Forums > Social Discussion > d'oh - a racist teenie girl band
Login/Join to ParticipateBRONZE Member
had her carpal tunnel surgery already thanks v much
4,145 posts
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland (UK)
had her carpal tunnel surgery already thanks v much
4,145 posts
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland (UK)
Posted:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jht...5/ixportal.html
That's why I don't support home education. And children stars. And why people who brand their cattle with swastikas are allowed to home-educate their children and make them into a girl band. And that they send them to perform in front of crowds from the age of 8 or 9, making them think they're doing something good. And (looked at some other articles about them) how they now have a weblog for the third, smallest, child ("Dresden"), telling about her life in a good white family.
And don't even mention "freedom of speech", I know it exists but this is wrong.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jht...5/ixportal.html
That's why I don't support home education. And children stars. And why people who brand their cattle with swastikas are allowed to home-educate their children and make them into a girl band. And that they send them to perform in front of crowds from the age of 8 or 9, making them think they're doing something good. And (looked at some other articles about them) how they now have a weblog for the third, smallest, child ("Dresden"), telling about her life in a good white family.
And don't even mention "freedom of speech", I know it exists but this is wrong.
"vices are like genitals - most are ugly to behold, and yet we find that our own are dear to us."
(G.W. Dahlquist)
Owner of Dragosani's left half
BRONZE Member
Zebberdy and Jack Daniels
278 posts
Location: Swansea, south wales
Zebberdy and Jack Daniels
278 posts
Location: Swansea, south wales
Posted:
About the whole examination process, anyone wanting to sit GCSE's(an exam that children sit at the age of 16 in the UK) have to go to this examination center in a city, i don't know the whole facts, as i've never sat any GCSE's. out of my own choise(I don't see why i need a piece of paper to say that i know how to read and write)
I am aware that this will dramiticly affect my future life, and i accept that, it was my desition not to sit any exams. and so far, my life is going great, I have a job, i'm in my second year of college and i've already fixed a place for a third year. My mother is a uni student herself, so she taught me everything i know basicly.
Without meaning to sound big headed, i've got a lot more experiance on life then all the friends that have i know that have come out of school. I've travled and discovered so many more things the a lot of people i know, my mom used to own a jewlary stall at festivals, we used to go to 10 festivals a year (until stall prices got too high). Yes i admit it's not the same "education" or experiance that kids coming out of school would have, but i've had a happy childhood, i'd never ever go back on it. I know my life will be different then most peoples as i don't have as many qualifacations. But i'm happy with that because this is how i want my life to be, i don't want things to be certain, i want the unexpected.
About the whole examination process, anyone wanting to sit GCSE's(an exam that children sit at the age of 16 in the UK) have to go to this examination center in a city, i don't know the whole facts, as i've never sat any GCSE's. out of my own choise(I don't see why i need a piece of paper to say that i know how to read and write)
I am aware that this will dramiticly affect my future life, and i accept that, it was my desition not to sit any exams. and so far, my life is going great, I have a job, i'm in my second year of college and i've already fixed a place for a third year. My mother is a uni student herself, so she taught me everything i know basicly.
Without meaning to sound big headed, i've got a lot more experiance on life then all the friends that have i know that have come out of school. I've travled and discovered so many more things the a lot of people i know, my mom used to own a jewlary stall at festivals, we used to go to 10 festivals a year (until stall prices got too high). Yes i admit it's not the same "education" or experiance that kids coming out of school would have, but i've had a happy childhood, i'd never ever go back on it. I know my life will be different then most peoples as i don't have as many qualifacations. But i'm happy with that because this is how i want my life to be, i don't want things to be certain, i want the unexpected.
The only reason i'm scared of little kid's is because I know in ten year's time they'll be mugging me.....
GOLD Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Posted:
I'm not aware of the Hindu situation you mention. What i was referring to is that the Hindu culture is historically based (as are most old cultures) on discrimination, oppression and racism.
In that respect it's got a lot in common with religion, indeed, the two are often inextricably linked.
It's common to condemn celebrating white culture on the grounds that to do so is racist; and it's true that there's been a lot of racism in white culture- but no more so than in many of the cultures which are encouraged to celebrate.
Racist groups, and political groups like the BNP, cite this as discrimination; and that makes a lot of sense. At least part of the reason the BNP are making inroads, is because they are focusing on making sense, rather than spreading hate.
Like i said before, my personal preference is de-emphasising all cultural celebration, white, Hindu, black- whatever; let's move forward and focus on the only culture that's really important- human culture.
Now, to clarify what I meant by 'cultural celebration'- I was not suggesting aboloshing history
Objective history is vital, because that is how humanity learns from its mistakes.
But it should be objective, and that means acknowledging the racism endemic in the roots of Hinduism and other cultures, and addressing the remnants that persist today, with the same vigour applied to racism by white groups.
By 'cultural celebration' I was referring to initiatives which end up making minorities even more insular, distinct, and self-contained, often using money which could be well used by deprived white areas, but unavailable to them because of their skin colour.
Written by: LazyAngel
also I think there's a difference between what you call 'cultural celebration' and nationalism. I personally believe that it is important for everyone to be aware of the history of their country, especially having studied archaeology in this context.
My studies have led me to believe that it is less the 'cultural celebration' which is the problem, and more the politicians that seek to manipulate this information to their own ends, just like statistics and any other kind of information.
As long as politicians/people have the power to withold information/ emphasise that which they choose, we will always face these problems.
When you refer to the hindu culture I assume you would take the situation at Ayodyah as a recent example. But this was an example of the above, as key archaeological information was witheld that could have avoided the ensuing riots and loss of life.
To ignore the history of a country will not fix things at all. After all it is only by knowing what happened during WW2 that everyone takes fascism so seriously.
