Hi, I have travelled a lot and strongly believe that formal schooling is not required anyhow. By the way formal schoolin is "the process of passing through the designed educational system of a state so as to acquire learning". Feel free to accept :-)
Schooling is suppose to be the foremost tool of educatiom, yet many today are schooled but uneducated. A well educated man should be able to survive in any situation he finds himself. This best acheived through inteligence and wisdom (book wise and street wise). A well educated man in the modern world however may be able to tell you all the parts of a car, but put him in a town with bikes and he becomes useless, and this is if he is an older citizen. The younger generation, will just be lost either way. Some time ago schools used to produce on book wise, now they even fail to do that
It seems that the foundation of the Con speaker's argument is that the current schooling is not doing well in educating the populous, and that experience would be better. The Con speaker did not say what kind of formal schooling we are debating so I will talk about all kinds. So what do schools do for us? They teach the basic understanding of mathematics that is necessary for life; they teach a logical process of solving everyday problems in science; they teach how to read and write; they teach the history of our people, which I would argue, is the most important thing to learn. The public school system is the foundation that experience builds off of. Education is the great equalizer that all people gain from. The Con's example of cars and bikes is also does not really apply. Education allows us to see connections in reality. We see how an engine in a car moves the tires on a bike, but we can still understand and learn that the person on the bike is that very engine. The Con speaker states that, "A well educated man should be able to survive in any situation he finds himself." But why? No one can do that even with education and/or experience.
The fact is that formal school is required in society. The con side has failed to really debate. The burden of proof lies with him to explain why formal schools should not be required. I cannot debate points that do not exist.