|
|
On October 31 2012 08:13 jdseemoreglass wrote:
Wow sam!zdat, I think I just found you on google. o.O You have a website in your name?
Don't tell anybody
edit: haven't updated that shit in a while
|
Ah ok.
On October 31 2012 08:18 XoXiDe wrote:
wow, I go eat and this thread takes another strange turn, where will it go next?!
Disneyland.
|
wow, I go eat and this thread takes another strange turn, where will it go next?!
|
On October 31 2012 08:14 sam!zdat wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2012 08:08 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 07:56 sam!zdat wrote:Yes, well put jd. But we don't educate people so they can fill the holes in better ways. Also we took away people's religion and now all they have is steven jobs. On October 31 2012 07:51 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 07:45 sam!zdat wrote:On October 31 2012 07:38 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 07:34 sam!zdat wrote:On October 31 2012 07:29 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 07:25 sam!zdat wrote:On October 31 2012 07:24 Risen wrote:
[quote]
What's wrong with the situation you have come up with? Is there some sort of purpose you have in mind for the human race? As far as I can tell we don't really have any purpose besides the ones we create for ourselves. yes, but which one do we want to create? Is it this fucking corporate theme park? I hope not, because that's damn pathetic. I'd like to make a civilization worth being proud of, and I'll tell you right now it doesn't involve any marketing consultants. edit: On October 31 2012 07:25 mynameisgreat11 wrote:
samzdat, you've seen "They Live", right? no what is that Why aren't you proud of the current civilization we have? It seems you feel we should all be grateful for what we have since we're better off than we once were. But what's wrong with not being satisfied with the present and wanting more? What's wrong with the "corporate theme park" as you put it? What? you *like* the theme park? Get what you deserve, I guess. I think it's fucking banal, and it makes me embarrassed to think of what the future will think of our "culture."
Why aren't you proud of what we've created? The only reason I have to be unhappy with the United States as it stands is our current social problems. We have a country in which I'm able to take advantage of my hard work in school and prosper. Why aren't you proud of the marketing consultants? They've mastered the art of manipulating fools. Doesn't seem so bad to me.
I am proud, actually. I just think it's time for the next step. As far as the marketing consultants... let's not go there. What do you mean by get what you deserve? Not really as important by why you think it's banal, though. (Why do you think it's banal) Because everything is designed to make you want to buy things... if that's not banal I don't know what is.
It's not that I like the theme park, it's that I don't think it's there at all.
That's because you've mistaken it for reality Also, from my point of view here in the mountains I don't see a corporate theme park, but maybe you're right. Oh, just wait, they're coming for you. Wat... ಠ_ಠ That seems umm... a bit paranoid? Ok. But don't say I didn't tell you so. Show nested quote +On October 31 2012 08:05 jdseemoreglass wrote:how to think about the question of what to value You've lost me now. Can't interpret the meaning of this statement, or it's implications. Sorry. you don't tell them WHAT to value, you teach them how to do philosophy. How to ask questions about what things should be valued and to think about them in a rigorous way. You teach them the history of the various things that people have thought about values, and you have them read the texts in which these various positions and arguments were set forth. If you teach them WHAT to value, that is just indoctrination. But if you teach them how to think about what to value, that is education. @Kwark: If you get me started about religion that will derail the thread even more than I normally do. But a) your little story about religion is typical smug pomo dismissal of thousands of years of human thought and b) I fail to see how "catholicism has its moments" can be understood as a ringing endorsement of same
By doing all the bolded portion you're imprinting your own biases on them. Also, you're pretty much saying all religions are indoctrinating their followers when you say, "If you teach them WHAT to value, that is just indoctrination."
You seem to have the problem most people do when they have opinions they can't sustain under questioning. You have no sources and no research to prove anything. All your opinions are based on how you feel. Guess what? I don't feel like you do. Your saying "But don't say I didn't tell you so" isn't getting us anywhere, and you're only going to convince fools to follow you.
|
Oh, you mean in his real name.
|
On October 31 2012 08:07 KwarK wrote:
Nobody took away anyone's religion. It died because it was shit. It was shit because it was run primarily by human beings as cynical and amoral as the rest of society.
I find it odd that you look to Catholicism, the religion that invented the idea that you get tortured after death unless you give them money and that mistreating your fellow man can be negated for a fee, as the highpoint of culture and some opposite of consumerism. Back then morality was for sale, heaven could be bought with a chantry, sins were proportionate to your income and challenging the system, the way you condemn consumerism, was heresy punished by death.
Humans are as greedy now as they were then, no better, no worse. They're just slightly better educated so you can't sell them the idea of paradise anymore, now you have to patent rounded corners and sell them some sweat shop labour.
The amount of stupid is so great, let me feed on your stupidity.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
On October 31 2012 08:21 Etrnity wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2012 08:07 KwarK wrote:
Nobody took away anyone's religion. It died because it was shit. It was shit because it was run primarily by human beings as cynical and amoral as the rest of society.
I find it odd that you look to Catholicism, the religion that invented the idea that you get tortured after death unless you give them money and that mistreating your fellow man can be negated for a fee, as the highpoint of culture and some opposite of consumerism. Back then morality was for sale, heaven could be bought with a chantry, sins were proportionate to your income and challenging the system, the way you condemn consumerism, was heresy punished by death.
Humans are as greedy now as they were then, no better, no worse. They're just slightly better educated so you can't sell them the idea of paradise anymore, now you have to patent rounded corners and sell them some sweat shop labour. The amount of stupid is so great, let me feed on your stupidity.
Instead of posting this, why don't you post what's wrong with what he said?
There's a reason people never take you seriously. Maybe if you backed up your statements?
