0
   

children deprived of philosophy

 
 
55hikky
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 Sep, 2010 08:19 am
@maxdancona,
maxdancona wrote:

And I have known people who have turned to strong drink.

what are you getting at..?
0 Replies
 
55hikky
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 6 Sep, 2010 08:47 am
@HexHammer,
..with much doubt and uncertainty...
the only thing i'm doubting is you at this point...
constant rhetoric, fallacies, insults.

do you honestly think i was in doubt when it says 1ton of x and 1 ton of y, which is heavier.. and i was doubting that they are the same?... really.... any biochem student would know this on the spot, and the fact that i've heard all of my physics professor say this once in the lecture doesn't help either...

i don't usually defend myself from insults, but i'd like to respect your comments, so i'm taking my time to actually respond to this... but come on hex.

"Yes, they'r equal in weight, but you arrive to the answer with much doubt and uncertainty."
assumption, insult, ad hominem,

"What you suggest is to waste time reinventing everything, when it's already there to read and learn, not very pragmatic. Least Ghandi I'm sure wouldn't be able to do what he did, without his education being a lawyer. "
Straw man; i did not say REINVENT EVERYTHING.. i said one class in ethics...
assumption/ appeal to belief, burden of proof: i'm sure.... without his education being a lawyer. yes, because all lawyers burn themselves to make a point. that's the point.
Division: i know you're not, but are you suggesting similar proofs for Rosa Parks and Socrates as well?

"What kids would spend days, weeks, months and even years thinking, they can read in just matter of minutes."
or we can teach kids something that would take years for them to internalize in matter of minutes...
but i agree with you on this point. which is why, IF we were going to make a class where some ethical or justice concepts are explored, we pick ones which can only be internalized with the appropriate concept to them at the point in their life.

"I put my money excatly where my mouth is, I put my own ass on the fireing line to go every step of my ideals and morals. I could easily have been fired on several occations meddeling in buisness beyond my own, when I could just look the other way and keep my job, I doubt any of you wousses in here have the guts to do what I have done through my life. "
not that i'm calling you a liar, but because i really have no clue whether you're 17, which would make this merely wishful thinking, or 71.
if writing who you are and trying to earn people's respect through explaining what type of person you are, you should spend more time writing more valid, vivid, insightful replies which reflect the type of person you are.

"I'm intelligent enough to make my own opinions and does not need anyone to manipulate me into popular opinions ..spare me. "
i don't doubt this, so you don't need to post it.
though i'll admit, i may have coerced you into writing this reflecting my older post, so i apologize for attacking you. i am guilty for fallacies myself; perhaps i didn't have a solid conclusion with logical premise.
well, i was just questioning how you came about to your opinion/conclusion so i guess this was appropriate reply to a degree..

-55hikky
55hikky
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 Sep, 2010 09:30 am
@littlek,
littlek wrote:

I haven't read all these posts in their entirety. And I don't know much about philosophy.

I am a teacher of middle school students (12-13 year olds). Most of the time it feels like we don't have enough time to teach the basics (math, eng, ss, sci). Foreign language is than highly recommended for most students. Sometimes kids don't have time for gym class (mine often have learning center in lieu of language or gym).

That being said..... we teach subjects by stacking information. The idea is to deconstruct a topic and break it into levels of understanding. Kids learn the basics one year and then add to the topic in following years.

What are the fundamental skills needed to begin the study of philosophy? Logic, cause and effect...? I really don't know. My guess is that a lot of these skills are being taught to students (with varying degrees of success) in the classes they have now. For example, a science lab involves the scientific procedures which seem to me to be good use of cause and effect, linear thinking, and other 'thinking' skills.

please don't read any of the replies.

none of the posts that I have replied to in the past two days even come close to the level of contribution you have made in these paragraphs.

i don't think i even have the credibility to even argue with this. everything i say would be rhetoric or wishful thinking in the face of this reply..

so...
relating to your reply
I feel that students do learn "cause and effect, linear thinking, and other 'thinking' skills" through various classes, OF COURSE. I do not doubt that. but I feel as if these skills are not really being applied to real life situations and problems enough. that was my concern...
----
sure if students were told:
the bucket is 14 cubic centimeters, water is being poured in at 5 gallons/minute, how long would it take? Logic, linear thinking, look at example 3.8, done. but life's problems aren't like this, where there's values and problems given, and one equation that fits this perfectly that you can just "plug and chug"...
---
i'm also bringing into the question of what you said about basics.
"Most of the time it feels like we don't have enough time to teach the basics (math, eng, ss, sci)."
perhaps we should re-think what "basics" is... if the TEACHERS, who actually knows this stuff, feel as if there are more things to drill into the heads than the children, how do you think the children feel about this pressure? is it healthy? is it working?
I guess it's working, from a teacher/professor's stand point; there's more and more university and college graduates every year, relative to the year before...
and i'm also bringing this about because, most universities are seeing the phenomenon of children not being "bright". I know you know since you are in the sphere of education, but others may not ; Harvard university actually sends out letters to their freshman students to slow down and enjoy life...(because some most intelligent and qualifying kids are failing to be insightful and creative.)
I, as a student, feel as if there are some redundancies in these "basic" classes that can be used to channel our time into something.... more tangible and constructive...

