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.
That's a good thought. Tzaph's argument about everything parents do with kids can be cast as 'indoctrination' is one to make us question the whole matter of what we as a society learn and how. Parents have primary rights, but a society has rights about the sort of people parents prepare their kids to be.
It's a deep socio -philosophic question, and I touched on it in a former post which nobody read.
But a bottom line seems to me to be that duty of society and parents is to take what's true as what is to be taught. So who decides what's true?
The problem is lumping everything under one umbrella--shared truth, perceived truth, undiscoverable truth -- and then claiming that we need to be talking about truth, when really, all of those are truth, until they are not.
This reminds me of an interview with Dr. Richard Feynman regarding the topic of magnets but the conversation moved into the problem with asking the question "why". In the end, the physicists does explain what the interviewer wanted to know, but at the point the concepts were above the head of the average layman.
The impression I get from that interview is that Dr. Feynman was satisfied with the interviewer's first claim which was based on observation, which is that there is a pushing against, a feeling, a sensation one gets when like poles are put together. It was the interviewer who wasn't satisfied with his own observation and then asked "why?" I think to want to know the "truth" is a preference and is a quest one should take.
So what should schools be teaching? The difference between observation and preference.
For me, preference is like eating ice-cream. We can prefer one flavor over another. But as long as we all are describing ice cream as it, its not a big deal.
It's when we are describing ice cream that has no resemblance to what we call ice cream is when "preference" becomes a problem.
And preference crosses over to indoctrination when we have to obscure facts and dehumanize people that use actual facts about ice-cream, just because they don't eat the same flavor, instead of addressing the facts themselves.
Nice analogy. I think it is important to try to be as nice as possible
Quote:
Originally Posted by phetaroi
I understand what you're saying and basically agree with you.
There is one point I would make -- that belief in god or holy books does not need to be justified...until one begins to push that belief on others.
You are dealing with a person who lives a prescriptive life and that person doesn't realize it.
Problems are there to be solved. They are not solved by ..what.. not wanting to deal with it? First step is understanding the problem. We might find that the soutions already exist, somewhere.
True, but one look at our news proves that not true. We can also look at how you and I different in our approach to theism as it relates to problem solving.
True, but one look at our news proves that not true. We can also look at how you and I different in our approach to theism as it relates to problem solving.
Looking at the news illuminates the problem - Getting at the facts is often not the primary objective. Bit this is the same on the forum and everywhere - it's a human problem, because critical thinking is not taught and people go with the 'prove I'm right' instinct, because they get taught nothing else.
The problem is lumping everything under one umbrella--shared truth, perceived truth, undiscoverable truth -- and then claiming that we need to be talking about truth, when really, all of those are truth, until they are not.
...
So what should schools be teaching? The difference between observation and preference.
You are dealing with a person who lives a prescriptive life and that person doesn't realize it.
The three things above caught my attention in your post and got me thinking.
In regard to the first (and I realize this is probably not exactly what you meant), it always puzzles me how some people whom I have known who have been born again and believe that they were selected by god to be one of a very small group of special people who truly understand his word and have been specially blessed by him are virtually incapable of leading a successful daily life. It's almost as if they are substituting their "specialness" (in their eyes, not god's eye) for their myriad of deficiencies. Mankind, and indeed individual men and women, are not always very capable of determining the "truth", particularly when it is in regard to themselves. [I want to emphasize again that I am not saying all christians or all born-agains, but when we look back at the number of "fallen" spiritual leaders of these people, it's rather striking].
I like your point about the difference between observation and preference. I think that's akin to what I would call critical thinking skills. And it reminds me of that quote I saw the other day that went something like -- reality is what remains after you no longer personally believe it.
I wasn't quite clear about what you meant by a "prescriptive life". Could you, perhaps, expand on that just a bit? Thanks.
When the state tells your kids when to have sex what religion what to eat what political side to take what gender they are what religion and they feed your kids
Are you really the parent?
When the state tells your kids when to have sex what religion what to eat what political side to take what gender they are what religion and they feed your kids
Are you really the parent?
I haven't seen "the state" do any of those things.
I wasn't quite clear about what you meant by a "prescriptive life". Could you, perhaps, expand on that just a bit? Thanks.
I don't understand "prescriptive life" either but then my verbal skills are not particularly advanced. I can however, lift heavy objects.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huckleberry3911948
When the state tells your kids when to have sex what religion what to eat what political side to take what gender they are what religion and they feed your kids
Are you really the parent?
Quote:
Originally Posted by phetaroi
I haven't seen "the state" do any of those things.
I think Huck is confusing the state with religion unless he is referring to a theocracy.
One aspect in which the education system failed me, I feel, is in the teaching of critical thinking skills and just plain how to think by which I mean logical thinking. I learned on my own how to think (which leaves room for erroneous thinking but it got me through high school, since I was a poor student with attention deficit problems). Another aspect is social skills and being on the spectrum, I really needed to be taught such skills!
When the state tells your kids when to have sex what religion what to eat what political side to take what gender they are what religion and they feed your kids
Are you really the parent?
No. Big Brother and his/her whims are really the parents. You can be an interim overseer of your own off-spring, if your lucky.
No. Big Brother and his/her whims are really the parents. You can be an interim overseer of your own off-spring, if your lucky.
There's no Big Brother like religions and their hold on society. Other than Stalinist marxism of course.
Quote:
Originally Posted by phetaroi
I haven't seen "the state" do any of those things.
There sometimes seems to be an apparent confusion between the state telling people when to have sex (for example) and the state religion religion that it has no power to oblige people to have sex or not. This is seen by the religious as an infringement of their power over society - which it is, and should be.
There's no Big Brother like religions and their hold on society. Other than Stalinist marxism of course.
There sometimes seems to be an apparent confusion between the state telling people when to have sex (for example) and the state religion religion that it has no power to oblige people to have sex or not. This is seen by the religious as an infringement of their power over society - which it is, and should be.
I think you are confusing Puritanism with some type of religious stronghold.
No, the confusion is in people wanting to inflict/inject their preferences into others homes.... "I'm somehow a victim, NOW LET ME IN!"
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.