Edit: Furthermore, you're what's wrong with most discussions in general. You people need to learn how to convince people who actually have something between their ears. Saying something will convince fools. Saying something and backing it up with reason will convince someone who's intelligent. You can't expect someone to simply trust what you say.
|
On October 31 2012 08:19 Risen wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2012 08:14 sam!zdat wrote:On October 31 2012 08:08 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 07:56 sam!zdat wrote:Yes, well put jd. But we don't educate people so they can fill the holes in better ways. Also we took away people's religion and now all they have is steven jobs. On October 31 2012 07:51 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 07:45 sam!zdat wrote:On October 31 2012 07:38 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 07:34 sam!zdat wrote:On October 31 2012 07:29 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 07:25 sam!zdat wrote:
[quote]
yes, but which one do we want to create? Is it this fucking corporate theme park? I hope not, because that's damn pathetic. I'd like to make a civilization worth being proud of, and I'll tell you right now it doesn't involve any marketing consultants.
edit:
[quote]
no what is that Why aren't you proud of the current civilization we have? It seems you feel we should all be grateful for what we have since we're better off than we once were. But what's wrong with not being satisfied with the present and wanting more? What's wrong with the "corporate theme park" as you put it? What? you *like* the theme park? Get what you deserve, I guess. I think it's fucking banal, and it makes me embarrassed to think of what the future will think of our "culture."
Why aren't you proud of what we've created? The only reason I have to be unhappy with the United States as it stands is our current social problems. We have a country in which I'm able to take advantage of my hard work in school and prosper. Why aren't you proud of the marketing consultants? They've mastered the art of manipulating fools. Doesn't seem so bad to me.
I am proud, actually. I just think it's time for the next step. As far as the marketing consultants... let's not go there. What do you mean by get what you deserve? Not really as important by why you think it's banal, though. (Why do you think it's banal) Because everything is designed to make you want to buy things... if that's not banal I don't know what is.
It's not that I like the theme park, it's that I don't think it's there at all.
That's because you've mistaken it for reality Also, from my point of view here in the mountains I don't see a corporate theme park, but maybe you're right. Oh, just wait, they're coming for you. Wat... ಠ_ಠ That seems umm... a bit paranoid? Ok. But don't say I didn't tell you so. On October 31 2012 08:05 jdseemoreglass wrote:how to think about the question of what to value You've lost me now. Can't interpret the meaning of this statement, or it's implications. Sorry. you don't tell them WHAT to value, you teach them how to do philosophy. How to ask questions about what things should be valued and to think about them in a rigorous way. You teach them the history of the various things that people have thought about values, and you have them read the texts in which these various positions and arguments were set forth. If you teach them WHAT to value, that is just indoctrination. But if you teach them how to think about what to value, that is education. @Kwark: If you get me started about religion that will derail the thread even more than I normally do. But a) your little story about religion is typical smug pomo dismissal of thousands of years of human thought and b) I fail to see how "catholicism has its moments" can be understood as a ringing endorsement of same By doing all the bolded portion you're imprinting your own biases on them. Also, you're pretty much saying all religions are indoctrinating their followers when you say, "If you teach them WHAT to value, that is just indoctrination."
Yes, that is why you teach them to do comparative religion, which is a kind of philosophy. If my bias is toward education and critical thought, I'll happily own that bias. That's why I'm not a postmodernist.
You seem to have the problem most people do when they have opinions they can't sustain under questioning. You have no sources and no research to prove anything.
Dude, fuck you. I spend my life reading books about questions like these. I'm not citing sources and making arguments with scholarly apparatus because we're talking philosophy on the internet and that's not what you do and it would be a waste of my time. These aren't the kind of things you post a link to some internet article or wikipedia and go "SEE!??" I'm saying what I think. I've come to this opinion because I'm obsessed with cultural criticism and that's what I do with my life. I've got nothing to prove to you. Yes, this is based on how I feel - it would be fucking dishonest if it weren't. I'm expressing myself. Why don't you tell me how YOU feel about it and we'll have a discussion.
|
On October 31 2012 08:24 sam!zdat wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2012 08:19 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 08:14 sam!zdat wrote:On October 31 2012 08:08 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 07:56 sam!zdat wrote:Yes, well put jd. But we don't educate people so they can fill the holes in better ways. Also we took away people's religion and now all they have is steven jobs. On October 31 2012 07:51 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 07:45 sam!zdat wrote:On October 31 2012 07:38 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 07:34 sam!zdat wrote:On October 31 2012 07:29 Risen wrote:
[quote]
Why aren't you proud of the current civilization we have? It seems you feel we should all be grateful for what we have since we're better off than we once were. But what's wrong with not being satisfied with the present and wanting more? What's wrong with the "corporate theme park" as you put it?
What? you *like* the theme park? Get what you deserve, I guess. I think it's fucking banal, and it makes me embarrassed to think of what the future will think of our "culture."
Why aren't you proud of what we've created? The only reason I have to be unhappy with the United States as it stands is our current social problems. We have a country in which I'm able to take advantage of my hard work in school and prosper. Why aren't you proud of the marketing consultants? They've mastered the art of manipulating fools. Doesn't seem so bad to me.
I am proud, actually. I just think it's time for the next step. As far as the marketing consultants... let's not go there. What do you mean by get what you deserve? Not really as important by why you think it's banal, though. (Why do you think it's banal) Because everything is designed to make you want to buy things... if that's not banal I don't know what is.
It's not that I like the theme park, it's that I don't think it's there at all.
That's because you've mistaken it for reality Also, from my point of view here in the mountains I don't see a corporate theme park, but maybe you're right. Oh, just wait, they're coming for you. Wat... ಠ_ಠ That seems umm... a bit paranoid? Ok. But don't say I didn't tell you so. On October 31 2012 08:05 jdseemoreglass wrote:how to think about the question of what to value You've lost me now. Can't interpret the meaning of this statement, or it's implications. Sorry. you don't tell them WHAT to value, you teach them how to do philosophy. How to ask questions about what things should be valued and to think about them in a rigorous way. You teach them the history of the various things that people have thought about values, and you have them read the texts in which these various positions and arguments were set forth. If you teach them WHAT to value, that is just indoctrination. But if you teach them how to think about what to value, that is education. @Kwark: If you get me started about religion that will derail the thread even more than I normally do. But a) your little story about religion is typical smug pomo dismissal of thousands of years of human thought and b) I fail to see how "catholicism has its moments" can be understood as a ringing endorsement of same By doing all the bolded portion you're imprinting your own biases on them. Also, you're pretty much saying all religions are indoctrinating their followers when you say, "If you teach them WHAT to value, that is just indoctrination." Yes, that is why you teach them to do comparative religion, which is a kind of philosophy. If my bias is toward education and critical thought, I'll happily own that bias. That's why I'm not a postmodernist. Show nested quote +
You seem to have the problem most people do when they have opinions they can't sustain under questioning. You have no sources and no research to prove anything.
