Politics and Beliefs
Pages
| Author | Topic: Politics and Beliefs |
|---|---|
|
...b10010b...
Member # 869
|
written Monday, October 10 2005 21:28
Profile
Homepage
quote:Horses are the classic example; we have an excellent fossil record suggesting a clear evolutionary lineage from an ancestral species. This is partly because the evolutionary history of horses involved obvious changes in body size and shape, which were reflected in the skeleton; soft tissues like eyes and feathers don't fossilise nearly as well. Incidentally, "half a feather" -- that is to say, something intermediate between scales (if, indeed, the ancestors of birds had scales) and the feathers we see today -- may or may not be helpful in flying, but it's perfectly good for creating an insulating layer to help keep you warm. Also, don't assume that just because two things are very different in outward physical structure there must be correspondingly large genetic differences involved in their formation; sometimes a subtle genetic change can have very obvious phenotypic effects. And by the way, I hate to brag, but, well, it hasn't been religion that's more than doubled the human lifespan in the past two centuries. [ Monday, October 10, 2005 22:03: Message edited by: Thuryl ] -------------------- My BoE Page Bandwagons are fun! Roots Hunted! Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00 |
|
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Monday, October 10 2005 21:32
Profile
Homepage
(EDIT: With reference to Synergy, of course.) Huh. It just occurred to me that I probably never mentioned that the truth or falsehood of Intelligent Design is not even part of the discussion for me. ID could be true, and it doesn't matter. It's whether ID constitutes teaching-worthy science, which I've argued it does not. I mean, for all any of us know, the universe popped into existence mere moments ago with all of us full-formed with false memories going back however long our memories go back. God could've created the world in exactly 4004 B.C. with dinosaur fossils already in it exactly as if they had died millions of years ago. These things could be true; they are simply not useful things to believe. So the truth or validity of science isn't really at issue here, although, again, the philosophical underpinnings of the methods would be a very interesting topic for a couple of weeks during some high school science course. But I think at least the two of us have reached some kind of agreement. Scientific truth is definitely not the only truth, but it's the kind that belongs in science classes, and others are very worthwhile in their respective places, too. [ Monday, October 10, 2005 21:33: Message edited by: Kelandon ] -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Monday, October 10 2005 23:20
Profile
Philosophy and science are heavily intertwined, as one was the parent of the other. The eternal question of "why are we here" has been attempted by many different people throughout history. In fact, it is the basis for organized religion, philosophy, and the scientific method. It would be helpful to agree that all three provide valid explanations within the context of each set of assumptions, but they don't co-mingle well. My hasty response on pg 1 of the thread reflects a philosophical answer to the questions, while Ash responded from the religious perspective. We are all correct, but the question of whether a theory with basis in religion should be taught in a subject based in scientific method was skirted. It seems blunt, but do religious schools teach evolution? If not, then that should answer the question posed originally. If so, then who the heck is trying to push the ID? I should provide the disclaimer that I have no knowledge of so-called Intelligent Design, but that is primarily because I'm ignorant. What is wrong with blind luck? Isn't that more faith-based and less egocentric? *this message sponsored by the peanuts* Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
|
Warrior
Member # 6347
|
written Tuesday, October 11 2005 02:49
Profile
~shakes fist at Synergy~ Trying to de-throne me and take over as Mr. Big-Poster, is that it? ;) ... Oh my... so much to read... and still so much to catch up on. I'll get around to it. Hopefully before it's too late. But for now, since I have to get ready for work and don't have much time, just this: quote:If we take as fact (for the sake of this discussion, of course, since we can't -really- know) that all things come from the One and are, by consequence, spiritual in nature, perhaps we can bridge the gap between our modes of thought in the following way: Animals may have achieved a "truer" level of spirituality insofar as that they exist in a harmony with the natural world around them that humans lack, but this is a static spirituality. It is unconscious, and simply "there". Humans, on the other hand, despite suffering from many incertitudes and—in some cases—disharmony, are special insofar as that their spiritual nature is dynamic; humans are conscious about spirituality in a way that animals clearly seem not to be. To me, this would certainly qualify as being special and worthy of note. Free will is a powerful and beautiful thing. That we can question and seek to understand seems to be a characteristic only possessed in our present world by homo sapiens sapiens (not passing judgment on our ancestors). This is a trait that has never been observed in other animals, to the best of my knowledge. Arguably, in time, this might lead us to a higher state of being which might be beyond the reach of animals...? -------------------- "Take time to listen to what is said without words, to obey the law too subtle to be written, to worship the unnameable and to embrace the unformed." -- Lao Tzu Posts: 124 | Registered: Monday, September 26 2005 07:00 |
