What is the "best" education?

Forums: Philosophy
Email this Topic • Print this Page

I decided to organize the perfect assortment of philosophies to pass onto 'the youth', so that maybe one day we can have enlightened, intelligent people everywhere, not just here online. :wink:

What are some of the philosophies you feel have the most to offer?

I include in "philosophies": science, languages, histories...whatever lessons you feel helped you the most. Thanks.

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 1,590 • Replies: 24

No top replies

If you want them to inherit the problems of the old world go right ahead. If you want to mold their minds so you can control them this idea of yours is a good one. But if you want them to become independent strong and intellectual you should simply give them problems. Puzzles, games, riddles. These things sharpen the mental faculties without the useless knowledge these philosophers preach.

Most philosophers have a somewhat twisted and unmodern view of the woman's place in the world. By teaching this to our children we are also giving them our demons.

0 Replies

Cyracuz

So you think that youth should not learn how to write and read. Better, they should not to learn how to speak. Acquiring a language, even by speaking it, means already mold their minds to meanings, concepts, ways of thinking. The same with counting.
And I think you must keep them away from other people, in order to avoid the contamination with social conventions.

0 Replies

Cyracuz: Val has a point: you cannot neglect teaching basic tools to the children, but your idea is, in moderation, a very good one.

The prospect of giving them logic puzzles and rubiks cubes was not something I had considered. Thanks.

Where did this come from:

Quote:

Most philosophers have a somewhat twisted and unmodern view of the woman's place in the world. By teaching this to our children we are also giving them our demons.

Would you care to elaborate? Thanks again.

0 Replies

The greatest tool we can lend our children is the ability to be critical. A healthy sense of skepticism is the trait I have considered most valuable so far in my life.

0 Replies

fredjones

Very good point. The real education has nothing to do with Cyracuz statement. Education is also to read Plato, Leibniz, Kant, but doing it critically. The same with science. With everything.

0 Replies

valwrote:

Quote:

So you think that youth should not learn how to write and read. Better, they should not to learn how to speak. Acquiring a language, even by speaking it, means already mold their minds to meanings, concepts, ways of thinking. The same with counting.
And I think you must keep them away from other people, in order to avoid the contamination with social conventions.

You're taking it far, and way past my point val. Smile

If you want a child to learn physics, you teach him physics, not everything about Albert Einstein or some other dead hero.

The trap I'd like to avoid is the same trap some christians fall into. They're too wrapped up in where Jesus Christ put his feet to notice where they're placing their own. Is it possible to teach children the ability of critical thought without telling them what they're supposed to be critical against?

The thought patterns of old philosopher's are products of the age they lived in. If female rights was a contemporary issue, chances are the philosopher has incorporated it into his philosophy. Some philosophers have an outright discriminating view of women. Some don't. But if you're going to chose what to teach the kids according to what pleases you, then anything might happen...

0 Replies

Cyracuz:
I think that giving more points of view, not less, is always the way to go. If you limit a child to only that which you believe, you are not doing him a service. Only by experiencing many avenues of thought, some good some bad, do we begin to formulate our own opinions about the world. At first, you do listen to your parents as a basis. In fact, studies show that the greatest predictor for political bent and religiosity come from your parents. That seems intuitive to me, although I might argue that on A2K the results would be quite different. Smile

I do agree with you that we should be generally more irreverent to the heroes of the past. We have taken normal people with human problems and turned them into the gods of human thought. They were not gods, just people who had gifts.

This line of yours was excellent:
"Is it possible to teach children the ability of critical thought without telling them what they're supposed to be critical against?" - Cyracuz

My answer is simple: be critical of everything. Let nothing pass unnoticed. That doesn't mean that we should never believe things for our own peace of mind, but always reserve judgement on the things which cannot be proven ("proven" in the scientific sense, not the absolute sense).

Besides, I just don't think it is okay to discount the teachings of philosophers based on their views of (what was current) society. Philosophers, more than anything, teach us how to think and to lay out arguments that normally are indecipherable emotions. In fact, I would say that the most ridiculous philosophers are the most useful, because their fallacies are laid bare for young minds to tear apart, if they are prepared to do so. Our job is to prepare them.

0 Replies

Good points fredjones.

Quote:

Philosophers, more than anything, teach us how to think and to lay out arguments that normally are indecipherable emotions.

I agree with this, but I am not sure I consider it a good thing. It's hard to learn a philosopher's critisism without getting his arguments as well.