Dude, fuck you. I spend my life reading books about questions like these. I'm not citing sources and making arguments with scholarly apparatus because we're talking philosophy on the internet and that's not what you do and it would be a waste of my time. These aren't the kind of things you post a link to some internet article or wikipedia and go "SEE!??" I'm saying what I think. I've come to this opinion because I'm obsessed with cultural criticism and that's what I do with my life. I've got nothing to prove to you. Yes, this is based on how I feel - it would be fucking dishonest if it weren't. I'm expressing myself. Why don't you tell me how YOU feel about it and we'll have a discussion.
Then why are you here? Go away.
Edit: bolded to what I was responding to. I think I've made it clear how I feel in this thread. Economically I'm a selfish actor and will support anything that increases my wealth. Socially I feel everyone deserves their fair shot b/c doing otherwise weakens humanity. Social issues are more important to me than economic ones because I'm already happy with where I am economically.
|
On October 31 2012 08:21 Etrnity wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2012 08:07 KwarK wrote:
Nobody took away anyone's religion. It died because it was shit. It was shit because it was run primarily by human beings as cynical and amoral as the rest of society.
I find it odd that you look to Catholicism, the religion that invented the idea that you get tortured after death unless you give them money and that mistreating your fellow man can be negated for a fee, as the highpoint of culture and some opposite of consumerism. Back then morality was for sale, heaven could be bought with a chantry, sins were proportionate to your income and challenging the system, the way you condemn consumerism, was heresy punished by death.
Humans are as greedy now as they were then, no better, no worse. They're just slightly better educated so you can't sell them the idea of paradise anymore, now you have to patent rounded corners and sell them some sweat shop labour. The amount of stupid is so great, let me feed on your stupidity.
Everything you bolded is fact.
|
On October 31 2012 08:19 Risen wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2012 08:14 sam!zdat wrote:On October 31 2012 08:08 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 07:56 sam!zdat wrote:Yes, well put jd. But we don't educate people so they can fill the holes in better ways. Also we took away people's religion and now all they have is steven jobs. On October 31 2012 07:51 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 07:45 sam!zdat wrote:On October 31 2012 07:38 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 07:34 sam!zdat wrote:On October 31 2012 07:29 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 07:25 sam!zdat wrote:
[quote]
yes, but which one do we want to create? Is it this fucking corporate theme park? I hope not, because that's damn pathetic. I'd like to make a civilization worth being proud of, and I'll tell you right now it doesn't involve any marketing consultants.
edit:
[quote]
no what is that Why aren't you proud of the current civilization we have? It seems you feel we should all be grateful for what we have since we're better off than we once were. But what's wrong with not being satisfied with the present and wanting more? What's wrong with the "corporate theme park" as you put it? What? you *like* the theme park? Get what you deserve, I guess. I think it's fucking banal, and it makes me embarrassed to think of what the future will think of our "culture."
Why aren't you proud of what we've created? The only reason I have to be unhappy with the United States as it stands is our current social problems. We have a country in which I'm able to take advantage of my hard work in school and prosper. Why aren't you proud of the marketing consultants? They've mastered the art of manipulating fools. Doesn't seem so bad to me.
I am proud, actually. I just think it's time for the next step. As far as the marketing consultants... let's not go there. What do you mean by get what you deserve? Not really as important by why you think it's banal, though. (Why do you think it's banal) Because everything is designed to make you want to buy things... if that's not banal I don't know what is.
It's not that I like the theme park, it's that I don't think it's there at all.
That's because you've mistaken it for reality Also, from my point of view here in the mountains I don't see a corporate theme park, but maybe you're right. Oh, just wait, they're coming for you. Wat... ಠ_ಠ That seems umm... a bit paranoid? Ok. But don't say I didn't tell you so. On October 31 2012 08:05 jdseemoreglass wrote:how to think about the question of what to value You've lost me now. Can't interpret the meaning of this statement, or it's implications. Sorry. you don't tell them WHAT to value, you teach them how to do philosophy. How to ask questions about what things should be valued and to think about them in a rigorous way. You teach them the history of the various things that people have thought about values, and you have them read the texts in which these various positions and arguments were set forth. If you teach them WHAT to value, that is just indoctrination. But if you teach them how to think about what to value, that is education. @Kwark: If you get me started about religion that will derail the thread even more than I normally do. But a) your little story about religion is typical smug pomo dismissal of thousands of years of human thought and b) I fail to see how "catholicism has its moments" can be understood as a ringing endorsement of same By doing all the bolded portion you're imprinting your own biases on them. Also, you're pretty much saying all religions are indoctrinating their followers when you say, "If you teach them WHAT to value, that is just indoctrination." You seem to have the problem most people do when they have opinions they can't sustain under questioning. You have no sources and no research to prove anything. All your opinions are based on how you feel. Guess what? I don't feel like you do. Your saying "But don't say I didn't tell you so" isn't getting us anywhere, and you're only going to convince fools to follow you.
By truly teaching people how to ask questions and think about questions, you are not indoctrinating them. Indoctrination can masquerade under the guise of education, but legitimate teaching about critical thinking is the farthest you can get from indoctrination. Just exposing people to something doesn't indoctrinate them, especially if you frame it as an exercise in evaluating the quality of the thing you're exposing them to.
|
On October 31 2012 08:25 Risen wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2012 08:24 sam!zdat wrote:On October 31 2012 08:19 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 08:14 sam!zdat wrote:On October 31 2012 08:08 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 07:56 sam!zdat wrote:Yes, well put jd. But we don't educate people so they can fill the holes in better ways. Also we took away people's religion and now all they have is steven jobs. On October 31 2012 07:51 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 07:45 sam!zdat wrote:On October 31 2012 07:38 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 07:34 sam!zdat wrote:
[quote]
What? you *like* the theme park? Get what you deserve, I guess. I think it's fucking banal, and it makes me embarrassed to think of what the future will think of our "culture."