|
Shaper
Member # 6292
|
written Tuesday, October 11 2005 05:33
Profile
Hey Muj, I'll demure and let you litter the boards with lengthy speeches and diatribes for a bit. I think my cup runneth over, and though I do get the writing bug readily enough, I am acutely aware how obnoxious it can be for others to deal with so much dialog. I'm sure a whole lot of people just stop reading after a short while and mutter to themselves, "Obsessive freaks!" It's good exercise and hopefully, good fun to bat ideas around, and it's been a while since I've been able to do it really. I'm driven by ideas and possibilities, so while some people focus on the practical and purely logical, I'm always thinking about, "What if....?" Everything gets really trippy to me when I am able to peel away all the built up assumptions. Life on other planets? How would others fit into the present sense of man's spiritual importance and centrality? This kind of thing is intriguing to ponder. It's good to push the envelopes of our comfort, familiarity and assumptions. I think you described animals in a meaningful way. Consciousness of one's spirituality and being makes a very different experience and set of responsibilities and drives than just doing what you do by "instinct" and fulfilling your basic physical needs. Anyhow, much to do today, and I'm rather anxious about stuff I have to perform at school today. The next thread I have in mind to create is more in keeping with the Halloween season. -------------------- [Insert Signature Here] Posts: 2009 | Registered: Monday, September 12 2005 07:00 |
|
Warrior
Member # 6347
|
written Tuesday, October 11 2005 05:45
Profile
Traitor! :P Throwing me to the wolves, are you? ;) I've barely even begun... there's still plenty here I haven't read and replied to. :( ... Yes, long ranting posts can be annoying to some. But it's not like this is a mundane thread with short, insignifant posts. It's a thread where many are writing huge posts, dealing with all sorts of topics and (at least I hope) having a good time of it. There's also the matter of choice. Clearly this (type of) thread doesn't appeal to anyone. And I maintain that message boards are a free-form medium, and that those who frequent them do so of their own free will. I don't post on every thread. Most people don't post in every thread. Honestly, I doubt if anyone posts in every thread. As such, I see nothing wrong with using a thread for its intended purpose (or at least new-found purpose, considering threads tend to change over time). This one's present purpose being that of opinionated, long-winded rants about everything and nothing. ;) ... I can understand having other things to do, though. I'm only back here now because I'm apparently not working today... or at least, not that I know of yet. ... Ah well, I'll just keep doing what I do. I've tried stopping it before (to no avail) and have long since given up hope of being a non-big-post-maker. I just want to add that, in my experience, big posts tend to be involving. And as much as this may not be the case for everyone, there's always a few people that end up writing far more than they're used to, diving into the discussion at hand, and I find that to be great fun. :D (And for the record, no, I won't take offense if people get annoyed at me and tell me to stfu. I'll understand, and tone down. But until then...) [ Tuesday, October 11, 2005 05:47: Message edited by: Muji ] -------------------- "Take time to listen to what is said without words, to obey the law too subtle to be written, to worship the unnameable and to embrace the unformed." -- Lao Tzu Posts: 124 | Registered: Monday, September 26 2005 07:00 |
|
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Tuesday, October 11 2005 08:55
Profile
Homepage
Muji, your posts wouldn't seem half as long if you didn't start a new paragraph with nearly every sentence. [ Tuesday, October 11, 2005 08:56: Message edited by: Kelandon ] -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
|
Warrior
Member # 6347
|
written Tuesday, October 11 2005 09:55
Profile
I doubt it would be much better otherwise... It's not just size that matter, it's what you do with it. ;) If I lumped it all together, sure, my posts would be physically smaller. But they're already pretty incoherent as it is most of the time. They'd become impossible to understand, and migraine-inducing (instead of only headache-inducing). ... Allow me to demonstrate. The following quote is my last post (arguably a small one) bunched up into a single paragraph: quote:How does that look? Smaller, yes. Much smaller. But as I said, that was a relatively short post to begin with. Imagine one of my longer ones, ranting about the perceived nature of reality, condensed like that... Would that be better? I could repeat the process with one of my longer, more "meaningful" posts, if you're not convinced. ;) I approach my posts from a nearly-artistic point of view. A space means as much as a word or character. Spaces and line-changes give rhythm. Which I use. It's not random. [ Tuesday, October 11, 2005 09:57: Message edited by: Muji ] -------------------- "Take time to listen to what is said without words, to obey the law too subtle to be written, to worship the unnameable and to embrace the unformed." -- Lao Tzu Posts: 124 | Registered: Monday, September 26 2005 07:00 |
|
...b10010b...