As for the final words in the quote, I find that the truly great writers are not the ones that can convey new thoughts, but the one who can write down the thoughts everyone has in such a way that you go: "Oh of course. Why didn't I think og that!"

0 Replies

Cyracuz wrote:

I find that the truly great writers are not the ones that can convey new thoughts, but the one who can write down the thoughts everyone has in such a way that you go: "Oh of course. Why didn't I think of that!"

Too true! I love it when that happens. Very Happy

0 Replies

Ciracuz

Yes, I know I went too far.
But how can we be critical about something without knowing it?
In ancient Greece there was a deep segregation of women. But Plato and Epicurus didn't think that women were inferior to men. Aristotle did.
You see, even then, the problem existed and was discussed.
In Plato's Republic women have the same duties than men, even in military service. Aristotle thought they should stay at home taking care of the children. Epicurus accepted women, like men, in his Garden, for philosophical discussions.
Do you think that those perspectives are so distant from the modern discussion?

0 Replies

Val wrote:

Quote:

In ancient Greece there was a deep segregation of women. But Plato and Epicurus didn't think that women were inferior to men. Aristotle did.
You see, even then, the problem existed and was discussed.

Yes, and by teaching our children about Aristotle, Plato and Epicurus we are simultaneously teaching our children the problem. We are teaching them the idea of discrimination simply by arguing against it.

I do not think that the perspectives you mention are so distant from the modern discussions. But is that because the world has changed little over two thousand years, or is it because we're debating the problem with two thousand year old ideas?

0 Replies

Cyracuz

Quote:

I do not think that the perspectives you mention are so distant from the modern discussions. But is that because the world has changed little over two thousand years, or is it because we're debating the problem with two thousand year old ideas?

[/QUOTE]

The both. First, we can not escape the past. In part, we are made of it. And despite world changes, the fundamental problems are still the same.

0 Replies

Cyracuz wrote:

Yes, and by teaching our children about Aristotle, Plato and Epicurus we are simultaneously teaching our children the problem. We are teaching them the idea of discrimination simply by arguing against it.

I suspect that discrimination runs deeper than just what we are taught. Humans have a natural proclivity to discriminate, for it is what kept us alive long ago. I believe that education is the only way to keep discrimination in check. Unless we are vigilant it will continue to raise its ugly head.

Examine this argument:
Discrimination (and by extension, many if not all of our social ills) is only learned.
If we can stop teaching children about our evils, then the evils will cease to exist.

This begs the question: where did the evil come from originally?
Surely someone had to invent it. Therefore it can be invented again. Instead of repeating history, we can learn from it.

0 Replies

Good point fredjones. Unless evil is like darkness. It doesn't truly exist. It is only the absence of light.

Your suspicions about discrimination are understandable. I agree that discrimination may arise without any provocation, but if we teach solidarity as a goal instead of discrimination as something to be avoided we are better armed.

0 Replies

Cyr. Now that you put it that way, I find myself agreeing. Quit being so damn reasonable. :wink:

0 Replies

A line from your previous post caught my eye:

Quote:

Instead of repeating history, we can learn from it.

This is why we must remember. But there is a danger. We must remember the holocaust so we can make sure it never happens again, but in remembering we also keep some very monstrous ideologies alive. It's a pickle...

0 Replies

Cyracuz wrote:

Yes, and by teaching our children about Aristotle, Plato and Epicurus we are simultaneously teaching our children the problem. We are teaching them the idea of discrimination simply by arguing against it.

i have to agree with this on the basis that when i was growing up my mother never mentioned racism or sexism, never even to tell me it was wrong, so it was never ever an issue to me and i was only introduced to these ideas when i was older and in high school at which point they just seemed silly. i was brought up with the idea that people are just people, i think if you teach ideas of discrimination, even if you are telling children they are wrong, you are still introducing the idea that people are different in the first place.

0 Replies

My point exactly, benjamino. Well said. Smile

And that's the pickle. We must remember, so it never happens again, but by remembering we may be in danger of bringing old problems to new generations.

0 Replies

a pickle indeed. i intend (if i ever have kids) to do what worked for my mother and not even mention anything about things like that till they are maybe in high school or old enough for it to not be much of an influence on their beliefs. then it becomes just a subject and something they would never do themselves and would fight against if they saw it happeneing (hopefully)

0 Replies

What is the "best" education?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know