[quote]
I am proud, actually. I just think it's time for the next step.
As far as the marketing consultants... let's not go there. What do you mean by get what you deserve? Not really as important by why you think it's banal, though. (Why do you think it's banal) Because everything is designed to make you want to buy things... if that's not banal I don't know what is.
It's not that I like the theme park, it's that I don't think it's there at all.
That's because you've mistaken it for reality Also, from my point of view here in the mountains I don't see a corporate theme park, but maybe you're right. Oh, just wait, they're coming for you. Wat... ಠ_ಠ That seems umm... a bit paranoid? Ok. But don't say I didn't tell you so. On October 31 2012 08:05 jdseemoreglass wrote:how to think about the question of what to value You've lost me now. Can't interpret the meaning of this statement, or it's implications. Sorry. you don't tell them WHAT to value, you teach them how to do philosophy. How to ask questions about what things should be valued and to think about them in a rigorous way. You teach them the history of the various things that people have thought about values, and you have them read the texts in which these various positions and arguments were set forth. If you teach them WHAT to value, that is just indoctrination. But if you teach them how to think about what to value, that is education. @Kwark: If you get me started about religion that will derail the thread even more than I normally do. But a) your little story about religion is typical smug pomo dismissal of thousands of years of human thought and b) I fail to see how "catholicism has its moments" can be understood as a ringing endorsement of same By doing all the bolded portion you're imprinting your own biases on them. Also, you're pretty much saying all religions are indoctrinating their followers when you say, "If you teach them WHAT to value, that is just indoctrination." Yes, that is why you teach them to do comparative religion, which is a kind of philosophy. If my bias is toward education and critical thought, I'll happily own that bias. That's why I'm not a postmodernist.
You seem to have the problem most people do when they have opinions they can't sustain under questioning. You have no sources and no research to prove anything.
Dude, fuck you. I spend my life reading books about questions like these. I'm not citing sources and making arguments with scholarly apparatus because we're talking philosophy on the internet and that's not what you do and it would be a waste of my time. These aren't the kind of things you post a link to some internet article or wikipedia and go "SEE!??" I'm saying what I think. I've come to this opinion because I'm obsessed with cultural criticism and that's what I do with my life. I've got nothing to prove to you. Yes, this is based on how I feel - it would be fucking dishonest if it weren't. I'm expressing myself. Why don't you tell me how YOU feel about it and we'll have a discussion. Then why are you here? Go away. Edit: bolded to what I was responding to. I think I've made it clear how I feel in this thread. Economically I'm a selfish actor and will support anything that increases my wealth. Socially I feel everyone deserves their fair shot b/c doing otherwise weakens humanity. Social issues are more important to me than economic ones because I'm already happy with where I am economically.
ok, "support it", wise guy. Let's see YOUR "sources and research"
|
On October 31 2012 08:26 TheTenthDoc wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2012 08:19 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 08:14 sam!zdat wrote:On October 31 2012 08:08 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 07:56 sam!zdat wrote:Yes, well put jd. But we don't educate people so they can fill the holes in better ways. Also we took away people's religion and now all they have is steven jobs. On October 31 2012 07:51 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 07:45 sam!zdat wrote:On October 31 2012 07:38 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 07:34 sam!zdat wrote:On October 31 2012 07:29 Risen wrote:
[quote]
Why aren't you proud of the current civilization we have? It seems you feel we should all be grateful for what we have since we're better off than we once were. But what's wrong with not being satisfied with the present and wanting more? What's wrong with the "corporate theme park" as you put it?
What? you *like* the theme park? Get what you deserve, I guess. I think it's fucking banal, and it makes me embarrassed to think of what the future will think of our "culture."
Why aren't you proud of what we've created? The only reason I have to be unhappy with the United States as it stands is our current social problems. We have a country in which I'm able to take advantage of my hard work in school and prosper. Why aren't you proud of the marketing consultants? They've mastered the art of manipulating fools. Doesn't seem so bad to me.
I am proud, actually. I just think it's time for the next step. As far as the marketing consultants... let's not go there. What do you mean by get what you deserve? Not really as important by why you think it's banal, though. (Why do you think it's banal) Because everything is designed to make you want to buy things... if that's not banal I don't know what is.
It's not that I like the theme park, it's that I don't think it's there at all.
That's because you've mistaken it for reality Also, from my point of view here in the mountains I don't see a corporate theme park, but maybe you're right. Oh, just wait, they're coming for you. Wat... ಠ_ಠ That seems umm... a bit paranoid? Ok. But don't say I didn't tell you so. On October 31 2012 08:05 jdseemoreglass wrote:how to think about the question of what to value You've lost me now. Can't interpret the meaning of this statement, or it's implications. Sorry. you don't tell them WHAT to value, you teach them how to do philosophy. How to ask questions about what things should be valued and to think about them in a rigorous way. You teach them the history of the various things that people have thought about values, and you have them read the texts in which these various positions and arguments were set forth. If you teach them WHAT to value, that is just indoctrination. But if you teach them how to think about what to value, that is education. @Kwark: If you get me started about religion that will derail the thread even more than I normally do. But a) your little story about religion is typical smug pomo dismissal of thousands of years of human thought and b) I fail to see how "catholicism has its moments" can be understood as a ringing endorsement of same By doing all the bolded portion you're imprinting your own biases on them. Also, you're pretty much saying all religions are indoctrinating their followers when you say, "If you teach them WHAT to value, that is just indoctrination." You seem to have the problem most people do when they have opinions they can't sustain under questioning. You have no sources and no research to prove anything. All your opinions are based on how you feel. Guess what? I don't feel like you do. Your saying "But don't say I didn't tell you so" isn't getting us anywhere, and you're only going to convince fools to follow you. By truly teaching people how to ask questions and think about questions, you are not indoctrinating them. Indoctrination can masquerade under the guise of education, but legitimate teaching about critical thinking is the farthest you can get from indoctrination. Just exposing people to something doesn't indoctrinate them, especially if you frame it as an exercise in evaluating the quality of the thing you're exposing them to.