Sorry if I've misunderstood your words, and I seem to have gone a little bit off topic
I'm not aware of the Hindu situation you mention. What i was referring to is that the Hindu culture is historically based (as are most old cultures) on discrimination, oppression and racism.
In that respect it's got a lot in common with religion, indeed, the two are often inextricably linked.
It's common to condemn celebrating white culture on the grounds that to do so is racist; and it's true that there's been a lot of racism in white culture- but no more so than in many of the cultures which are encouraged to celebrate.
Racist groups, and political groups like the BNP, cite this as discrimination; and that makes a lot of sense. At least part of the reason the BNP are making inroads, is because they are focusing on making sense, rather than spreading hate.
Like i said before, my personal preference is de-emphasising all cultural celebration, white, Hindu, black- whatever; let's move forward and focus on the only culture that's really important- human culture.
Now, to clarify what I meant by 'cultural celebration'- I was not suggesting aboloshing history
Objective history is vital, because that is how humanity learns from its mistakes.
But it should be objective, and that means acknowledging the racism endemic in the roots of Hinduism and other cultures, and addressing the remnants that persist today, with the same vigour applied to racism by white groups.
By 'cultural celebration' I was referring to initiatives which end up making minorities even more insular, distinct, and self-contained, often using money which could be well used by deprived white areas, but unavailable to them because of their skin colour.
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
GOLD Member
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posted:
So my English teacher had a degree in English. My Biology teacher had degrees in bio and chem. My physics teacher a M.S. in physics. My math teacher had his Ph.D. in math.
Can a parent be all these?
So my English teacher had a degree in English. My Biology teacher had degrees in bio and chem. My physics teacher a M.S. in physics. My math teacher had his Ph.D. in math.
Can a parent be all these?
-Mike
Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella
A buckuht n a hooze! -Valura
GOLD Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Posted:
Here's a photo of the girl I mentioned earlier- Shanni Naylor, 12 years old, slashed whilst in a UK comprehensive school by another pupil, for no other reason than, the day before, she'd defended a friend from the bully.
Non-Https Image Link
Would this have happened if she'd been home tutored?
Sorry if the post is provocative; I thought yours was also.
Of course a parent can't have degrees and ph.D's in all the subjects a child is supposed to study- they don't need to.
Time and again when this issue comes up, and people start rubbishing home education- plenty here who've themselves experienced home education post quite clearly that they feel they benefitted from it.
Not all do of course, but many. Equally, many forced to endure the school education system are mentally scarred by it.
Maybe US schools are great, but UK ones can, for many, be horrific- the curiculum is geared totally towards vocation and exams, and bullying is rife.
Children are individual beings, with rights, who should not be forced to endure the intimidation and violence that is rampant in UK schools; no adult would have to put up with this at their place of work, yet we let it happen to children at schools.
I totally understand, and sympathise with parents who wish to give their children something better.
Now this doesn't mean I think school is bad for all children- many thrive there- but some do not.
Some home tutors mess up- but to condemn all home tutoring as bad, is, IMO, misguided.
If I had children, i would be very tempted to take the home tutoring option. Initially I would like them to try school, and see how it goes- if they like it and benefit from it, i think it's the best place for them to be.
Written by: Doc Lightning
So my English teacher had a degree in English. My Biology teacher had degrees in bio and chem. My physics teacher a M.S. in physics. My math teacher had his Ph.D. in math.
Can a parent be all these?
Here's a photo of the girl I mentioned earlier- Shanni Naylor, 12 years old, slashed whilst in a UK comprehensive school by another pupil, for no other reason than, the day before, she'd defended a friend from the bully.
Non-Https Image Link
Would this have happened if she'd been home tutored?
Sorry if the post is provocative; I thought yours was also.
Of course a parent can't have degrees and ph.D's in all the subjects a child is supposed to study- they don't need to.
Time and again when this issue comes up, and people start rubbishing home education- plenty here who've themselves experienced home education post quite clearly that they feel they benefitted from it.
Not all do of course, but many. Equally, many forced to endure the school education system are mentally scarred by it.
Maybe US schools are great, but UK ones can, for many, be horrific- the curiculum is geared totally towards vocation and exams, and bullying is rife.
Children are individual beings, with rights, who should not be forced to endure the intimidation and violence that is rampant in UK schools; no adult would have to put up with this at their place of work, yet we let it happen to children at schools.
I totally understand, and sympathise with parents who wish to give their children something better.
Now this doesn't mean I think school is bad for all children- many thrive there- but some do not.
Some home tutors mess up- but to condemn all home tutoring as bad, is, IMO, misguided.
If I had children, i would be very tempted to take the home tutoring option. Initially I would like them to try school, and see how it goes- if they like it and benefit from it, i think it's the best place for them to be.
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
BRONZE Member
Zebberdy and Jack Daniels
278 posts
Location: Swansea, south wales
Zebberdy and Jack Daniels
278 posts
Location: Swansea, south wales
Posted:
There are books, especialy made for parents that are turoring their kids at home, so yes, absolutely yes a parent can be all those things. My mother only had minor qualifacations on all those subjects, she sat what would be basicly the belgian (she's belgian) version on an A Level. No one ever know's anything for sure until they've tried and tested it. I have, I would never turn my back on what i've had from my education. Yes it may not be as good as some children coming out of school, but I for one can say that I know where i'm going in life and what I want to do with my life. I dare anyone here to ask a bunch of 16-17 year olds that just came out of school, what they want to do with their lives, I am willing to bet anything that the response you'll get from the vast majority of these kids will be "i'm not sure". just for the record, i really really don't mean to sound like i'm preaching.
