| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
cari-kira
Germany655 Posts
the topic seems like some grudge post from a pubertal mind, even the first sentence holds words like "idiotic" and "uneducated", and the rest just follows. sry i have to be so clear, but as i see it, here's nothing to discuss. the people just state their opinions to nazis and to germany, and nothing is topic related anymore, because the topic is made up of hot air. | ||
|
msl
Germany477 Posts
On November 14 2012 06:48 oneofthem wrote: there is a part of that ideal, critical exchange of ideas, but there is also value building. an exercise that is not of the same kind, does not involve the same brain parts. when someone denies that, for example, racism against immigrants or antisemitism is bad, then you are supposed to condemn the guy. it's not so hard to figure out. the sort of limp weak relativism isn't going to stand up, especially against raw, primal hatred of the kind represented by true believers in the nazi type movements. yes to open examination of facts, but also yes to upholding base rock moral principles. (if i call it, teaching moral values, some relativist might scream bloody murder. deal with it) I have no problem with teaching moral values, but the only way to do that is through critical thought, not through indoctrination. That is the point. "Value-building" in the absence of critical thought is indoctrination. Basicly what you're saying seems to be that people need to be taught morals, they are incapable of coming by them by the way of reason, so they need to be indoctrinated. Something I vehemtly disagree with. This is not weak relativism my friend, this is believe in the ideals and ideas of humanism. | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
what facts are left out? is it just because the narratives are a bit heavyhanded, like in a typical documentary? yea, the preferred description of that education is critical reflection on the particular german experience and gathering lessons from history. then some kid calls it indoctrination. i said even if it's indoctrination, it is still ok. this is not to say i support indoctrination over critical reflection. i just was responding to another guy's post who characterised it as such. | ||
|
AntiGrav1ty
Germany2310 Posts
| ||
|
Mafe
Germany5966 Posts
Poll: Non-germans: Do you see a nazi-uprising in germany happening? No (19) Yes. (2) 21 total votes Your vote: Non-germans: Do you see a nazi-uprising in germany happening? | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On November 14 2012 07:05 AntiGrav1ty wrote: Nothing is left out. You get beat over the head with the facts in 8 different subjects throughout your whole school career. well, for germans who don't like that consider what happened to the american south after the civil war. (not saying germans are equivalent to southern racists) some education, even if it's overbearing, is better than reactionary hardening. it's unfortunate that maybe it's oversaturated a bit. i think german cultural reformation is a shining achievement as well as its effort in building a united europe. this path is under threat following the fallouts of the economic crisis, and i have to react fairly strongly to thinking that wants to criticise this enlightenment achievement. it's a good thing that we are able to make progress, germany being a prime example of this progress. | ||
|
msl
Germany477 Posts
On November 14 2012 07:01 oneofthem wrote: um, i've never said you don't want critical examination of the material. indoctrination is not my characterisation. the reason why i posted was to question this characterisation. on what ground are you calling the german experience an indoctrination. what facts are left out? is it just because the narratives are a bit heavyhanded, like in a typical documentary? yea, the preferred description of that education is critical reflection on the particular german experience and gathering lessons from history. then some kid calls it indoctrination. i said even if it's indoctrination, it is still ok. this is not to say i support indoctrination over critical reflection. i just was responding to another guy's post who characterised it as such. Bolded part what i disagree with.. You cannot have indoctrination AND an education towards independent and critical thought. They are mutually exclusive. | ||
|
AntiGrav1ty
Germany2310 Posts
On the upside pretty much everyone in Germany is aware of what happened. If people don't know what happened or glorify german history then it's because they chose to disregard the facts and not because they didn't get the education.. | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On November 14 2012 07:15 msl wrote: Bolded part what i disagree with.. You cannot have indoctrination AND an education towards independent and critical thought. They are mutually exclusive. well, what do you think my idea indoctrination consists in? the answer is, absolutely no different from what critical education is. i am just objecting to the labeling of the education effort as indoctrination. of course, factual accuracy and fair presentation etc are important in this process. i'm not saying you should make up shit and brainwash kids. however, if someone wants to call education indoctrination, i'll just say, with pleasure. | ||
|
mcc
Czech Republic4646 Posts
On November 14 2012 06:57 msl wrote: I have no problem with teaching moral values, but the only way to do that is through critical thought, not through indoctrination. That is the point. "Value-building" in the absence of critical thought is indoctrination. Basicly what you're saying seems to be that people need to be taught morals, they are incapable of coming by them by the way of reason, so they need to be indoctrinated. Something I vehemtly disagree with. This is not weak relativism my friend, this is believe in the ideals and ideas of humanism. Most people are incapable of such critical thought. Nothing in 10000+ years history of our species points otherwise. All of social cohesion and other necessary functions in society are built on what you call indoctrination and it won't change in the foreseeable future. Plus it is impossible to arrive at morals by way of pure reason as morals are based in emotions (nothing wrong with that and you can still use reason to analyze them, but reason is not really unnecessary for morals to exist). | ||