The only thing I can possibly think of that wouldn't have a bias would be the teaching of mathematics. Teaching any history will be biased because we only have a limited perspective on it.
|
On October 31 2012 08:27 sam!zdat wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2012 08:25 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 08:24 sam!zdat wrote:On October 31 2012 08:19 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 08:14 sam!zdat wrote:On October 31 2012 08:08 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 07:56 sam!zdat wrote:Yes, well put jd. But we don't educate people so they can fill the holes in better ways. Also we took away people's religion and now all they have is steven jobs. On October 31 2012 07:51 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 07:45 sam!zdat wrote:On October 31 2012 07:38 Risen wrote:
[quote]
What do you mean by get what you deserve? Not really as important by why you think it's banal, though. (Why do you think it's banal)
Because everything is designed to make you want to buy things... if that's not banal I don't know what is.
It's not that I like the theme park, it's that I don't think it's there at all.
That's because you've mistaken it for reality Also, from my point of view here in the mountains I don't see a corporate theme park, but maybe you're right. Oh, just wait, they're coming for you. Wat... ಠ_ಠ That seems umm... a bit paranoid? Ok. But don't say I didn't tell you so. On October 31 2012 08:05 jdseemoreglass wrote:how to think about the question of what to value You've lost me now. Can't interpret the meaning of this statement, or it's implications. Sorry. you don't tell them WHAT to value, you teach them how to do philosophy. How to ask questions about what things should be valued and to think about them in a rigorous way. You teach them the history of the various things that people have thought about values, and you have them read the texts in which these various positions and arguments were set forth. If you teach them WHAT to value, that is just indoctrination. But if you teach them how to think about what to value, that is education. @Kwark: If you get me started about religion that will derail the thread even more than I normally do. But a) your little story about religion is typical smug pomo dismissal of thousands of years of human thought and b) I fail to see how "catholicism has its moments" can be understood as a ringing endorsement of same By doing all the bolded portion you're imprinting your own biases on them. Also, you're pretty much saying all religions are indoctrinating their followers when you say, "If you teach them WHAT to value, that is just indoctrination." Yes, that is why you teach them to do comparative religion, which is a kind of philosophy. If my bias is toward education and critical thought, I'll happily own that bias. That's why I'm not a postmodernist.
You seem to have the problem most people do when they have opinions they can't sustain under questioning. You have no sources and no research to prove anything.
Dude, fuck you. I spend my life reading books about questions like these. I'm not citing sources and making arguments with scholarly apparatus because we're talking philosophy on the internet and that's not what you do and it would be a waste of my time. These aren't the kind of things you post a link to some internet article or wikipedia and go "SEE!??" I'm saying what I think. I've come to this opinion because I'm obsessed with cultural criticism and that's what I do with my life. I've got nothing to prove to you. Yes, this is based on how I feel - it would be fucking dishonest if it weren't. I'm expressing myself. Why don't you tell me how YOU feel about it and we'll have a discussion. Then why are you here? Go away. Edit: bolded to what I was responding to. I think I've made it clear how I feel in this thread. Economically I'm a selfish actor and will support anything that increases my wealth. Socially I feel everyone deserves their fair shot b/c doing otherwise weakens humanity. Social issues are more important to me than economic ones because I'm already happy with where I am economically. ok, "support it", wise guy. Let's see YOUR "sources and research"
Support what? What would you like me to support? I'm not making any claims here. You made claims, I asked you to try and convince me using sources and research, you failed that task.
|
On October 31 2012 08:29 Risen wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2012 08:27 sam!zdat wrote:On October 31 2012 08:25 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 08:24 sam!zdat wrote:On October 31 2012 08:19 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 08:14 sam!zdat wrote:On October 31 2012 08:08 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 07:56 sam!zdat wrote:Yes, well put jd. But we don't educate people so they can fill the holes in better ways. Also we took away people's religion and now all they have is steven jobs. On October 31 2012 07:51 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 07:45 sam!zdat wrote:
[quote]
Because everything is designed to make you want to buy things... if that's not banal I don't know what is.
[quote]
That's because you've mistaken it for reality Also, from my point of view here in the mountains I don't see a corporate theme park, but maybe you're right. Oh, just wait, they're coming for you. Wat... ಠ_ಠ That seems umm... a bit paranoid? Ok. But don't say I didn't tell you so. On October 31 2012 08:05 jdseemoreglass wrote:how to think about the question of what to value You've lost me now. Can't interpret the meaning of this statement, or it's implications. Sorry. you don't tell them WHAT to value, you teach them how to do philosophy. How to ask questions about what things should be valued and to think about them in a rigorous way. You teach them the history of the various things that people have thought about values, and you have them read the texts in which these various positions and arguments were set forth. If you teach them WHAT to value, that is just indoctrination. But if you teach them how to think about what to value, that is education. @Kwark: If you get me started about religion that will derail the thread even more than I normally do. But a) your little story about religion is typical smug pomo dismissal of thousands of years of human thought and b) I fail to see how "catholicism has its moments" can be understood as a ringing endorsement of same By doing all the bolded portion you're imprinting your own biases on them. Also, you're pretty much saying all religions are indoctrinating their followers when you say, "If you teach them WHAT to value, that is just indoctrination." Yes, that is why you teach them to do comparative religion, which is a kind of philosophy. If my bias is toward education and critical thought, I'll happily own that bias. That's why I'm not a postmodernist.
You seem to have the problem most people do when they have opinions they can't sustain under questioning. You have no sources and no research to prove anything.
