Thoughts on "AI and Education" I am not a fan of the “let’s teach our 8-year-olds how to use OpenClaw, run businesses, or make PPTs” trend I see in some schools. In the age of AI, I think children need less of that, not more, especially before age 10. As someone replied to an earlier post I wrote on education, if we use the OpenClaw metaphor, build the soul.md file first for your child. That is the layer that is actually important and defining. My instinct is that the years from 4 to 10 should be used to teach explicit frameworks for understanding the world. For me, that means subjects like philosophy, history (especially the history of religion), cosmology, psychology and biology (bc they help explain why humans behave the way they do), and math, meaning logic and rigor. I want to very consciously shape my child’s underlying epistemic and philosophical architecture. Because otherwise, what do you get? A generation of children who seem smart, but are mostly just hyper-optimized for whatever the current system rewards. Right now, that often means attention, polish, and precocious performance. But those are not the same thing as depth. They are not the same thing as judgment. They are certainly not the same thing as wisdom. What matters is not raising children who can outrun whatever happens to be fashionable at the moment. It is raising children with enough internal structure, understanding, and comprehension to recognize what actually matters in life. I want them to see beyond the systems and incentives that happen to be in vogue today, to understand why things are the way they are, and to operate within constraints without being defined by them. Of course they need to learn the rules of the game. But I do not want them to be led by those rules. I want them to understand it clearly enough to participate in it without mistaking it for reality. As a friend said to me recently, there is the game of life, and there is Life. I think it's important for my kids to know how to operate within systems and social constraints, but not confuse those constraints with truth, meaning, or purpose. The point is not to raise children who are expertly optimized for the current moment or environment, but to raise children who can tell the difference between what is enduring and what is transient, and know how to compromise between the two in a way that is authentic and fulfilling. I don't think any of this is at all controversial btw. Where I probably differ from some is how truly essential and foundational I think this is and how early it can be introduced, reinforced, and actually comprehended and practiced by the child. I already started at 3.5. Going well so far. Core concepts this month has been wisdom vs knowledge and the yin-yang symbol and what it means. You'd be surprised how quickly they picked up on the former, quite instantaneous really and very solid understanding. The latter is still more of a toy concept at the moment but probably because I am not explaining it well!