There are books, especialy made for parents that are turoring their kids at home, so yes, absolutely yes a parent can be all those things. My mother only had minor qualifacations on all those subjects, she sat what would be basicly the belgian (she's belgian) version on an A Level. No one ever know's anything for sure until they've tried and tested it. I have, I would never turn my back on what i've had from my education. Yes it may not be as good as some children coming out of school, but I for one can say that I know where i'm going in life and what I want to do with my life. I dare anyone here to ask a bunch of 16-17 year olds that just came out of school, what they want to do with their lives, I am willing to bet anything that the response you'll get from the vast majority of these kids will be "i'm not sure". just for the record, i really really don't mean to sound like i'm preaching.
The only reason i'm scared of little kid's is because I know in ten year's time they'll be mugging me.....
GOLD Member
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posted:
I'd be for homeschooling if there were standardized tests to make sure that the kids were getting adequate coverage in all subjects.
This would include state curricula on such subjects as evolution.
I'd be for homeschooling if there were standardized tests to make sure that the kids were getting adequate coverage in all subjects.
This would include state curricula on such subjects as evolution.
-Mike
Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella
A buckuht n a hooze! -Valura
GOLD Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Posted:
And I'd be for schools being mandatory if they were places all children could go without being brutalised.
But, neither home-tutoring or schools are currently perfect- so it's down to individual cases.
Moving away from the bullying issue and onto 'standardised tests'- if these tests were the same, and in the same number,as those currently used in the UK school curriculum, then I would object to that.
Some stanardised tests, yes- but if it's to the same extent as in the UK school curriculum, then home tutoring starts to become just like school.
The UK school curriculum, and the UK school system, is currently, IMO, rubbish.
We still have a high proportion of school leavers who cannot read or write, and the only approach used is to continue to push onto them the subjects that they cannot (for whatever reasons), assimilate.
A child has 11 years of education- can you see the potential of that- how much they could learn, about living,and about themselves.
Instead, we cram them 30-to-a-class, and subject them to a extremely limited curriculum that a substantial minority of them, simply reject.
If some of those in that minority can be saved through home-tutoring, then thank goodness for home-tutoring.
It may not be perfect, and it may be open to abuse- but exactly the same is true of school.
Home tutoring is not soley a refuge for the victims of bullying, and it's not a state-school-at-home- it's an approach which, for many families, is specifically to avoid some of what they see as the bad aspects of school education.
As for the teaching of evolution- I may be wrong here, but, judging from the number of internet pressure groups advocating teaching evolution in US schools vs. pressure groups advocating teaching 'intelligent design'; it would again appear that the problem you raise is, not soley restricted to home education.
And I'd be for schools being mandatory if they were places all children could go without being brutalised.
But, neither home-tutoring or schools are currently perfect- so it's down to individual cases.
Moving away from the bullying issue and onto 'standardised tests'- if these tests were the same, and in the same number,as those currently used in the UK school curriculum, then I would object to that.
Some stanardised tests, yes- but if it's to the same extent as in the UK school curriculum, then home tutoring starts to become just like school.
The UK school curriculum, and the UK school system, is currently, IMO, rubbish.
We still have a high proportion of school leavers who cannot read or write, and the only approach used is to continue to push onto them the subjects that they cannot (for whatever reasons), assimilate.
A child has 11 years of education- can you see the potential of that- how much they could learn, about living,and about themselves.
Instead, we cram them 30-to-a-class, and subject them to a extremely limited curriculum that a substantial minority of them, simply reject.
If some of those in that minority can be saved through home-tutoring, then thank goodness for home-tutoring.
It may not be perfect, and it may be open to abuse- but exactly the same is true of school.
Home tutoring is not soley a refuge for the victims of bullying, and it's not a state-school-at-home- it's an approach which, for many families, is specifically to avoid some of what they see as the bad aspects of school education.
As for the teaching of evolution- I may be wrong here, but, judging from the number of internet pressure groups advocating teaching evolution in US schools vs. pressure groups advocating teaching 'intelligent design'; it would again appear that the problem you raise is, not soley restricted to home education.
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
GOLD Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Posted:
Having said that, and, having read some of the internet stuff on the evolution/intelligent design issue; I can see why you'd be uneasy at the prospect of fundamentalist Christian home-tutoring
Even so, maybe it's one of those differences between the UK and US; over here it's not a big problem- we don't have that many fundamentalists.
It seems to me that the problems aren't so much to do with home-tutoring, as with something deeper within the US culture.
The question isn't whether home-tutoring is open to abuse- it is. The question is more about whether the pros of home-tutoring overide the cons, and whether the problems of home-tutoring are any more damaging than the problems of state education.
So I do see what you're saying, i just disagree that scrappng home tutoring, or excessive standardisation of home tutoring; is the best way to go about it.
Having said that, and, having read some of the internet stuff on the evolution/intelligent design issue; I can see why you'd be uneasy at the prospect of fundamentalist Christian home-tutoring
Even so, maybe it's one of those differences between the UK and US; over here it's not a big problem- we don't have that many fundamentalists.
It seems to me that the problems aren't so much to do with home-tutoring, as with something deeper within the US culture.
The question isn't whether home-tutoring is open to abuse- it is. The question is more about whether the pros of home-tutoring overide the cons, and whether the problems of home-tutoring are any more damaging than the problems of state education.
So I do see what you're saying, i just disagree that scrappng home tutoring, or excessive standardisation of home tutoring; is the best way to go about it.
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
BRONZE Member
Zebberdy and Jack Daniels
278 posts
Location: Swansea, south wales
Zebberdy and Jack Daniels
278 posts
Location: Swansea, south wales
Posted:
I second onewheeldave. Every child on the planet would learn more if they were comfetable with their environment. And personaly i've seen what some of the classrooms are in the local schools. They are gloomy as hell. What else can you expect from kids? would you really want to learn in a depressive room? Also maybe if a kid with 11 year's of SCHOOL education can barely read and write, that could be telling us all something about the school system. I done catering last year at college, and I am telling the truth, they made it impossible for the kids to fail that course. they gave the kid's the anwsers to every writen test (Insead of letting the kids learn from their mistakes and use their own brain) and what annoyed me the most, is that 3 of my tutors actualy made me put mistake's in my work that didn't have any oridgianal mistakes, to show that I had "progressed".