|
Usagi
Spain1647 Posts
![[image loading]](https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/546958_10151244179154640_1525245788_n.jpg) | ||
|
mcc
Czech Republic4646 Posts
On November 14 2012 07:15 msl wrote: Bolded part what i disagree with.. You cannot have indoctrination AND an education towards independent and critical thought. They are mutually exclusive. Nope they are not. They just serve different audiences. Some people will never have will or inclination to delve into critical thinking, for them you have one narrative, the others will as time goes on find out how the first narrative is skewed and form their own critical opinions. Your view of the world is too black and white (critical thinking vs "indoctrination") and completely ignores the complexity of the real world. What you call indoctrination are just normal societal mechanisms that are necessary for any society to function. Of course what I presented is also slightly too black and white (on a different level), but that was just to illustrate the point in reality people are on something like a continuum between the two extremes and it is more-dimensional. | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
it's not even a german punishment kind of thing. i think every society should educate people on the absolute wrongness of hateful thinking and tendencies. | ||
|
Saumure
France404 Posts
On November 14 2012 07:34 Usagi wrote: Fun thread to find on the day I see this hanging on a wall. User was warned for this post. TL is an english forum, cf rules. Could you explain? | ||
|
Usagi
Spain1647 Posts
On November 14 2012 07:54 Saumure wrote: TL is an english forum, cf rules. Could you explain? I didnt receive a warning notification O.o It's just a nice game of words about the general strike of tomorrow asking for the return of Franco. | ||
|
mcc
Czech Republic4646 Posts
On November 14 2012 07:46 oneofthem wrote: ^i'm a little more optimistic about the effects of education, but share the pessimism about both the strength of vile sentiments, as well as existing conditions of either prejudice or apathy that makes proper education difficult. a measure that bans the absolutely indefensible position is not so bad considering the risk of the alternative. it's not even a german punishment kind of thing. i think every society should educate people on the absolute wrongness of hateful thinking and tendencies. I am more than sure that education towards critical thinking is a good thing and can accomplish a lot, but I am also sure that you cannot have society without some level of "indoctrination". And thus I do not share his general dislike for them. Societal engineering tools in general are just that, tools. And they should be used when their use is appropriate. As for the particular scenario under discussion, I do not have strong opinion one way or the other as it is really hard to tell. Lately I think that the American approach (but somewhat more reasonable) to free speech is probably a better solution. The reason for my thinking is that at a point where such limitations to free speech would have any effect would be already too late. If general population is not laughing at the extremists, it is already too late and no bans will prevent it with any reasonable certainty. On the other hand if general population dismisses the ideology, there is no reason for a ban, actually the opposite. | ||
|
Rassy
Netherlands2308 Posts
Not realy my piece of cake but you have to go with the limited amount of threads offerd. Annyway:The title is laughable and couldnt be further from the truth. Germany has the smallest amount of right extremists of every country in europe lol. This is because as a result of the war german people have a realy high awareness for what can happen. They grow up learning all the horros of the nazi regime and feel guilty about that. It is much more interesting to discuss the uprising of extreme right in previously tollerant nations as the netherlands, or the consistantly high ratings extremist partys get in france, since they are actually reason for a concern. | ||
|
MoltkeWarding
5195 Posts
well, for germans who don't like that consider what happened to the american south after the civil war. (not saying germans are equivalent to southern racists) You mean the Scallawag-Negro coalition unleashed by radical Republicans which defeated all attempts at political moderation, and alienated relations between the races so bitterly, that when the Democrats started regaining the South, the Jim Crow laws further exacerbated racial animosity for several generations? Some achievement. Leaving this irrelevant language of "education vs indoctrination" aside, here is my summary as to what this entire dispute is ultimately about. There is a great empirical tradition in historiography which stems from Goethe's maxim in his introduction in the Theory of Colours: Indeed, strictly speaking, it is useless to attempt to express the nature of a thing abstractedly. Effects we can perceive, and a complete history of those effects would, in fact, sufficiently define the nature of the thing itself. We should try in vain to describe a man's character, but let his acts be collected and an idea of the character will be presented to us. Jakob Burckhardt even clearer in his maxim: Philosophy subordinates and is unhistorical. History coordinates and is unphilosophical. In the tradition of history, which is intertwined with that of literature, the ultimate goal of a great historian is the same as that placed in the Greek tragedy: that of elevating the audience to Catharsis, a purification of self whereby the imbalances of emotions (or, in the modern context, ideological dogma) are