as of "stacking information," i was assuming this so called "philosophy class" would work sort of a "life skill" class, or a language class in high school where you just tell them what it is and that's all. Nothing serious, theoretical, and non-applicable to life (which is what i'm trying to avoid with this class)

i really don't know how this class will be structured. "What are the fundamental skills needed to begin the study of philosophy?"
I don't know, my guess is worse than yours would be.
but i think we need one. OR as i mention this for the first time,
teachers of every class actually makes their lecture based around life, only things that really help the children grow, weaving values, courage, ethics into every story they introduce...
but i remember high school vividly... teachers were fixated on saying facts and going on to meet the criteria required by state and neither parents have time to pack lunches so there's no hope there.

us students are being driven towards something the adults can't comprehend. school = success, that's how the adults today were brought up 50 years ago and it worked for them, why not their kids right? going to school used to mean guaranteed success, today, and so far in the near future, there isn't as much of success as we'd like to think.

and to be a pessimist, i don't think it even worked back then after stating all of the above
... look what they have done to the world...
wasteland, species disappearing, weather, cars, skies... how OBVIOUS does our failures have to be??? (well we focus only on the success i guess; scientific method ftw)
-55hikky

wow, this was long for a reply that i started with, "i have nothing to say..."
maybe i should edit...
55hikky
 
  1  
Reply Mon 6 Sep, 2010 09:35 am
@littlek,
and thank you very much for your time =]
you were very helpful to me, and to this discussion/question.
-55hikky
0 Replies
 
Ding an Sich
 
  2  
Reply Tue 7 Sep, 2010 07:00 am
@55hikky,
55hikky wrote:

Why is it that we do not teach the importance of communication, society, rationality, values and ethics to children?

They may be too young to understand some complex concepts of value, logic, aesthetics, metaphysics, epistemology but facts such as,

"why we have a society, and not anarchy."

can be told to them so they would have a better understanding of why rules exist and why not to break them, rather than doing something bad is followed by either a "no no" or a "biiig no no (with a spanking)" from your parents. Just being told that, "or else you're going to go to jail" really isn't a convincing reason to follow the rules set by some sentient beings from wherever no matter what age you are at for a rational being of any appreciable level of cognitive capacity we would like ourselves to be known to possess.

we are forced to take western civilization, economics, asian history, american history, plate tectonics, calculus; things most people never use in their life, yet something like history is taught over and over and over, even though none of them is absorbed by children because it's just not applicable to life (not at the age they are unless the teachers and professors are very talented in keeping children engaged during the lecture). why can't there be one class that gives a chance to see a small portion of reality and answer the common question of why and how.

i'm not a parent, but is this a flawed idea? do you think we should, or shouldn't?
Do we fear the possibility that children will rebel uncontrollably and lead to a era of chaos and rebellion if we teach children reality and how to see the world as is, and think for themselves without committing blindly to systems, tradition, custom...?


Wow I smell something of the "slippery slope fallacy", but I want to be sure. Do you think that if we teach philosophy that rebellion and chaos will ensue?

The reason why most people never apply certain subjects to their everyday life is because they CHOOSE not to. Everything that is taught in schools and colleges can be applicable to everyday life - even Calculus.

By the way what is "everyday life"? What does that even mean? Would it not be better to simply say "life"? Can I have an "every-other-day-life"?
55hikky
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Sep, 2010 07:42 am
@Ding an Sich,
Quote:

Wow I smell something of the "slippery slope fallacy", but I want to be sure. Do you think that if we teach philosophy that rebellion and chaos will ensue?

no not really, but what do i know. I was wondering what you guys thought.

Quote:

The reason why most people never apply certain subjects to their everyday life is because they CHOOSE not to. Everything that is taught in schools and colleges can be applicable to everyday life - even Calculus.

i really like this response. clever.
though i agree with this theoretical statement, i'll have to disagree on the ground of practicality.
i can make sure i name every single living animals i see by their phylum and species, like you say... but... no. I think only a handful of people will actually go through that, wouldn't you agree? and this level of severity will apply to others (such as what you have mentioned-calculus). I'm just saying this through observation.