Member # 869
|
written Tuesday, October 11 2005 12:18
Profile
Homepage
There is such a thing as balance, you know. :P Kelandon is a textual aesthetician by profession. You would do well to listen to his advice. -------------------- My BoE Page Bandwagons are fun! Roots Hunted! Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00 |
|
Warrior
Member # 6347
|
written Tuesday, October 11 2005 18:25
Profile
This -is- me being balanced. :( I've been worse. Yes, hard as that may be to imagine. But I'm the guest here, not the host. It's not my place to judge what's appropriate or not. ~bows~ I should probably cut down on my postings, anyways. ~looks at post count~ Ayup... -------------------- "Take time to listen to what is said without words, to obey the law too subtle to be written, to worship the unnameable and to embrace the unformed." -- Lao Tzu Posts: 124 | Registered: Monday, September 26 2005 07:00 |
|
Shock Trooper
Member # 6068
|
written Tuesday, October 11 2005 20:44
Profile
Speaking of the issue of I.D., it reminds me how disappointed I am with the current situation of our modern public schools. We always try to teach children what "we know," without any room for free-thinking like the ancient Greek and Roman universities. Philosophy classes don't really exist anymore; they've become history and "social studies" classes. Adults are certainly allowed to study on campuses during their adult lives, but today's children do not have the privilege of developing in that state of free thought. Human values and independent ideas are no longer allowed, but they are restricted to being taught what little we know of science, mathematics, and language, and whatever the picky courts say is okay to teach. Did you know that it's actually illegal to have a "moment of silence" in a public school, for fear of someone offering up a silent prayer? -------------------- "Sometimes I get all hungry! And then I catch some flies! They fly into my webs! They are really yummy guys!" -Spider Posts: 209 | Registered: Monday, July 4 2005 07:00 |
|
Shaper
Member # 6292
|
written Tuesday, October 11 2005 20:53
Profile
Hmmm....Muji's mad at me for trying to outpost him. Muji's mad at me for not posting at all. Mad Muji: The Word Warrior. Coming soon to a theater near you. ... That's an astute observation, Spidey. We've come a long way since the ideal of the Renaissance Man where education and exploration for their own sake were valued, no? Now we crank out worker drones where all is focused on career and money. We're not taught to critically think or question the authorities of knowledge, though occasionally we pay lip service to it. Schools are socializing institutions as much as anything else. Hello Huxley. Hello Orwell. Bye Bye Brain. [ Tuesday, October 11, 2005 21:02: Message edited by: Synergy67 ] -------------------- [Insert Signature Here] Posts: 2009 | Registered: Monday, September 12 2005 07:00 |
|
Post Navel Trauma ^_^
Member # 67
|
written Tuesday, October 11 2005 22:28
Profile
Homepage
quote:I didn't know that, and I don't believe you. Two minutes with Google gave a link to an atricle about a law forcing schools to have a moment of silence being upheld by the courts. -------------------- Barcoorah: I even did it to a big dorset ram. desperance.net - Don't follow this link Posts: 1798 | Registered: Thursday, October 4 2001 07:00 |
|
Infiltrator
Member # 4248
|
written Tuesday, October 11 2005 23:16
Profile
quote:If we broaden the concept of "The One Source" to contain material things as well, science has already made a good theory about what "The One" could be. What it comes "To The One", I always like to look at things from that view point. quote:Actually, it seems that our "cousin" species, like gorillas and chimpansees also have a limited ability to contemplate the meaning of life, as well as some big whales and dolphins do. Plus, the research on this has merely began; it has already been proven that we're not alone on this planet, but it is yet unknown what we will find in the end. So discard the picture of human as the only sentient being already, it won't take you anywhere. I agree with the harmony/disharmony thing, though; it seems that only species who have reached the third level of consciousness (beings who are concious of self) with nimble fingers have been able to mess the balance of nature this badly. [ Wednesday, October 12, 2005 04:05: Message edited by: Frozen Feet ] -------------------- Somebody PLEASE turn the heat on. Posts: 617 | Registered: Tuesday, April 13 2004 07:00 |
|
By Committee
Member # 4233
|
written Wednesday, October 12 2005 05:25
Profile
The ID debate is political grand-standing at its worst. I agree with Kel - there are practical reasons for teaching evolution that ID lacks. Posts: 2242 | Registered: Saturday, April 10 2004 07:00 |
|
Infiltrator
Member # 4256
|
written Wednesday, October 12 2005 06:32
Profile
quote:No, but it was religion that held on to what progress had been made.(i.e early middle ages, the only centers of learning were religious ones, not because the people weren't 'free' but because they were too busy trying to survive.) Religion/Conservatism tends to try to hold on to the past, which isn't bad when the past is better then the present/immediate future(regress of the general state of humanity), but causes problems when 'progress' is being made. A car has to have both a brake and an engine to work well. :P Posts: 564 | Registered: Wednesday, April 14 2004 07:00 |
|