I second onewheeldave. Every child on the planet would learn more if they were comfetable with their environment. And personaly i've seen what some of the classrooms are in the local schools. They are gloomy as hell. What else can you expect from kids? would you really want to learn in a depressive room? Also maybe if a kid with 11 year's of SCHOOL education can barely read and write, that could be telling us all something about the school system. I done catering last year at college, and I am telling the truth, they made it impossible for the kids to fail that course. they gave the kid's the anwsers to every writen test (Insead of letting the kids learn from their mistakes and use their own brain) and what annoyed me the most, is that 3 of my tutors actualy made me put mistake's in my work that didn't have any oridgianal mistakes, to show that I had "progressed".
The only reason i'm scared of little kid's is because I know in ten year's time they'll be mugging me.....
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,762 posts
Location: York University, United Kingdom
Pooh-Bah
1,762 posts
Location: York University, United Kingdom
Posted:
But you yourself have said, thumperabbit, that your education is possibly not up to the same standard as some people who have come out of school. A post later you're saying that it's better. Which is it?
Oh, and just for general information, Ruth Kelly (if she has her way) will abolish the National Curriculum and advocate that schools are run by their financial patrons rather than Local Education Authorities.
This includes Faith groups and Retail companies.
Does ANYONE want their child to go to a school run by McDonalds? Or Nike? Or Fundamentalists?
But you yourself have said, thumperabbit, that your education is possibly not up to the same standard as some people who have come out of school. A post later you're saying that it's better. Which is it?
Oh, and just for general information, Ruth Kelly (if she has her way) will abolish the National Curriculum and advocate that schools are run by their financial patrons rather than Local Education Authorities.
This includes Faith groups and Retail companies.
Written by: BBC News
A new type of self-governing school authority, a "trust", will be created, which can oversee individual schools or a mini-chain of schools. These can be run by successful schools or outside providers, such as universities, businesses, faith groups or community groups.
Does ANYONE want their child to go to a school run by McDonalds? Or Nike? Or Fundamentalists?
After much consideration, I find that the view is worth the asphyxiation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I may disagree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
Diamond In The Rough
459 posts
Location: Richmond, Virginia
459 posts
Location: Richmond, Virginia
Posted:
The fact this kind of speech is protected by the First Amendment is difficult to accept, but it is an unfortunate aspect of a free society. To protect free speech, the unpleasant must be protected along with the pleasant. People cannot truly have free speech if the government mandates which opinions are acceptable to express and which are not. (Note I can only speak as an American here, but I think this sentiment is universally fundamental.)
Only allowing speech that is popular completely defeats the concept behind the First Amendment. If the government restricts one type of unpopular speech, what is to keep it from moving on to other forms of unpopular speech, such as anti-war sentiments or criticism of elected officials? It is perfectly reasonable to be angry about the Nazi-Twins, or KKK marches, or even receiving hate mail. However, citizens should let this negative situation serve as a reminder of the First Amendment's true purpose. The First Amendment is integral to the basic notion of the American democratic system.
The protection the courts give free speech and the press is meant to ensure that people can have an open exchange of ideas for the purpose of bringing about political and social changes. The system is set up to let the voice of the people be heard. Unfortunately, not everyone is going to have something pleasant to say. As long as the nation guarantees freedom of speech and of the press, some people will use it to voice unpopular sentiments.
Yes, you may feel what they are doing is wrong, but in their eyes, inter-racial marriage is wrong. Everyone will have different perspectives and you must accept that, or you become as intolerant as they have seemingly been brainwashed to be. As the great sage Alec Guinness said, "You're going to find that many of the truths you cling to depend greatly on your own point of view."
Written by: Birgit
And don't even mention "freedom of speech", I know it exists but this is wrong.
The fact this kind of speech is protected by the First Amendment is difficult to accept, but it is an unfortunate aspect of a free society. To protect free speech, the unpleasant must be protected along with the pleasant. People cannot truly have free speech if the government mandates which opinions are acceptable to express and which are not. (Note I can only speak as an American here, but I think this sentiment is universally fundamental.)
Only allowing speech that is popular completely defeats the concept behind the First Amendment. If the government restricts one type of unpopular speech, what is to keep it from moving on to other forms of unpopular speech, such as anti-war sentiments or criticism of elected officials? It is perfectly reasonable to be angry about the Nazi-Twins, or KKK marches, or even receiving hate mail. However, citizens should let this negative situation serve as a reminder of the First Amendment's true purpose. The First Amendment is integral to the basic notion of the American democratic system.
The protection the courts give free speech and the press is meant to ensure that people can have an open exchange of ideas for the purpose of bringing about political and social changes. The system is set up to let the voice of the people be heard. Unfortunately, not everyone is going to have something pleasant to say. As long as the nation guarantees freedom of speech and of the press, some people will use it to voice unpopular sentiments.
Yes, you may feel what they are doing is wrong, but in their eyes, inter-racial marriage is wrong. Everyone will have different perspectives and you must accept that, or you become as intolerant as they have seemingly been brainwashed to be. As the great sage Alec Guinness said, "You're going to find that many of the truths you cling to depend greatly on your own point of view."
Dance like it hurts; Love like you need money; Work like someone is watching.
Never criticize someone until you've walked a mile in their shoes. That way, when you DO criticize them, you are a mile away, and you have their shoes.
SILVER Member
Liquid Cow
2,629 posts
Location: High Wycombe, England
Liquid Cow
2,629 posts
Location: High Wycombe, England
Posted:
I'm reserving judgement on the whole home schooling thing for now, I can see benefits and drawbacks in both teaching types being argued at the moment, but currently nothing that hasn't been said already.