I would also state that if the application of these discipline to life does increase happiness or fulfillment, more people would practice the art, just like you said. but people choose not to, why? excuse my assumption but could it be that that people who do not do so is because it does not make them "more happy" than if they were not to. But what if it does? ...
the answer to that will be integrated with your next quote.
...you said,
Quote:

Everything that is taught in schools and colleges can be applicable to everyday life - even Calculus.

philosophy IS taught in colleges (and perhaps schools too). so you're saying they ARE applicable to everyday life. why not start early? If you are implying that because philosophy is not taught in ,say, middle school, it is not applicable to life? that children in middle school don't perform any level of moral judgment, Justice evaluation, right and wrong, exposed to concept of self interest vs. upholding egalitarianism, authoritarian parents vs anarchy/permissive parenting? of course they are. if that is so, shouldn't it be taught in schools, according to your statement?
___
After revisiting the above two paragraphs, I seemed to of have twisted your quotes so that it is favorable in my argument, please make sure you point out my misinterpretations.
___
Quote:

By the way what is "everyday life"? What does that even mean? Would it not be better to simply say "life"? Can I have an "every-other-day-life"?

yea thanks for pointing that out. i think i was trying to say, life of a 'typical' citizen
so wtf is a typical citizen? i don't want to get too deep into it for i've never really pondered nor read any texts which attempt to or exclusively define one, i hope you can apply your rational definition of what a 'typical' citizen is. my definition would be; has a house, a job, eats, engages in conversations as well as public affairs, has hobbies... =b. of course this would be region specific and that is fine.
i wanted to point out that it had to help out the general public the majority. I think it would be faulty to take a small sample of people and assume all others are like such,( i.e. every human being works at a coffee shop) and try and build any rules based on them.
General enough to be applied to the general. Malleable and plastic enough to be tailored to the individual's need.

"Every-other-day-life" i'm sure you can lol ^ ^. i'll be interested to hear your definition, and experience of it if you decide to engage in its nature.

thanks for your input in this discussion.
-55hikky
HexHammer
 
  0  
Reply Tue 7 Sep, 2010 08:31 am
@55hikky,
Trying to speak on your terms and ideologies, a limited kind of philosophy should be nessesary for kids, but not in the traditional sense of the word, but here in Denmark we belive in very free thinking, usually we encourage people to think out of the box. We should teach kids how to think for themselves, not belive in marketing ploys, spindoctors ..etc. They should know the meaning of "optimal" and "ideal" scenarios ..etc.

Right now I think schools is stone age, relying on outdated doctrins, kids should understand the relevance of their schooling. Just see how many unhealthy diets there are, no veggies ..no wonder so many gets hemorage, yet we can do very advanced math ..but does not understand much of basic needs as humans.

..foolish.
Sentience
 
  4  
Reply Tue 7 Sep, 2010 09:42 am
I'm thirteen, and I find myself not at all deprived of philosophy. It's within reach for those who wish for it.
55hikky
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Sep, 2010 10:32 am
@Sentience,
That is wonderful, I MUST ask you a few questions. if you don't know, or don't want to answer that is fine, just answer the ones you feel comfortable answering.

1. what do you believe led you to "wish for [philosophy]?
2. is the abundance of philosophy a positive or negative contribution to your life?
3. do you believe your fellow children which surround you get less, equal, or more exposure and/or desire for philosophy as you do?

-55hikky
55hikky
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Sep, 2010 10:46 am
@HexHammer,
HexHammer wrote:

Trying to speak on your terms and ideologies, a limited kind of philosophy should be nessesary for kids, but not in the traditional sense of the word, but here in Denmark we belive in very free thinking, usually we encourage people to think out of the box. We should teach kids how to think for themselves, not belive in marketing ploys, spindoctors ..etc. They should know the meaning of "optimal" and "ideal" scenarios ..etc.

Right now I think schools is stone age, relying on outdated doctrins, kids should understand the relevance of their schooling. Just see how many unhealthy diets there are, no veggies ..no wonder so many gets hemorage, yet we can do very advanced math ..but does not understand much of basic needs as humans.

..foolish.


how does your culture "encourage to think outside of the box"? an entire country harbor the unified "belive in very free thinking"? is this done through peers? teachers? parents? entertainment? etc.?

when you say, "we should teach kids how to think for themselves..."
who or what is "we"? teachers? parents? all humans of society?

" They should know the meaning of "optimal" and "ideal" scenarios ..etc."
yes they should!!! but do they???