Dude, fuck you. I spend my life reading books about questions like these. I'm not citing sources and making arguments with scholarly apparatus because we're talking philosophy on the internet and that's not what you do and it would be a waste of my time. These aren't the kind of things you post a link to some internet article or wikipedia and go "SEE!??" I'm saying what I think. I've come to this opinion because I'm obsessed with cultural criticism and that's what I do with my life. I've got nothing to prove to you. Yes, this is based on how I feel - it would be fucking dishonest if it weren't. I'm expressing myself. Why don't you tell me how YOU feel about it and we'll have a discussion. Then why are you here? Go away. Edit: bolded to what I was responding to. I think I've made it clear how I feel in this thread. Economically I'm a selfish actor and will support anything that increases my wealth. Socially I feel everyone deserves their fair shot b/c doing otherwise weakens humanity. Social issues are more important to me than economic ones because I'm already happy with where I am economically. ok, "support it", wise guy. Let's see YOUR "sources and research" Support what? What would you like me to support? I'm not making any claims here. You made claims, I asked you to try and convince me using sources and research, you failed that task.
Because you don't understand what philosophical argumentation is, and you've demanded something which is a category error to demand. What sort of "sources and research" do you have in mind? What would you like me to post? I can demand that you go read a stack of philosophical literature that my ideas are coming from, but I don't think you're gonna go do that, now are you?
edit:
On October 31 2012 08:28 Risen wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2012 08:26 TheTenthDoc wrote:On October 31 2012 08:19 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 08:14 sam!zdat wrote:On October 31 2012 08:08 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 07:56 sam!zdat wrote:Yes, well put jd. But we don't educate people so they can fill the holes in better ways. Also we took away people's religion and now all they have is steven jobs. On October 31 2012 07:51 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 07:45 sam!zdat wrote:On October 31 2012 07:38 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 07:34 sam!zdat wrote:
[quote]
What? you *like* the theme park? Get what you deserve, I guess. I think it's fucking banal, and it makes me embarrassed to think of what the future will think of our "culture."
[quote]
I am proud, actually. I just think it's time for the next step.
As far as the marketing consultants... let's not go there. What do you mean by get what you deserve? Not really as important by why you think it's banal, though. (Why do you think it's banal) Because everything is designed to make you want to buy things... if that's not banal I don't know what is.
It's not that I like the theme park, it's that I don't think it's there at all.
That's because you've mistaken it for reality Also, from my point of view here in the mountains I don't see a corporate theme park, but maybe you're right. Oh, just wait, they're coming for you. Wat... ಠ_ಠ That seems umm... a bit paranoid? Ok. But don't say I didn't tell you so. On October 31 2012 08:05 jdseemoreglass wrote:how to think about the question of what to value You've lost me now. Can't interpret the meaning of this statement, or it's implications. Sorry. you don't tell them WHAT to value, you teach them how to do philosophy. How to ask questions about what things should be valued and to think about them in a rigorous way. You teach them the history of the various things that people have thought about values, and you have them read the texts in which these various positions and arguments were set forth. If you teach them WHAT to value, that is just indoctrination. But if you teach them how to think about what to value, that is education. @Kwark: If you get me started about religion that will derail the thread even more than I normally do. But a) your little story about religion is typical smug pomo dismissal of thousands of years of human thought and b) I fail to see how "catholicism has its moments" can be understood as a ringing endorsement of same By doing all the bolded portion you're imprinting your own biases on them. Also, you're pretty much saying all religions are indoctrinating their followers when you say, "If you teach them WHAT to value, that is just indoctrination." You seem to have the problem most people do when they have opinions they can't sustain under questioning. You have no sources and no research to prove anything. All your opinions are based on how you feel. Guess what? I don't feel like you do. Your saying "But don't say I didn't tell you so" isn't getting us anywhere, and you're only going to convince fools to follow you. By truly teaching people how to ask questions and think about questions, you are not indoctrinating them. Indoctrination can masquerade under the guise of education, but legitimate teaching about critical thinking is the farthest you can get from indoctrination. Just exposing people to something doesn't indoctrinate them, especially if you frame it as an exercise in evaluating the quality of the thing you're exposing them to. Teaching any history will be biased because we only have a limited perspective on it.
That's a major part of what you teach about, when you teach about history.
|
On October 31 2012 08:28 Risen wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2012 08:26 TheTenthDoc wrote:On October 31 2012 08:19 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 08:14 sam!zdat wrote:On October 31 2012 08:08 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 07:56 sam!zdat wrote:Yes, well put jd. But we don't educate people so they can fill the holes in better ways. Also we took away people's religion and now all they have is steven jobs. On October 31 2012 07:51 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 07:45 sam!zdat wrote:On October 31 2012 07:38 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 07:34 sam!zdat wrote:
[quote]
What? you *like* the theme park? Get what you deserve, I guess. I think it's fucking banal, and it makes me embarrassed to think of what the future will think of our "culture."
[quote]
I am proud, actually. I just think it's time for the next step.
As far as the marketing consultants... let's not go there. What do you mean by get what you deserve? Not really as important by why you think it's banal, though. (Why do you think it's banal) Because everything is designed to make you want to buy things... if that's not banal I don't know what is.
It's not that I like the theme park, it's that I don't think it's there at all.
