Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
First of all. You use inflammatory language that demonstrates your inability to consider what I am saying without bias and emotion. I am not "insisting."
Sure you are. You are repeating an assertion and not accepting refusal. It isn't a bad thing. Your claim that it is "inflammatory" is odd, though. One could read all sorts of stuff into that choice of a word.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LearnMe
I am trying to explain myself, my thinking, at least to the point that you understand what I am commenting. Clearly you do not, but unfortunately that is clear only to me, not to you, so I try again.
It is clear to me that you are asserting a position which is untenable, relying on an overly broad definition of a word. Unfortunately, this isn't clear to you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LearnMe
We do not and should not teach by "appealing to an accepted authority." You put my words into yours, because this is what you want to do, but what I am trying to explain is that we should agree upon truth by way of a reasonable, acceptable and agreeable criteria.
Except when you say "Simply because parents may not bother with the explanations doesn't mean they don't exist or that maybe an explanation is appropriate". In those cases, we DO teach by appealing to the accepted authority, the parent. These are your words. In certain cases, parents who teach their children do so without explanation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LearnMe
This is what we expect of professionals in all these fields you list, or their peer-reviewed research and conclusions DON'T MAKE IT INTO THE EDUCATION TEXT BOOKS. This in no way is to suggest ongoing updates and revisions are not necessary and appropriate forever going forward.
So much for "universal truths we have come to determine".
Quote:
Originally Posted by LearnMe
This is very different than the manner in which religious teaching -- preaching -- is conducted and accepted.
And you lump those 2 things together. That's fascinating, especially as it relates to teaching children. Are you using the word "preaching" to mean "earnestly advocate (a belief or course of action)." If so, then how is that different from telling my child, earnestly, not to touch fire and not question about that? I recall that you said "Of course there is much we teach our kids without bothering to get into the math or physics or chemistry explanation for why it is true you will burn yourself if you play with fire".
Quote:
Originally Posted by LearnMe
That you can't make the distinction between these differences is beyond me,
What is beyond me is how you can see that the distinction you draw is self-serving and arbitrary and driven by inaccurate language.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LearnMe
we all have a certain level of appreciation for process and rigor that goes into what is published in educational text books books versus how books like the Koran, the Bible, the Book of Mormon were published and how those teachings are the "appealing to an accepted authority" you are "insisting" upon.
So a textbook which teaches creationism as a viable alternative is subject to "rigor" but the bible which teaches it isn't. Got it.
Sure you are. You are repeating an assertion and not accepting refusal. It isn't a bad thing. Your claim that it is "inflammatory" is odd, though. One could read all sorts of stuff into that choice of a word.
It is clear to me that you are asserting a position which is untenable, relying on an overly broad definition of a word. Unfortunately, this isn't clear to you.
Except when you say "Simply because parents may not bother with the explanations doesn't mean they don't exist or that maybe an explanation is appropriate". In those cases, we DO teach by appealing to the accepted authority, the parent. These are your words. In certain cases, parents who teach their children do so without explanation.
So much for "universal truths we have come to determine".
And you lump those 2 things together. That's fascinating, especially as it relates to teaching children. Are you using the word "preaching" to mean "earnestly advocate (a belief or course of action)." If so, then how is that different from telling my child, earnestly, not to touch fire and not question about that? I recall that you said "Of course there is much we teach our kids without bothering to get into the math or physics or chemistry explanation for why it is true you will burn yourself if you play with fire".
What is beyond me is how you can see that the distinction you draw is self-serving and arbitrary and driven by inaccurate language.
So a textbook which teaches creationism as a viable alternative is subject to "rigor" but the bible which teaches it isn't. Got it.
resends..., again I am without time this morning because I have family visiting, but surely you can appreciate that if I were "insisting and not accepting refusal," I could not continue in this forum. I have been "accepting refusal" to accept or understand my opinions and point of view for a very long time, as is very clear from my history in this forum in which I even started a thread about how people simply don't change their minds about their fundamental core beliefs in these regards once they get past their twenties, regardless what facts, reason or logic presented...