brought into harmony through attained understanding. That is the use of history to humanity. It brings use solace and peace through its ability to comfort and console the mind. Oneofthem would convert this noble vessel of peace into a vessel of war. In his perspective, things happen for the sake of illuminating moral truth. The evil of Nazism is an a priori reality in his mind far before any exposition of any worldly incarnation of it occurs. Even then, it does not matter if this world incarnation fits his descriptions in exact, so long as the interpretative force can be manipulated to serve the truth of his mind's eye. If I say to him: you probably don't want to use Hitler if you are going to vent against genetic-deterministic racism, his views aren't quite what you think they are. He will say: drag, now I'll need a new Hitler to play the role of Hitler. To him, it's absolutely irrelevant how things are actually incarnated on earth. He is off to battle for the heavens, and he is dragging truth behind his chariot. Of course he pretends to have great respect for historical knowledge, in the same sense that Voltaire respected Shakespeare. If it's not against his dogmas, it's for him rather than against him. And since his dogmas are politely kept information-free, he pretends to play the mediator between opinion and truth. Notice how I've been stuffing my responses with controversial matters of judgement on historical events, hoping to draw this great admirer of history out. We have a true ostrich in our midst here! Let's see if his great respect for history will prompt him to affirm, or dispute, my position when I dismiss the following historical interpretations as popular legend, speculative, apocryphal or misleading information: “The World Jewish Congress declared war on Germany on September 3 1939.” “Fascist philosophy is anti-semitic or racist to the core.” “Salazar was a fascist dictator who provided Germany with valuable shipments of Tungsten during the war.” “The Nazis infamously framed the KPD by setting fire to the Reichstag, by which leverage they passed the enabling act.” “Kristallnacht symbolised a milestone whereby Hitler had decided to take harsher measures against German Jews.” Not being a historian, he has rather naive views on how easily facts are accepted as indisputable historical truth, but we will forgive him and credit him with Rankean illusions on how historical research could be perfected. After all, the most important part of historianship is building values, and in this sense, he, with the might of his keyboard and the sharpness of his intuition alone is better qualified to see the moral essence of Nazism, and relate them in the field of education to historians such as Rainer Zitelmann, Eberhard Jäckel, or Werner Maser, who unnecessarily complicate the matter by confusing people with superfluous information and ambiguous analysis. (Obviously, the Historikerstreit in the 80s did eventually drag the level of debate on Nazi history nearly down to his level. If only he could have been born early enough to participate in it, I'm sure oneofthem would have found it the most scintillating use of his formidable wits.) Children need to be trained like Gorillas in those linguistic aptitude tests, linking automated moral precepts to historical events. Here is my approximation of oneofthem's grade 6 World History curriculum: Second World War: Shows racism, anti-semitism is bad. Antebellum South: Exposes the evils of slavery. Ides of March: Inspires us to overthrow dictatorships Mary Tudor: Exposes the horrors of Catholic fanaticism Revocation of Edict of Nantes: Evils of intolerant theological monarchies Virginio's stabbing of his daughter: err... Cideville's Infatuation with Mme. Chatelet: well... Duke of Wellington's Speech Supporting the Corn Laws: I guess...he's some sort of reactionary. Affair of the Poisons in 1677: Wait...which socio-economical group were poisoning whom? I need ideological clarification or else why is this on the curriculum at all? That's a curt summary of the consequences if we let this dangerous fellow expand his influence beyond the walls of this vaunted website. So before you endorse this guy, ask yourself this question: Do I want my children to be reading LaFontaine by the time they're six, or this guy for moral clarity? | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
damn those northerners for allowing niggers to vote. gotta take righteous vengeance! not reading the rest of that because you have no idea who i am or what i do. sorry. | ||
|
MoltkeWarding
5195 Posts
On November 14 2012 09:25 oneofthem wrote: i had thought you were some kind of harmless oddity before, but when you blame freed black slaves for the racial tensions of the south. seriously? not reading the rest of that because you have no idea who i am or what i do. sorry. Yeah, I'd at least read the wikipedia article on post-war history before I come back to challenge the contention, but what I wrote was a red herring. The significant issue here is that you seem to think I agree with you that the most important question here is which "group" deserves the blame, only that I'm taking the other side. As for my misunderstanding of your subtle virtues, I apologise for making your articulation the equivalent of your person. Easy targets, and all. No doubt you are a good samaritan at home, a credit to your neighbourhood, and you eat meat the proper English way with your fork pointing down. I think a few Nazis may have fit this description as well, but I'll finally relent and admit the painful truth: I don't think you're a Nazi. I don't think you're a good guy or a bad guy. I don't know you, as you said, just as you don't know me, Nazis, Germans, or the mind of God. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Counter-Strike Other Games |
|
Epic.LAN
BSL Team A[vengers]
Dewalt vs ZeLoT
UltrA vs ZeLoT
SC4ALL
SC4ALL
BSL 21
BSL Team A[vengers]
Cross vs Sobenz
Sziky vs IcaruS
SC4ALL
SC4ALL
BSL 21
Replay Cast
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