EDITED_BY: TheBovrilMonkey (1130593533)
Written by: thumperabbit
Also maybe if a kid with 11 year's of SCHOOL education can barely read and write, that could be telling us all something about the school system. I done catering last year at college
I'm reserving judgement on the whole home schooling thing for now, I can see benefits and drawbacks in both teaching types being argued at the moment, but currently nothing that hasn't been said already.
EDITED_BY: TheBovrilMonkey (1130593533)
But there's no sense crying over every mistake. You just keep on trying till you run out of cake.
PLATINUM Member
Flying Water Muppet
5,276 posts
Location: Edin-borrow., United Kingdom
Flying Water Muppet
5,276 posts
Location: Edin-borrow., United Kingdom
Posted:
GCSE's are a joke, I could have learned that stuff in two weeks. (as a kid, as an adult, I could have done a few hours before the exam) And standard grades are easier than that! So I'm for home schooling. You could get all the [censored] out of the way in a few months, and then teach them something useful.
GCSE's are a joke, I could have learned that stuff in two weeks. (as a kid, as an adult, I could have done a few hours before the exam) And standard grades are easier than that! So I'm for home schooling. You could get all the [censored] out of the way in a few months, and then teach them something useful.
"the now legendary" - Kaskade
"the still legendary" - Kaskade
I spunked in my friend's aquarium and the fish ate it. I love all fish. Especially the pink ones. They are my bitches. - Anon.
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,762 posts
Location: York University, United Kingdom
Pooh-Bah
1,762 posts
Location: York University, United Kingdom
Posted:
And how do you think that makes people who found them challenging feel?
I got 6 A's, 5 B's at GCSE.
That's higher than the average, but I still didn't find them "a joke". Maybe you got straight A*s, I don't know.
The only thing I didn't appreciate was being forced to learn things I knew I was going to drop as soon as I could e.g. Physics, French. I'm never ever going to want to learn those, so I didn't like being forced to spend 2 years learning them.
And how do you think that makes people who found them challenging feel?
I got 6 A's, 5 B's at GCSE.
That's higher than the average, but I still didn't find them "a joke". Maybe you got straight A*s, I don't know.
The only thing I didn't appreciate was being forced to learn things I knew I was going to drop as soon as I could e.g. Physics, French. I'm never ever going to want to learn those, so I didn't like being forced to spend 2 years learning them.
After much consideration, I find that the view is worth the asphyxiation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I may disagree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
BRONZE Member
Zebberdy and Jack Daniels
278 posts
Location: Swansea, south wales
Zebberdy and Jack Daniels
278 posts
Location: Swansea, south wales
Posted:
I said I had a better education for myself, even if it's not suited to other kid's that may have been school taught, I also said that I have had better life experiece being home educated then if I were taught in school. I didn't say I had a better standard of education from being home schooled.
Written by: Sethis
But you yourself have said, thumperabbit, that your education is possibly not up to the same standard as some people who have come out of school. A post later you're saying that it's better. Which is it?
I said I had a better education for myself, even if it's not suited to other kid's that may have been school taught, I also said that I have had better life experiece being home educated then if I were taught in school. I didn't say I had a better standard of education from being home schooled.
The only reason i'm scared of little kid's is because I know in ten year's time they'll be mugging me.....
BRONZE Member
had her carpal tunnel surgery already thanks v much
4,145 posts
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland (UK)
had her carpal tunnel surgery already thanks v much
4,145 posts
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland (UK)
Posted:
Prometheus, that's what I meant. I see all your points. I just didn't want to discuss the article on a "but if that's their opinion..." basis, because I know it is and it's their right. I'm still shocked and quite sad at how they must have been manipulated.
Home schooling is not singularly responsible for that, I never said it like that, Dave. But it is a factor that has shaped their lives and their exposure to a very limited range of opinions, which is as I said one of my main concerns about the home schooling. I met a man who told me he'd home-schooled his daughter in his own, Christian fashion, and she had absolutely no contact with non-Christian kids, alcohol and other drugs, until the day she met some people, went to a club, got drugs in her drink and got date-raped. She never even knew that things like that existed. Such a limited knowledge of what's going on in the world is definitely more likely to occur when kids are kept away from people outside their little circle. NO not all home-schooling parents will educate their kids like this, and YES lots of people can come out of home-schooling with good knowledge and all, but before I can approve of it I'd need regulations for what is taught and guarantees that different views of the world are encouraged.
Prometheus, that's what I meant. I see all your points. I just didn't want to discuss the article on a "but if that's their opinion..." basis, because I know it is and it's their right. I'm still shocked and quite sad at how they must have been manipulated.
Home schooling is not singularly responsible for that, I never said it like that, Dave. But it is a factor that has shaped their lives and their exposure to a very limited range of opinions, which is as I said one of my main concerns about the home schooling. I met a man who told me he'd home-schooled his daughter in his own, Christian fashion, and she had absolutely no contact with non-Christian kids, alcohol and other drugs, until the day she met some people, went to a club, got drugs in her drink and got date-raped. She never even knew that things like that existed. Such a limited knowledge of what's going on in the world is definitely more likely to occur when kids are kept away from people outside their little circle. NO not all home-schooling parents will educate their kids like this, and YES lots of people can come out of home-schooling with good knowledge and all, but before I can approve of it I'd need regulations for what is taught and guarantees that different views of the world are encouraged.
"vices are like genitals - most are ugly to behold, and yet we find that our own are dear to us."
(G.W. Dahlquist)
Owner of Dragosani's left half
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,762 posts
Location: York University, United Kingdom
Pooh-Bah
1,762 posts
Location: York University, United Kingdom
Posted:
How do you know you've had a better experience if you've never *been* in public schools?
Not everyone gets bullied. Not every room is boring. Not every teacher sucks.
