors demonstrate how students are classified and rewarded according to their personalities as well as their work ability. The schooling system works to justify economic inequalities and has been coined, the “great equalizer.” Bowles and Gintis believe that the schooling systems only add to the inequalities in American society because it separates good students from poor students, in an effort to try to allocate economic positions. Repression and inequality is not blamed on the schooling system, but on the capitalist economy.

Gintis and Bowles argue that the Capitalist economy forced schools and work places to produce people that will contribute to the prospering economy. Accordingly, it is evident that Capitalist economies are more focused on the profit and outcome, rather than the human need. They argue that Capitalist economies work oppositely of democracies because Capitalism is focused on profit. Thus Capitalism centers on the minority, which is managers and capitalists, rather than the majority of the work force.

I found this book to be a bit dry in the beginning, but as I continued to read it, it began to grasp my interest. I found in interesting to read a critique of the American schooling system from an outside perspective. I believe that Bowles and Gintis are correct in the way that our schooling system prepares us for the work force and separates the students by their ability to perform. From my perspective as a student, I feel as though I have experienced the pressures of being formed into a worker for the Capitalist economy, but I view this as a positive outcome of my education. However, I found the preparation for the capitalist economy is more focused at the college level than in pre-k through twelfth grade. After reading this book, it made me take a different view point about the American economy and how our schooling system supports out Capitalist tendencies.

Freud's Theories

I agree with Allan Hobson, that some of Freud’s work is out dated since his theories date back to 1895. Although Freud’s theories seem obsolete, I agree with Soames, that they still have merit. I believe that the mind continues to work and think while we are sleeping, and thus I agree with Soames completely. It is evident that during sleep many people’s brains allow them to do things that they wouldn’t do during their sleep. I believe that Freud’s theories about dreams are correct, and that we are in a different state when we awake. Dreams seem to be a way for dreamers to clear their minds and do what they desire. It is evident that people’s dreams have some connection with their lives, and thus have intrinsic value as Soames stated. Soames is correct that dreams need to be interpreted, and that Freud’s theory of hallucinatory is correct. I believe that dreams can present something to us and that usually we need to decipher what the dream really means. Although Freud's dreams are a bit out dated, we should not throw them out. I believe that although Freud's theories are not extremely scientific that he had brushed the surface of something very important and that someone needs to complete and expand on his theories.

Random Firing

I was disappointed we could only spend one class period on the debate between Allan Hobson and Mark Soames about Freud’s theories on dreams, because I found it very interesting. I found Hobson’s argument to be scientific, yet very strong. I partially agree that our dreams are random firings, but I also agree with Soames, that Freud was correct in believing that dreams explain a lot about our lives. I sometimes think that dreams are random because when I try to recall my dreams they seem to be very random and they don’t make a whole lot of sense. Also when recalling dreams, I have a hard time remembering the entire dream because various parts are missing. So I am torn between Hobson’s and Soames’s beliefs on dreams, I would like to believe that they have meaning and are not completely random. I do not believe that reoccurring dreams or the dreams I have that reflect on my day’s experiences are random at all.

Hobson exercises the notion that we are story loving creatures and argues that we make sense of these random firings through stories. But I have always believed that our dreams are thoughts that are trapped in our self-conscious and make their way through our dreams. We save ourselves from ourselves through dreams by confronting our demons in our dreams where we are safe. I think about the dreams that I have had that stick out in my mind, and I can see all of the different demons that show up in my dreams. Now, these are not monster demons, but fears that I have as a human being. One of the biggest fears that I have is death, much like the rest of the human population. Many of my dreams I have had to decipher in order to better understand them, like Soames suggests that we need to do. Sometimes our thoughts in our self-conscious come out in dreams that we have a hard time understanding. But once we interpret the dreams, it is easier to understand what are dreams really mean.

Moral Rights

We watched the film, “No Dogs or Philosophers Allowed” in class, and it left me with a few ideas. Are moral or legal rights more significant? It is evident that moral and legal rights are completely different and have different meanings. Legal rights are the rights that everyone has and that are generally used in court and law. Moral rights are a bit different and usually need some interpretation. I believe that both moral and legal rights are important because sometimes people’s beliefs are over shadowed by legal rights. Although someone’s moral beliefs may be different that their legal rights I believe that they should still have to follow the law, because after all it is the law. And we also have the option as Americans to voice our opinions about what we do not morally believe in. But if we gave more power to moral rights over legal rights, complete mayhem would be the result. We are given legal rights and laws for a purpose, and although moral rights exist, they are just a means to support legal rights when needed.