That's because you've mistaken it for reality Also, from my point of view here in the mountains I don't see a corporate theme park, but maybe you're right. Oh, just wait, they're coming for you. Wat... ಠ_ಠ That seems umm... a bit paranoid? Ok. But don't say I didn't tell you so. On October 31 2012 08:05 jdseemoreglass wrote:how to think about the question of what to value You've lost me now. Can't interpret the meaning of this statement, or it's implications. Sorry. you don't tell them WHAT to value, you teach them how to do philosophy. How to ask questions about what things should be valued and to think about them in a rigorous way. You teach them the history of the various things that people have thought about values, and you have them read the texts in which these various positions and arguments were set forth. If you teach them WHAT to value, that is just indoctrination. But if you teach them how to think about what to value, that is education. @Kwark: If you get me started about religion that will derail the thread even more than I normally do. But a) your little story about religion is typical smug pomo dismissal of thousands of years of human thought and b) I fail to see how "catholicism has its moments" can be understood as a ringing endorsement of same By doing all the bolded portion you're imprinting your own biases on them. Also, you're pretty much saying all religions are indoctrinating their followers when you say, "If you teach them WHAT to value, that is just indoctrination." You seem to have the problem most people do when they have opinions they can't sustain under questioning. You have no sources and no research to prove anything. All your opinions are based on how you feel. Guess what? I don't feel like you do. Your saying "But don't say I didn't tell you so" isn't getting us anywhere, and you're only going to convince fools to follow you. By truly teaching people how to ask questions and think about questions, you are not indoctrinating them. Indoctrination can masquerade under the guise of education, but legitimate teaching about critical thinking is the farthest you can get from indoctrination. Just exposing people to something doesn't indoctrinate them, especially if you frame it as an exercise in evaluating the quality of the thing you're exposing them to. The only thing I can possibly think of that wouldn't have a bias would be the teaching of mathematics. Teaching any history will be biased because we only have a limited perspective on it.
If you teach things through the socratic method then you eliminate the authoritative bias and, more than that, encourage individuals to explore their own biases. A genuine discussion led appropriately does the opposite of instill values in people. I feel sorry for you if you've never had one in an educational setting, to be honest.
I find it funny you bring up math since math (well, the interesting parts of math) only exists because people knew how to ask fundamental questions.
|
Eh, Herman Cain was alright IMO. He was an idiot, but at least he was willing to admit he was one and to learn. If he would have ended up as a puppet because of that, I don't know.
|
On October 31 2012 08:30 sam!zdat wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2012 08:29 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 08:27 sam!zdat wrote:On October 31 2012 08:25 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 08:24 sam!zdat wrote:On October 31 2012 08:19 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 08:14 sam!zdat wrote:On October 31 2012 08:08 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 07:56 sam!zdat wrote:Yes, well put jd. But we don't educate people so they can fill the holes in better ways. Also we took away people's religion and now all they have is steven jobs. On October 31 2012 07:51 Risen wrote:
[quote]
Also, from my point of view here in the mountains I don't see a corporate theme park, but maybe you're right. Oh, just wait, they're coming for you. Wat... ಠ_ಠ That seems umm... a bit paranoid? Ok. But don't say I didn't tell you so. On October 31 2012 08:05 jdseemoreglass wrote:how to think about the question of what to value You've lost me now. Can't interpret the meaning of this statement, or it's implications. Sorry. you don't tell them WHAT to value, you teach them how to do philosophy. How to ask questions about what things should be valued and to think about them in a rigorous way. You teach them the history of the various things that people have thought about values, and you have them read the texts in which these various positions and arguments were set forth. If you teach them WHAT to value, that is just indoctrination. But if you teach them how to think about what to value, that is education. @Kwark: If you get me started about religion that will derail the thread even more than I normally do. But a) your little story about religion is typical smug pomo dismissal of thousands of years of human thought and b) I fail to see how "catholicism has its moments" can be understood as a ringing endorsement of same By doing all the bolded portion you're imprinting your own biases on them. Also, you're pretty much saying all religions are indoctrinating their followers when you say, "If you teach them WHAT to value, that is just indoctrination." Yes, that is why you teach them to do comparative religion, which is a kind of philosophy. If my bias is toward education and critical thought, I'll happily own that bias. That's why I'm not a postmodernist.
You seem to have the problem most people do when they have opinions they can't sustain under questioning. You have no sources and no research to prove anything.
Dude, fuck you. I spend my life reading books about questions like these. I'm not citing sources and making arguments with scholarly apparatus because we're talking philosophy on the internet and that's not what you do and it would be a waste of my time. These aren't the kind of things you post a link to some internet article or wikipedia and go "SEE!??" I'm saying what I think. I've come to this opinion because I'm obsessed with cultural criticism and that's what I do with my life. I've got nothing to prove to you. Yes, this is based on how I feel - it would be fucking dishonest if it weren't. I'm expressing myself. Why don't you tell me how YOU feel about it and we'll have a discussion. Then why are you here? Go away. Edit: bolded to what I was responding to. I think I've made it clear how I feel in this thread. Economically I'm a selfish actor and will support anything that increases my wealth. Socially I feel everyone deserves their fair shot b/c doing otherwise weakens humanity. Social issues are more important to me than economic ones because I'm already happy with where I am economically. ok, "support it", wise guy. Let's see YOUR "sources and research" Support what? What would you like me to support? I'm not making any claims here. You made claims, I asked you to try and convince me using sources and research, you failed that task. Because you don't understand what philosophical argumentation is, and you've demanded something which is a category error to demand. What sort of "sources and research" do you have in mind? What would you like me to post? I can demand that you go read a stack of philosophical literature that my ideas are coming from, but I don't think you're gonna go do that, now are you?
I think you underestimate the amount I read. I'm out of books at the moment and would gladly read more.
When you make statements like "Oh, just wait, they're coming for you." I demand a source or some sort of research backing that statement up.
When you claim religion isn't what Kwark has declared (in spite of well documented history that religion is what he stated) I ask for sources to your claim.
When you claim we're developing a corporate theme park I say I don't see it, and ask for why you feel that way.
I ask what you mean by getting what I deserve, and you do not answer in spite of saying I deserve "something".
Why should anyone take you at your word? I'm trying to help you every step of the way here. I'm trying to give you every opportunity to persuade ME to your way of thinking and you continually fail to meet expectations. I don't know how you can expect an intelligent individual to come around to your way of thinking if you're unwilling to back up your statements.
Edit: "That's a major part of what you teach about, when you teach about history."
Simply teaching that does not remove the bias.
On October 31 2012 08:31 TheTenthDoc wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2012 08:28 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 08:26 TheTenthDoc wrote:On October 31 2012 08:19 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 08:14 sam!zdat wrote:On October 31 2012 08:08 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 07:56 sam!zdat wrote:Yes, well put jd. But we don't educate people so they can fill the holes in better ways. Also we took away people's religion and now all they have is steven jobs. On October 31 2012 07:51 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 07:45 sam!zdat wrote:On October 31 2012 07:38 Risen wrote:
[quote]
What do you mean by get what you deserve? Not really as important by why you think it's banal, though. (Why do you think it's banal)
Because everything is designed to make you want to buy things... if that's not banal I don't know what is.