I don't think I would have liked home teaching because 1. My mother had a job which would have prevented a lot of time being spent on it. 2. I would have become even more socially maladjusted and reclusive than I am already.
And, IMHO if someone can't read and write by the time they are 16 then either the kid is mentally deficient or their parents SUCK. Any school, no matter HOW bad, could teach a child to read and write.
How do you know you've had a better experience if you've never *been* in public schools?
Not everyone gets bullied. Not every room is boring. Not every teacher sucks.
I don't think I would have liked home teaching because 1. My mother had a job which would have prevented a lot of time being spent on it. 2. I would have become even more socially maladjusted and reclusive than I am already.
And, IMHO if someone can't read and write by the time they are 16 then either the kid is mentally deficient or their parents SUCK. Any school, no matter HOW bad, could teach a child to read and write.
After much consideration, I find that the view is worth the asphyxiation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I may disagree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
GOLD Member
Self-Flagellation Expert
3,414 posts
Location: Bogged at CG, Australia
Self-Flagellation Expert
3,414 posts
Location: Bogged at CG, Australia
Posted:
The problem with schools, as i see it, are mainly the following:
too many students/teacher.
too much of a 'slowest pace sets the pace' sorta thing - If one kid take 5 weeks to pick up calculus, then the whole class is on calculus for 5 weeks.
too much class-based interaction, and not in a helpful way (talking, messing about etc).
The other thing is, though, you pick up some good points:
dealing with other people in a close situation.
absorbing information from different means (visual/auditory/textual learning)
Doing my little devil's advocatey thing here, but who are we to pick and choose what someone's beliefs are? Them saying that white power is the way forward, up the aryans and all that may, and does, make us sick.
But maybe our tolerance of non-white peoples, our abolishment of segregation (i forgot what the proper word is, apartheid or something) and everything that we hold as right and good makes them sick.
Now, i'm not saying that their view is right, or ours is wrong. But i can't say that ours is right and theirs is wrong.
That'd take me to the same level as all the people that we're talking about here.
The problem with schools, as i see it, are mainly the following:
too many students/teacher.
too much of a 'slowest pace sets the pace' sorta thing - If one kid take 5 weeks to pick up calculus, then the whole class is on calculus for 5 weeks.
too much class-based interaction, and not in a helpful way (talking, messing about etc).
The other thing is, though, you pick up some good points:
dealing with other people in a close situation.
absorbing information from different means (visual/auditory/textual learning)
Doing my little devil's advocatey thing here, but who are we to pick and choose what someone's beliefs are? Them saying that white power is the way forward, up the aryans and all that may, and does, make us sick.
But maybe our tolerance of non-white peoples, our abolishment of segregation (i forgot what the proper word is, apartheid or something) and everything that we hold as right and good makes them sick.
Now, i'm not saying that their view is right, or ours is wrong. But i can't say that ours is right and theirs is wrong.
That'd take me to the same level as all the people that we're talking about here.
"beg beg grovel beg grovel"
"master"
--FSA
"There was an arse there, i couldn't help myself"
--Rougie
GOLD Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Posted:
Presumably the question here is not whether there are some bad aspects to home schooling, but how it compares to traditional schooling (which also has bad aspects).
So, to me, a lot of the arguments here against home schooling are a bit invalid, as they all seem to have in common the fact that they apply equally to shools,and to schooled children.
This happens to plenty of schooled people as well; additionally, that's one particular example of home schooling- I would think that the majority of home tutored children are actually made aware of those dangers.
How does a schooled person know they've had a better experience if they've not been home tutored?
No-ones saying they are- the word we're using is 'some'.
That's not true, as should be evident by the levels of illiteracy we currently have amongst school leavers.
Plenty of people leave school who have great parents, and who are highly intelligent; yet can't read or write well.
For example,some dyslexics; also children whose minds are such that they cope well with learning logical and consistent skills, but have serious problems with dealing with the irregularities and inconsistencies of the English language (hence the campaigns to introduce 'simplified spelling etc).
=========
We've been through this before
In my view it is perfectly possible (and desirable) to condemn some viewpoints as 'wrong' (ie some POVs are 'wrong')
That's my viewpoint- by sheer logic it follows that I'm either
1. right- in which case it's fine to judge some viewpoints as 'wrong'
2. wrong- which is impossible, as it would then be true that there are no 'wrong' points of view (hence, mine couldn't be said to be wrong)
3. neither wrong or right- in which case, again, my viewpoint (or any viewpoint) can't be said to be 'wrong'.
*disclaimer- after writing that, i'm feeling somewhat confused myself, and reserve the right to come back later to change it
Seriously,I may not have explianed it well, but, I feel strongly that, as rational intelligent beings, we are well within our rights to condemn the views of those whose actions are cruel, or whose viewpoints are presented as being rational, yet, on investigation, contain clear inconsistencies (this last being particularly prevalent amongst religious fundamentalists).
Presumably the question here is not whether there are some bad aspects to home schooling, but how it compares to traditional schooling (which also has bad aspects).
So, to me, a lot of the arguments here against home schooling are a bit invalid, as they all seem to have in common the fact that they apply equally to shools,and to schooled children.
Written by: Birgit
I met a man who told me he'd home-schooled his daughter in his own, Christian fashion, and she had absolutely no contact with non-Christian kids, alcohol and other drugs, until the day she met some people, went to a club, got drugs in her drink and got date-raped.
This happens to plenty of schooled people as well; additionally, that's one particular example of home schooling- I would think that the majority of home tutored children are actually made aware of those dangers.
Written by: Sethis
How do you know you've had a better experience if you've never *been* in public schools?
How does a schooled person know they've had a better experience if they've not been home tutored?
Written by: Sethis
Not everyone gets bullied. Not every room is boring. Not every teacher sucks.
No-ones saying they are- the word we're using is 'some'.