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Wednesday, October 12 2005 06:47
Profile
Homepage
quote:As Khoth has already said, this is entirely false, and I'd like to elaborate. The issue was whether one could have prayer in public schools, even student-led voluntary non-denominational prayer at an after-school event like a football game. As far as I know, that was ruled illegal, since there is nothing inherently religious about a football game (but if you want to have an after-school prayer club, that's okay) and a general prayer is considered coercive, since there would be situations in which virtually everyone else is praying, so you feel as though you have to. However, a moment of silence has been specifically upheld as being okay, since one can use it to pray, to review one's goals for the game, or to do nothing at all. quote:This is dramatic and fun to say but also not generally true. Most of my education has been centered on critical thinking. Philosophy was an important part of my middle school curriculum. And although I went to private schools, my experience is surely not unique or even necessarily unusual. And in college (which is, I believe, the only real school), no one forces you to become a business major or anything pre-professional. History majors and English majors and a variety of other specialists work on critical thinking and analysis. Physics classes put a great emphasis on putting you in the lab to see the actual experiments upon which your laws of physics are based (well, at least in theory they do). Don't get me wrong: many — and probably even most — public middle and high schools that I know of are conformity machines. But usually there are alternatives to the normal track at the local public high school (be they AP classes, separate programs, private schools, whatever), and colleges almost universally teach critical thinking over conformity. -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
|
Master
Member # 5977
|
written Wednesday, October 12 2005 06:47
Profile
Homepage
quote:Now Iprobably shouldn't start this, but I feel the enormous need to say this (I'm not anti-religion or something, for people who might think that after reading this post). You're right about the fact that religion generally holds on to the past. that is fine. And indeed, in times of progress religion can cause problems (like when Galilei discovered that the sun was the center of our galaxy and not the Earth. it was religion who said it was different and thereby halted progress for some years. Also, an other thing which is more current, is the fact that a religion itself doesn't seem to progress over time. Judaism and christianity seem to have passed their "bloody era", but now its the Islam that begins its "bloody era." What I'm saying is, that perhaps the Islam is a religion that is slower than other religions and still has to pass this era of terrorism against other religions (Christianity also had this bloody era, the crusades, but that was a long time ago. It already passed that era). Now I don't want to start a hole "muslims are good/bad" discussion, simply by the fact that people would most probably be offended, and we want to avoid that, don't we? -------------------- Thralni's almighty Avernum pages: My webpage, containing scenario's and graphics made by me (And maybe someday the homepage of the almighty chicken gods). Click here for more information on Olga's fortune teller kiosk Olga's fortune teller kiosk has been temporarily closed down, but you can contact the prophet with a PM - Was signed by the prophet of the almighty chicken gods, gods of everything that is a chicken. Work has begun on the Nephilian grammar and vocabulary guide! Posts: 3029 | Registered: Saturday, June 18 2005 07:00 |
|
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Wednesday, October 12 2005 06:51
Profile
Homepage
It has a lot more to do with the social and economic conditions prevalent in the Middle East than it does with Islam. There are Muslims from Morocco to Indonesia, and not all of them are having the same sorts of problems as the Middle Eastern ones. -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
|
By Committee
Member # 4233
|
written Wednesday, October 12 2005 06:55
Profile
That the monasteries unknowingly held on to the secrets of the classical era was more a fluke than anything else. The church cast civilization headlong into the abyss; it was only despite the church's intentions that civilization crawled back out. Posts: 2242 | Registered: Saturday, April 10 2004 07:00 |
|
Master
Member # 5977
|
written Wednesday, October 12 2005 06:58
Profile
Homepage
Social coditions yes, but only in the Middle east? no. Take for example my own country: Holland. We already had two political murders in maybe two years, while in maybe fifty years before that, we had none! Its mostly caused by the racisisme against mostly morocans, which, pardon me, I tend to understand. It are mostly morocans in Holland who actually are the troublemakers. However, this causes hatred among Morocans. Then there happens something like the murder of Van Gogh (does anybody still remember that?), and you have got hatred between two folks. The natives of the country, here the Dutch, say that they are frightened of the Morocans and have all kinds of prejudices, and the Morocans say that the Dutch are foolish rasists. Of course, the war in Iraq (which I really don't want to start about) also has its consequences. -------------------- Thralni's almighty Avernum pages: My webpage, containing scenario's and graphics made by me (And maybe someday the homepage of the almighty chicken gods). Click here for more information on Olga's fortune teller kiosk Olga's fortune teller kiosk has been temporarily closed down, but you can contact the prophet with a PM - Was signed by the prophet of the almighty chicken gods, gods of everything that is a chicken. Work has begun on the Nephilian grammar and vocabulary guide! Posts: 3029 | Registered: Saturday, June 18 2005 07:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 335