Entertainment value or educational?

Acompora related zoos to pornography by the way that nonhumans, or animals, are changed into a different image much like the way that women are given a different image in pornography. I believe that zoos are similar to pornography in the way that wild animals are forced to live a certain way than what is natural to them, just so that humans can gaze at them. It is evident that animals in zoos are completely innocent and have no choice in their inhabitance at the zoo. Pornography is a bit different, people that participate, do it by choice. Although, some argue that people get stuck in the porn industry because of drug and money problems.

Many people try to justify zoos as places with educational value. I see the educational value in zoos, but unfortunately zoos are not used for this purpose by the majority of the general public. Most people go to zoos just to see wild animals. And, quite ironically, people do not view true wild animals, but only images of what humans desire to see. While some people go to read the information provided about the animals, most people just walk around and avoid the learning experience. In this sense, zoos are much like pornography because they are for purely entertainment value.

An Image of a Wild Animal

Acampora’s essay has definitely grasped my attention with the regards to zoos being pornographic. When I first learned of his comparison of zoos and pornography I was a bit shocked because I have never thought of zoos as obscene and offensive. Rather, I have viewed zoos as educational areas where people can see animals and converse with other people. I would have to agree with our class discussion that circuses are much more pornographic in the sense of forcing animals to be un-natural. Circuses force animals completely out of their habitat and natural state. By forcing animals to perform and do things that humans desire to see, they are taking the animal’s freedoms away. Although zoos take animal freedoms away to a certain extent, it is not nearly as bad as forcing an elephant to dance and do tricks that are out of its’ norm.

Zoos take away animal’s natural rights and animals are turned into something different than a natural wild animal. Ironically, people go to zoos to see wild animals because they wouldn’t normally be able to see them. Therefore, zoos create an image of what wild animals look like, much like the way pornography creates an image of women. Animals in zoos do not have a choice to stay or leave because they are caged in. Similarly, people are also forced to remain the pornography business due to poverty, drug addiction, or other factors. Therefore, I agree with Acampora’s claims that zoos are pornographic, but I still do not consider zoos to be as obscene as pornography.

Zoos are pornographic?!

Ralph Acampora depicts zoos to be overly pornographic and demeaning to animals in his essay, “Zoos and Eyes: Contesting Captivity and Seeking Successor Practices.” When I first read the title of the essay I was confused as to how an educational facility would be portrayed as pornographic. According to www.dictionary.com, the definition for pornography is: –noun obscene writings, drawings, photographs, or the like, esp. those having little or no artistic merit. I found this interesting because I do not think of a zoo in this fashion. Acampora suggests that Zoos take animals out of their natural state and force them to be what humans’ desire. He said, “they are visual objects whose meaning is shaped predominantly by the perversions of a patriarchal gaze.” I agree that zoos take animals out of their natural habitat and force them to live awkwardly among other zoo animals, but I do not see this as pornographic. I agree with Acampora when he makes the connection that both pornography and zoos alienate their subjects and force them into non natural situations and expect them to perform a certain way. But I do not agree that zoos are completely pornographic, they are learning facilities that are not obscene in any way.

The unexamined life

In class we spoke briefly about one of Socrates famous quotes, “The unexamined life is not worth living.” I have always enjoyed this short quote because it forces you to think about and observe your own life. Although many people believe that Socrates may have been looking down at the lower classes that are stuck in turmoil, I believe he was challenging people to live their lives to the fullest. Although the lower classes may be stuck in the fields working all day, they can still flourish within the life that they have. Even if you work in the fields every day, you can still think and use your mind for different reasoning skills. I believe that Socrates was challenging humans to not become lazy and not use their minds. The mind is an amazing thing and it is a shame when people do not take advantage of it. I have always thought of Socrates quote and forced myself to go beyond what I usually would. I think you can interpret this quote anyway that you choose, but I believe that Socrates was trying to encourage people to better their lives. You only have one life to live, so don’t shouldn’t waste it, live it the way you want to.