Written by: Sethis
And, IMHO if someone can't read and write by the time they are 16 then either the kid is mentally deficient or their parents SUCK. Any school, no matter HOW bad, could teach a child to read and write.
That's not true, as should be evident by the levels of illiteracy we currently have amongst school leavers.
Plenty of people leave school who have great parents, and who are highly intelligent; yet can't read or write well.
For example,some dyslexics; also children whose minds are such that they cope well with learning logical and consistent skills, but have serious problems with dealing with the irregularities and inconsistencies of the English language (hence the campaigns to introduce 'simplified spelling etc).
=========
Written by: MiG
But maybe our tolerance of non-white peoples, our abolishment of segregation (i forgot what the proper word is, apartheid or something) and everything that we hold as right and good makes them sick.
Now, i'm not saying that their view is right, or ours is wrong. But i can't say that ours is right and theirs is wrong.
That'd take me to the same level as all the people that we're talking about here.
We've been through this before
In my view it is perfectly possible (and desirable) to condemn some viewpoints as 'wrong' (ie some POVs are 'wrong')
That's my viewpoint- by sheer logic it follows that I'm either
1. right- in which case it's fine to judge some viewpoints as 'wrong'
2. wrong- which is impossible, as it would then be true that there are no 'wrong' points of view (hence, mine couldn't be said to be wrong)
3. neither wrong or right- in which case, again, my viewpoint (or any viewpoint) can't be said to be 'wrong'.
*disclaimer- after writing that, i'm feeling somewhat confused myself, and reserve the right to come back later to change it
Seriously,I may not have explianed it well, but, I feel strongly that, as rational intelligent beings, we are well within our rights to condemn the views of those whose actions are cruel, or whose viewpoints are presented as being rational, yet, on investigation, contain clear inconsistencies (this last being particularly prevalent amongst religious fundamentalists).
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,762 posts
Location: York University, United Kingdom
Pooh-Bah
1,762 posts
Location: York University, United Kingdom
Posted:
The problems with Home tutoring, as I see it, are mainly the following:
Too much time spent with parents, so no other role models are available.
Parent will consciously or unconsciously affect the child's choice of subjects. e.g. I hate maths, so obviously my child wouldn't be focusing that much on it.
Too much social isolation. You aren't exposed to other people's views/opinions.
The good points are:
You will not get bullied.
You will progress at your own pace.
And I agree with you, MiG insofar as you talk about respect for other people's beliefs. However, when those beliefs become actions then you need to draw the line between the majority of society and the subculture's right to exist.
"Your right to swing your fist ends at my face" Great quote (it might have been Dave, can't remember) which sums up most of the argument between talking/doing.
The problems with Home tutoring, as I see it, are mainly the following:
Too much time spent with parents, so no other role models are available.
Parent will consciously or unconsciously affect the child's choice of subjects. e.g. I hate maths, so obviously my child wouldn't be focusing that much on it.
Too much social isolation. You aren't exposed to other people's views/opinions.
The good points are:
You will not get bullied.
You will progress at your own pace.
And I agree with you, MiG insofar as you talk about respect for other people's beliefs. However, when those beliefs become actions then you need to draw the line between the majority of society and the subculture's right to exist.
"Your right to swing your fist ends at my face" Great quote (it might have been Dave, can't remember) which sums up most of the argument between talking/doing.
After much consideration, I find that the view is worth the asphyxiation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I may disagree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
BRONZE Member
Zebberdy and Jack Daniels
278 posts
Location: Swansea, south wales
Zebberdy and Jack Daniels
278 posts
Location: Swansea, south wales
Posted:
I'm setting myself as example against my friends that have come out of publid school, thats how I can compair my life experience to their's. If I had been home schooled I would have the outlook on life and the freedome I feel now, I know that for sure. I've come to this conclution of what would have happened if I went to public school, I have a fierce temperment with disccusions such as this, or politics. If I were in public school I would either be a bully and would have been expelled from school, or I would have been bullied, I can take a certain ammount of crap from people, eventualy when I lash out I intend on hurting someone. After a certain ammount of bullying I would have eventualy cracked and get expelled for fighting.
Also, while we are on the topic of bullying, even being home educated has bully's involved. In my childhood I had to put up with being beaten up and verbaly abused (like many children in school) because of the fact that I was home schooled and me, my sister and my mother were, if you can say "gipsy's" or "hippies" because we went to a lot of festivals. so the time I wasn't in my house studying, when I was out enjoying myself playing with mates or riding my bike, I would get bullied. So I think it's a proven fact, bully's are everywhere.
I'm setting myself as example against my friends that have come out of publid school, thats how I can compair my life experience to their's. If I had been home schooled I would have the outlook on life and the freedome I feel now, I know that for sure. I've come to this conclution of what would have happened if I went to public school, I have a fierce temperment with disccusions such as this, or politics. If I were in public school I would either be a bully and would have been expelled from school, or I would have been bullied, I can take a certain ammount of crap from people, eventualy when I lash out I intend on hurting someone. After a certain ammount of bullying I would have eventualy cracked and get expelled for fighting.
Also, while we are on the topic of bullying, even being home educated has bully's involved. In my childhood I had to put up with being beaten up and verbaly abused (like many children in school) because of the fact that I was home schooled and me, my sister and my mother were, if you can say "gipsy's" or "hippies" because we went to a lot of festivals. so the time I wasn't in my house studying, when I was out enjoying myself playing with mates or riding my bike, I would get bullied. So I think it's a proven fact, bully's are everywhere.
The only reason i'm scared of little kid's is because I know in ten year's time they'll be mugging me.....
SILVER Member
I make my own people.
607 posts
Location: Nashville, Tennessee, USA
I make my own people.
607 posts
Location: Nashville, Tennessee, USA
Posted:
Hmmmm. I've heard homeschoolers point to those problems in public school as a reason to homeschool...