|
written Wednesday, October 12 2005 07:48
Profile
Homepage
Muji, one sentence per paragraph is not balance. It's easier to read than one mass of text with no breaks, but it's no the best way to format writing. North African and Middle Eastern Muslims carry their problems wherever the immigrate just like everyone else. Relocating doesn't suddenly change your nationality and outlook. Also, interestingly enough, Islam is about 500 years younger than Christianity, which means that it would be more accurate (though no more meaningful) to compare it to Christianity about five centuries ago. That puts us in the same vicinity as the creation of the Spanish Inquisition and Christian missionary rampages through the Americas. No, Islam isn't so unique. —Alorael, who feels a need to point out that religion has contributed virtually nothing scientifically. Preservation of the scientific findings of others is nice, but it doesn't excuse using those findings to suppress any further advances. As soon as education moved past the Church, education also surpassed the Church. Posts: 14579 | Registered: Saturday, December 1 2001 08:00 |
|
Shaper
Member # 6292
|
written Wednesday, October 12 2005 08:35
Profile
Kel, I'm thinking your schooling experience is far from trypical. EDIT: I was going to fix the typo, but I rather like it. [ Wednesday, October 12, 2005 09:52: Message edited by: Synergy67 ] -------------------- [Insert Signature Here] Posts: 2009 | Registered: Monday, September 12 2005 07:00 |
|
The Establishment
Member # 6
|
written Wednesday, October 12 2005 16:37
Profile
quote:Although ID itself supposedly does not say anything about the designer, however, it does require divine intervention. The problem is the old theological question of who created the designer. Suppose extraterrestrials did it, then who created the extraterrestrials? By the logic used by the IDists (which is flawed), it is impossible for complexity we observe to be created by something less complicated, the designer has to be more complex than us. Under the same logic that shows it is impossible for our complexity to arise on its own, it is also impossible for the designers complexity to arise on its own as well, at least in any acceptable age of the universe. Therefore, we are back to the realm of the supernatural. ID fails on being a scientific theory. It cannot be tested nor invalidated. Any discovery can be retrofitted to fit in the scope of ID. We discover a certain protein folding pattern in nature, well clearly it could be designed to be that way. The same could be said about planetary formation, the laws of atomic physics, and anything else. In other words, it adds little new, other than to say that we do not understand the mechanisms yet. Concluding that it had to be designed based on ignorance of the process is a dangerous exercise as it halts all frontiers of any human understanding. ID is at best philosophy, but it is not science once the issue is dissected. To those doubting the motivations of most IDers, I suggest searching for the Wedge Document. This reveals the real social nature of ID, not the scientific one. It starts with a conclusion and seeks to justify it any way possible, this is not how science works. quote:I suppose it depends on your definition of religion. Of course science is limited, it only deals with things that we can measure and influence. It says nothing about anything supernatural, neither does it say anything about pixies, dragons, Santa Claus, or the Greek gods. Why should it? Are these things important? Does pondering the existence of elves do anything but use up chemical bonds? That is not to say that pondering deep questions of philosophy is worthless; it has some value and can lead to new epistomological insights that may be of use. Science is NOT a faith under any traditional definition! The scientific method has assumptions, I grant you that. These assumptions might not be able to be "tested" or "proven" in the traditional way. However, I offer a "proof in the product" by looking at the world around you and all the good science has done. No other philosophy yet discovered has resulted in so much. I find it amusing and disturbing the amount of suspicion toward science in general society despite the fact that we all rely on it almost without question. The computer you are reading this on is a product of the scientific method, the dinner you did not have to go out and hunt and kill is the result of the same philosophy, the medicines you likely took at some point in your life are because of science. Without science we would at best be in the middle ages with short lifespans, poor education, and what today are considered inhospitable living conditions. As far as when science runs out, well, I doubt that will be for a long time. If that day does come, we will need a new kind of method that has yet to be devised, one that can incorporate and exceed science. -------------------- Your flower power is no match for my glower power!! Posts: 3726 | Registered: Tuesday, September 18 2001 07:00 |