"Right now I think schools is stone age, relying on outdated doctrins, kids should understand the relevance of their schooling"
i think so too, which is why i am trying to see if there is a renovation that can be made. someone, it may be you, said in a previous reply that, "schools should not be a place to teach ethics" or a statement similar in context. i used to agree with this as well; i think it's almost impossible for the current school system to do more than what it is doing right now. it has reached its potential in contribution to society... or so it may seem. so instead of implementing the burden on the parents (since here in US parents are inept as ever at teaching children (the economy does not allow for such luxury)) i figured school was more efficient and effective...

I understand that problems with educations and society lies elsewhere, but i think, with my level of insight, or should i say even with my level of insight, it is almost obvious that having an ethics and values class is perhaps beneficial for us...

-55hikky
Sentience
 
  2  
Reply Tue 7 Sep, 2010 11:04 am
@55hikky,
1. The arrogant desire to show off my intelligence led to me realizing how, for all my smarts, I knew an incredibly little amount. This lead to Wikipedia browsing, and one thing led to another...

2. It certainly hasn't hurt me in any way, and I like the idea that I actually have to think about my beliefs and reason for them, but I can't say it was really a positive either, as I would have been just as happy not doing it at all.

3. Most definitely.
55hikky
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Sep, 2010 11:26 am
@Sentience,
Sentience wrote:

1. The arrogant desire to show off my intelligence led to me realizing how, for all my smarts, I knew an incredibly little amount. This lead to Wikipedia browsing, and one thing led to another...

2. It certainly hasn't hurt me in any way, and I like the idea that I actually have to think about my beliefs and reason for them, but I can't say it was really a positive either, as I would have been just as happy not doing it at all.

3. Most definitely.

if you are really into philosophy, but you're not committed enough to buy any text books, go to plato.stanford.edu they have a philosophy encyclopedia.

i'm guessing the type of 'philosophy' you looked into was a blend of logic, argument structuring, and critical thinking.. what other branches of philosophy is appealing to you besides these?

and for #3 is it safe to assume you mean most students around you desire philosophy?

so then i get to the heart of the thread.
do you think an class that will teach you everything you learned by yourself would be helpful? a class that will not only teach you everything you learned on wiki, but have other views and opinions of your classmates as well as a more detailed and well structured syllabus that will enhance your understanding of whatever you were interested in.
or
are you content with the level of information you gained from wiki.
-55hikky
0 Replies
 
Ding an Sich
 
  2  
Reply Tue 7 Sep, 2010 11:45 am
@55hikky,
I did not say that "philosophy is not applicable to life" because it is not taught at a school or a college. Philosophy is necessary for a man to carry out his life. But this is a completely different topic for another day.

Philosophy should be taught in schools - this is a matter that we have no disagreement on.

By the way my school did indeed teach philosophy (Logic, Ethics, Worldview, Apologetics). In this case your argument fails when you say that, "If you are implying that because philosophy is not taught in ,say, middle school, it is not applicable to life?" In this case it was indeed taught in middle school; my middle school for that matter.

I was also not limiting philosophy. I was merely giving an example of a subject that can be applied to "everyday life", e.g. Calculus.

Be careful to not put any words in my mouth.



HexHammer
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Sep, 2010 12:03 pm
@55hikky,
When you try to quote me, then quote me, not make up quotes, thanks.
55hikky
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Sep, 2010 12:04 pm
@Ding an Sich,
Ding an Sich wrote:

I did not say that "philosophy is not applicable to life" because it is not taught at a school or a college. Philosophy is necessary for a man to carry out his life. But this is a completely different topic for another day.

Philosophy should be taught in schools - this is a matter that we have no disagreement on.

By the way my school did indeed teach philosophy (Logic, Ethics, Worldview, Apologetics). In this case your argument fails when you say that, "If you are implying that because philosophy is not taught in ,say, middle school, it is not applicable to life?" In this case it was indeed taught in middle school; my middle school for that matter.

I was also not limiting philosophy. I was merely giving an example of a subject that can be applied to "everyday life", e.g. Calculus.

Be careful to not put any words in my mouth.



great! not only do you agree on this thread, but you actually experienced something that is closest to what this thread is about.

were those philosophy classes popular in middle school, or was it something that you knew existed, yet never crossed your mind to take at the time?

is there anything more you can tell me about these philosophy classes in your middle school?


oh yes, and that quote, i meant the life of a middle school student since we clarified that the classes were offered at college level so i had shifted the topic to pre-college education/life. anyways.

-55hikky
Ding an Sich
 
  2  
Reply Tue 7 Sep, 2010 03:01 pm
@55hikky,
Well I went to a Christian School that made it mandatory to take these classes.
Logic was a very basic intro to logic which involved Aristotelian logic. Ethics, Apologetics, and Worldview were centered around a Christian Weltanschauung. Very basic overall, but enough to get those brain juices flowing.