It's not that I like the theme park, it's that I don't think it's there at all.
That's because you've mistaken it for reality Also, from my point of view here in the mountains I don't see a corporate theme park, but maybe you're right. Oh, just wait, they're coming for you. Wat... ಠ_ಠ That seems umm... a bit paranoid? Ok. But don't say I didn't tell you so. On October 31 2012 08:05 jdseemoreglass wrote:how to think about the question of what to value You've lost me now. Can't interpret the meaning of this statement, or it's implications. Sorry. you don't tell them WHAT to value, you teach them how to do philosophy. How to ask questions about what things should be valued and to think about them in a rigorous way. You teach them the history of the various things that people have thought about values, and you have them read the texts in which these various positions and arguments were set forth. If you teach them WHAT to value, that is just indoctrination. But if you teach them how to think about what to value, that is education. @Kwark: If you get me started about religion that will derail the thread even more than I normally do. But a) your little story about religion is typical smug pomo dismissal of thousands of years of human thought and b) I fail to see how "catholicism has its moments" can be understood as a ringing endorsement of same By doing all the bolded portion you're imprinting your own biases on them. Also, you're pretty much saying all religions are indoctrinating their followers when you say, "If you teach them WHAT to value, that is just indoctrination." You seem to have the problem most people do when they have opinions they can't sustain under questioning. You have no sources and no research to prove anything. All your opinions are based on how you feel. Guess what? I don't feel like you do. Your saying "But don't say I didn't tell you so" isn't getting us anywhere, and you're only going to convince fools to follow you. By truly teaching people how to ask questions and think about questions, you are not indoctrinating them. Indoctrination can masquerade under the guise of education, but legitimate teaching about critical thinking is the farthest you can get from indoctrination. Just exposing people to something doesn't indoctrinate them, especially if you frame it as an exercise in evaluating the quality of the thing you're exposing them to. The only thing I can possibly think of that wouldn't have a bias would be the teaching of mathematics. Teaching any history will be biased because we only have a limited perspective on it. If you teach things through the socratic method then you eliminate the authoritative bias and, more than that, encourage individuals to explore their own biases. A genuine discussion led appropriately does the opposite of instill values in people. I feel sorry for you if you've never had one in an educational setting, to be honest. I find it funny you bring up math since math (well, the interesting parts of math) only exists because people knew how to ask fundamental questions.
How do you plan on teaching history through Socratic method?
|
|
|
On October 31 2012 08:28 Risen wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2012 08:26 TheTenthDoc wrote:On October 31 2012 08:19 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 08:14 sam!zdat wrote:On October 31 2012 08:08 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 07:56 sam!zdat wrote:Yes, well put jd. But we don't educate people so they can fill the holes in better ways. Also we took away people's religion and now all they have is steven jobs. On October 31 2012 07:51 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 07:45 sam!zdat wrote:On October 31 2012 07:38 Risen wrote:On October 31 2012 07:34 sam!zdat wrote:
[quote]
What? you *like* the theme park? Get what you deserve, I guess. I think it's fucking banal, and it makes me embarrassed to think of what the future will think of our "culture."
[quote]
I am proud, actually. I just think it's time for the next step.
As far as the marketing consultants... let's not go there. What do you mean by get what you deserve? Not really as important by why you think it's banal, though. (Why do you think it's banal) Because everything is designed to make you want to buy things... if that's not banal I don't know what is.
It's not that I like the theme park, it's that I don't think it's there at all.
That's because you've mistaken it for reality Also, from my point of view here in the mountains I don't see a corporate theme park, but maybe you're right. Oh, just wait, they're coming for you. Wat... ಠ_ಠ That seems umm... a bit paranoid? Ok. But don't say I didn't tell you so. On October 31 2012 08:05 jdseemoreglass wrote:how to think about the question of what to value You've lost me now. Can't interpret the meaning of this statement, or it's implications. Sorry. you don't tell them WHAT to value, you teach them how to do philosophy. How to ask questions about what things should be valued and to think about them in a rigorous way. You teach them the history of the various things that people have thought about values, and you have them read the texts in which these various positions and arguments were set forth. If you teach them WHAT to value, that is just indoctrination. But if you teach them how to think about what to value, that is education. @Kwark: If you get me started about religion that will derail the thread even more than I normally do. But a) your little story about religion is typical smug pomo dismissal of thousands of years of human thought and b) I fail to see how "catholicism has its moments" can be understood as a ringing endorsement of same By doing all the bolded portion you're imprinting your own biases on them. Also, you're pretty much saying all religions are indoctrinating their followers when you say, "If you teach them WHAT to value, that is just indoctrination." You seem to have the problem most people do when they have opinions they can't sustain under questioning. You have no sources and no research to prove anything. All your opinions are based on how you feel. Guess what? I don't feel like you do. Your saying "But don't say I didn't tell you so" isn't getting us anywhere, and you're only going to convince fools to follow you. By truly teaching people how to ask questions and think about questions, you are not indoctrinating them. Indoctrination can masquerade under the guise of education, but legitimate teaching about critical thinking is the farthest you can get from indoctrination. Just exposing people to something doesn't indoctrinate them, especially if you frame it as an exercise in evaluating the quality of the thing you're exposing them to. The only thing I can possibly think of that wouldn't have a bias would be the teaching of mathematics. Teaching any history will be biased because we only have a limited perspective on it.
I'm doing a sociology class, and we had 1 lecturer for the first half and another lecturer for the second half. The first lecturer told us to read Milton Freidman and then some Karl Marx, told us a bit about both, and let us make up our own minds. The second lecturer just told us that banks are bad because they are greedy and something about the gold standard.
Sure everything is biased to some degree, but there are ways of teaching which encourage people to think. Some teachers just tell people what to think.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