|
Shock Trooper
Member # 4557
|
written Wednesday, October 12 2005 20:40
Profile
quote:Actually it is almost entirely true. Public schooling is a cesspool of apathy and incompetence, and has been since the days of John Dewey. Private schooling, which I have no experience in, does not seem to be, and it seems rather impractical and short-sighted to compare the two. Public schooling is more than intent on almost literally babysitting their students. In fact, in my high school the last action done of any consequence in the school was to strip the vending machines of any junk food. This completely insignificant and immaterial "concern" is one of many that plagues public schooling and undermines the quality of education given. Public schools are no longer concerned with education. Or if they are, those in charge are much too stupid to act to any effect. quote:Neither does public schooling, but that isn't the point. College, or I should say university, is so much different from public schooling, because these institutions are not just stations of learning, but establishments of progress. It is the people who attend and work at these places that push society into ever increasing heights of thought. These people learn, not because they believe they should, but because they know they must. This is what the point of education should be, but isn't. To impart that learning is not just a means to an end, but the means of living; to show that learning is what emancipates life from the shackles of mere existence; to convey that thought is what gives meaning to free will, this, this should be the goal of schooling. But it isn't. quote:This is what I have recently started calling (most likely in a caffeine induced bout of hyperactivity) the philosophy of a subject. This "philosophy" includes how the subject has been carried out, how it is currently carried out, and generally how progress is made in the particular area. The philosophy of science, the philosophy of english, the philosophy of history, etc., these are the subjects that modern public schooling attempts to teach through the current curriculum. They spout the facts of a subject, while trying to give a sense of the aforementioned philosophy. This subversive method, though I believe effective in the past, is failing due to one modern actuality. I have found that in my high school, the average teacher has never actually worked in their particular field other than to teach it. In fact, I have only had one science teacher that actually worked as a scientist. Furthermore, most teachers I have had came straight out of a local community college, which, as it turns out, makes the same mistakes public schooling does. The repetitive nature of this problem has obvious consequences. No teacher is able to teach the philosophy of a subject, and for the sake of their jobs, they don't. For a clear example, buy the Baron's AP Physics B book and the Baron's AP Physics C book. One was written by a physics professor at Brown, and the other was written by a high school teacher. quote:These alternatives either depend on the quality of teaching or one's income. AP courses are brilliant only because they can be done through independent study (except those that require lab time, such as AP Chemistry). Their tests are usually very well designed, and weighted practically. Unfortunately most students do not know how teach themselves, as this requires a great deal of critical thinking. So they take the class, and subject themselves to more of the same. Fortunately for me I had a scientist for an AP Chemistry teacher, and as a result most of my class (including yours truly) received fives. Now my school is not what you would call decent. It is, rather, one of the worst in its county. In fact, last year, the school considered a grade of 25% and over a D. Recently, I heard of another school in Mississippi whose grading scale was punctuated by 5% blocks, meaning 95% and up was an A, 90% and up was a B, etc. This school also had an AP Chemistry class, and, apparently, the only person who actually felt confident enough to take the test, got a 2. quote:But one must get admittance to a good university, and 18 years is much too long a time to wait for a decent education. -------------------------------------------------- From my experience of public schooling I believe I can safely say that if public schooling does not change soon, it will be the downfall of American society. Of course this raises the question, how to create change? The problem with teachers seems to be the biggest. The obvious answer to this would be to either raise teacher standards or train better teachers. Of course if better trained professionals wanted to be teachers, they would be teaching in our public schools. The fact is, there are too many opportunities out there for the trained professional, so affecting the selection of teachers would be rather unnecessary. Actually, touching the system in any way would do little good. It seems that the only way to improve the education of the average citizen is to delimit society's tendency to educate, and instead emphasize the individual's need to learn. Learning is intrinsically individualist, and so must be treated as the individual's responsibility. [ Thursday, October 13, 2005 13:20: Message edited by: KernelKnowledge12 ] Posts: 264 | Registered: Wednesday, June 16 2004 07:00 |