What I have been doing, with you and others, is attempting to substantiate my opinions in these regards with the best of facts, reason and logic I can muster. Perhaps at a minimum to demonstrate that what I believe is not "just because." Whatever exchange happens as a result might hopefully continued in the same spirit, but I can't insist on that either. You want to call this "insisting" and/or don't understand why I take exception to that accusation? What if I accused you in the same way that you are "insisting" I agree with you even though I don't? Does that work for you?
My point in calling out that sort of rhetoric on your part is to suggest that if we avoid those sorts of "inflammatory" accusations and instead stick with the intellectual exchange based on facts, reason and logic, we are more likely to be more productive. Or use other than facts, reason and logic if you wish, but let's call it what it is. Fair?
Can't insist of course, but my suggestion. Might we agree about this at least?
Except when you say "Simply because parents may not bother with the explanations doesn't mean they don't exist or that maybe an explanation is appropriate". In those cases, we DO teach by appealing to the accepted authority, the parent. These are your words. In certain cases, parents who teach their children do so without explanation.
There are countless examples of how parents teach their children, what parents teach their children, what people believe...
My focus is on the best manner of teaching, how we might best strive toward our universal truths, what criteria is best, etc.
Not all teachings, beliefs, notions, approaches are equal in these regards! Obvious, right?
Some parents teach by beating their kids when they feel that a beating is appropriate, to use a sad example to make this point. Other parents teach by way of explanation. Others rely on the "just because" methodology and/or "because I'm your father/mother!"
All free to do as they wish, of course, but that freedom does NOT mean that we are all doing as well as others in all these regards related to what we learn, what we believe, what we teach our children and how...
I don't "insist" on my opinion, but I will share my opinion about all this and do my best to justify it, again with facts, reason and logic as best I am able (per another small example of reason contained in this last comment before I sign off again this morning).
You want to call this "insisting" and/or don't understand why I take exception to that accusation? What if I accused you in the same way that you are "insisting" I agree with you even though I don't? Does that work for you?
Sure. I AM insisting. There is no shame in it. And when you refuse, instead of accepting your position, I am refusing its validity and restating my position. I am insisting. This is not inflammatory. it is accurate. You have a problem with it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LearnMe
My point in calling out that sort of rhetoric on your part is to suggest that if we avoid those sorts of "inflammatory" accusations and instead stick with the intellectual exchange based on facts, reason and logic, we are more likely to be more productive.
And if we stopped trying to label accurate assessments as "inflammatory" and instead addressed the actual content, we might get somewhere.
Not all teachings, beliefs, notions, approaches are equal in these regards! Obvious, right?
Right. Some call for explanation, others do not, just an assertion of authority.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LearnMe
All free to do as they wish, of course, but that freedom does NOT mean that we are all doing as well as others in all these regards related to what we learn, what we believe, what we teach our children and how...
And that freedom is often driven by what is relevant, feasible or appropriate at any given moment, which does not make the impractical or useless explanation desirable or more valid, nor does it make the simple statement less correct. Therefore, certain types of parental teaching (about religion and other topics) qualify as indoctrination.
There are countless examples of how parents teach their children, what parents teach their children, what people believe...
My focus is on the best manner of teaching, how we might best strive toward our universal truths, what criteria is best, etc.
Not all teachings, beliefs, notions, approaches are equal in these regards! Obvious, right?
Some parents teach by beating their kids when they feel that a beating is appropriate, to use a sad example to make this point. Other parents teach by way of explanation. Others rely on the "just because" methodology and/or "because I'm your father/mother!"
All free to do as they wish, of course, but that freedom does NOT mean that we are all doing as well as others in all these regards related to what we learn, what we believe, what we teach our children and how...
I don't "insist" on my opinion, but I will share my opinion about all this and do my best to justify it, again with facts, reason and logic as best I am able (per another small example of reason contained in this last comment before I sign off again this morning).
Thanks again and another good Sunday to you!
Arguing with (secular) "facts, reason and logic" is a yetzer hara for a Jew. Do what G-d tells you, and the rest will magically work out for the best.
Why would you waste HOURS washing lettuce in the mistaken notion that you can avoid all bugs? It's a little obsessive, don't you think?
Quote:
Originally Posted by rosends
who said "hours" and who said "all"? I have washed lettuce. It doesn't take hours and the goal is to remove visible bugs.
Perhaps the first poster got minutes mixed up with hours. I, too, am curious about the source of his misinformation.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