Nothing of real excitement unfortunately.
littlek
  Selected Answer
 
  5  
Reply Tue 7 Sep, 2010 04:58 pm
@55hikky,
I think you are right, in general, about a few things:
1) We do teach to the state standards more than most of us like (but we do it all the same, most of us).
2) Kids are losing their creative edge in the world in part because of the above (due to the lack of creative thinking things through time).
3) Parents are also overwhelmed with school - homework and the amount of stuff to organize.


I think this lack of free-thinking time starts young - before school age. Children seem to be scheduled for every minute of the day, or else they are sitting in front of a screen playing games or watching videos. I feel like my generation (I'm 41) was the last generation to enjoy hours of playing in the dirt, getting lost in the woods, playing long board games involving strategy.....

Our school just reduced the amount of homework that teachers can give (not by much), and ALSO jumped the math curriculum up a notch at the same time. Kids have more and more stress and anxiety disorders, less common sense (it seems), fewer free hours during the day, and many aren't getting enough sleep.
HexHammer
 
  0  
Reply Tue 7 Sep, 2010 11:31 pm
@littlek,
Wise words indeed.
0 Replies
 
55hikky
 
  1  
Reply Wed 8 Sep, 2010 06:39 am
@littlek,
So perhaps with different approach, we can both agree on the fact that 'philosophy' classes utilized simply as a tool for self-understanding, questioning different issues, encouraging critical thinking and so on with minimum dependence on teacher's points of view would not be harmful, if not beneficial given the state of extreme emphasis on memorization, ahem*, excuse me, education.
Seeing this 'evolution' in the ... i don't know what the word is.... social standards in education??
what do YOU suggest we do?
i see one was that your school attempted to decrease the amount of homework.
whatelse would you suggest,
1. within realistic parameters, and
2. theory/idealistic/wishful thinking as a teacher (i.e.... $1billion dollars to schools everyday... i don't know..)

----
everything below is just an 'conversation' i will be holding with you, not too relevant to the reply
---
well I myself will soon stop coming here since I have found answers I have been looking for.
I am not aware what region you are from, but I am also active through a social community based website called facebook, and i have joined a group called

The Learning Revolution

which are all people who see the increasing potency in both parents and school to hinder the children's potential due to emerging circumstances that they are both ill prepared for but have better insight and idea by a million folds than my little "philosophy class" proposition. they have proven to be much more helpful than even the most insightful and inspiring individuals here... such as hexhammer...

also, being a philosophy major, I asked all of my various philosophy professors about children and teaching philosophy. They are perfect since they
1. directly relate to the type of people and children I grew up with which were the source of my inspiration
2. they are all parents and grandparents who have experience in teaching their children and grandchildren morals, justice, ethics, and logic at very, VERY early ages; ages which defy Kohlberg or Plato's theory.

unlike all the people here, besides you, who try to answer me only through wikipedia is very, very shallow and useless for the sort of 'radical' thinking and expression. and quite frankly, i now see that what i am trying to do is exactly to prevent the nurturing of these type of people, who stick to 'facts' and can't accept anything else...

so this discussion I have started was therapeutic to me in multi-dimension.

-55hikky
0 Replies
 
55hikky
 
  1  
Reply Wed 8 Sep, 2010 06:47 am
@Ding an Sich,
yes, as this thread digs deeper into the issue several hurdles surface; qualified teachers capable of teaching this sort of class, (whatever 'this' is) and ability to teach something that is appreciated by the children to be "practical" which I aim to be...

what i'm trying to propose is really something that HAS to be taught by parents (at least traditionally) and 'formalizing,' 'standardizing,' 'criteria-izing' this so that it can be taught to every children EFFECTIVELY becomes very difficult, especially now when the concept is still in the idea stage before design, engineering, and reforming. my idea is very... stupid.

thanks for your contribution for your thread. I enjoyed your insight!!

-55hikky
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How should we improve the school system? - Discussion by alexpari1
Teachers in School - Discussion by RyanO45
School Incident - What can I do? - Question by Kyle-M
School Uniforms Get Shorter - Question by harpazo
Kid wouldn't fight, died of injuries - Discussion by gungasnake
Police questioning students at school. - Question by boomerang
Is this weird, or normal? - Question by boomerang
Public school zero tolerance policies. - Question by boomerang
10yr Old Refuses to Recite Pledge - Discussion by Diest TKO
You learned that in school!? - Question by boomerang
 
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 01/18/2022 at 08:32:36