Too much time sitting in a classroom with just one teacher, as opposed to being out experiencing the real world and meeting different kinds of people.
Curriculum selection is governed from an "Ivory Tower" where a school board picks what everyone has to study.
Socialization limited only to children of the same age group all being taught the same as yourself.
I think that all methods of education have potential problems, but I think it's difficult to say that a problem only exists in one system or the other.
Standardized testing is often brought up as a way to make sure children are being educated well, but whenever it's instituted (in the US, at least) it seems that everyone hates it because neither government school teacher nor homeschooling parents like being forced to "teach for the test."
BTW, I think this thread has gotten way off topic. I won't post any more about homeschooling in this thread.
Back on topic...
Teenie bopper singers annoy me, and racist ones annoy me even more. Maybe freedom of speech is a quaint, outdated notion that worked 200 years ago but shouldn't apply to a modern world. There should be a standardized test that all musicians should have to pass before being allowed to record songs, to make sure they aren't offensive.
Written by: Sethis
The problems with Home tutoring, as I see it, are mainly the following:
Too much time spent with parents, so no other role models are available.
Parent will consciously or unconsciously affect the child's choice of subjects. e.g. I hate maths, so obviously my child wouldn't be focusing that much on it.
Too much social isolation. You aren't exposed to other people's views/opinions.
Hmmmm. I've heard homeschoolers point to those problems in public school as a reason to homeschool...
Too much time sitting in a classroom with just one teacher, as opposed to being out experiencing the real world and meeting different kinds of people.
Curriculum selection is governed from an "Ivory Tower" where a school board picks what everyone has to study.
Socialization limited only to children of the same age group all being taught the same as yourself.
I think that all methods of education have potential problems, but I think it's difficult to say that a problem only exists in one system or the other.
Standardized testing is often brought up as a way to make sure children are being educated well, but whenever it's instituted (in the US, at least) it seems that everyone hates it because neither government school teacher nor homeschooling parents like being forced to "teach for the test."
BTW, I think this thread has gotten way off topic. I won't post any more about homeschooling in this thread.
Back on topic...
Teenie bopper singers annoy me, and racist ones annoy me even more. Maybe freedom of speech is a quaint, outdated notion that worked 200 years ago but shouldn't apply to a modern world. There should be a standardized test that all musicians should have to pass before being allowed to record songs, to make sure they aren't offensive.
PLATINUM Member
Flying Water Muppet
5,276 posts
Location: Edin-borrow., United Kingdom
Flying Water Muppet
5,276 posts
Location: Edin-borrow., United Kingdom
Posted:
I like you dave.
Wasn't it socrates who made it clear that opinions can be wrong? Thank god. Otherwise we would have a bunch of sophist idiots talking relativist crap at us all the time.
That's a rough paraphrasing of the original greek text.
I like you dave.
Wasn't it socrates who made it clear that opinions can be wrong? Thank god. Otherwise we would have a bunch of sophist idiots talking relativist crap at us all the time.
That's a rough paraphrasing of the original greek text.
"the now legendary" - Kaskade
"the still legendary" - Kaskade
I spunked in my friend's aquarium and the fish ate it. I love all fish. Especially the pink ones. They are my bitches. - Anon.
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,762 posts
Location: York University, United Kingdom
Pooh-Bah
1,762 posts
Location: York University, United Kingdom
Posted:
Erm... you're more of sitting in a class room with 11 teachers... or more if you have more than one teacher for each subject at GCSE (and I know that we had about 5 teachers for sports, and 2 for several other subjects, plus form tutors, plus heads of year). Plus the fact that you change teachers every year you're in school. I think I must have had about 50 teachers all told during my time in Secondary school. Compared to 2 parents.
And I would argue that Schools are exactly what prepares you for the real world. It's where you learn all the norms and values expected of you when you leave school and go into a job (e.g. Punctuality, respect for authority, reliability). It's where you learn to fight, play the popularity game, stand up for yourself and work as part of a team. It also gives you a good introduction to *all* subjects and detailed instruction in the ones you choose to specialise in.
People in Primary school socialize with people up to 6 years older. People in Secondary school socialize with people up to 7 years older. And isn't that for the good? I don't know many 12 year olds who would benefit from being in the same classes as 18 year olds.
And when you do make friends with people older than you, isn't that because you share the same interests? If you join an extra-curricular club then the only reason why people will be there is because they're doing exactly the same as you.
Bugger.
Off Topic AGAIN.
Sorry.
I don't have anything against teenage singers per se, but they still annoy me. Especially when their target audience is 12 year old girls and they're singing about sex/drugs/suicide.
Written by: Patriarch917
Too much time sitting in a classroom with just one teacher, as opposed to being out experiencing the real world and meeting different kinds of people.
Erm... you're more of sitting in a class room with 11 teachers... or more if you have more than one teacher for each subject at GCSE (and I know that we had about 5 teachers for sports, and 2 for several other subjects, plus form tutors, plus heads of year). Plus the fact that you change teachers every year you're in school. I think I must have had about 50 teachers all told during my time in Secondary school. Compared to 2 parents.
And I would argue that Schools are exactly what prepares you for the real world. It's where you learn all the norms and values expected of you when you leave school and go into a job (e.g. Punctuality, respect for authority, reliability). It's where you learn to fight, play the popularity game, stand up for yourself and work as part of a team. It also gives you a good introduction to *all* subjects and detailed instruction in the ones you choose to specialise in.
Written by: Patriarch917
Socialization limited only to children of the same age group all being taught the same as yourself.
People in Primary school socialize with people up to 6 years older. People in Secondary school socialize with people up to 7 years older. And isn't that for the good? I don't know many 12 year olds who would benefit from being in the same classes as 18 year olds.
And when you do make friends with people older than you, isn't that because you share the same interests? If you join an extra-curricular club then the only reason why people will be there is because they're doing exactly the same as you.
Bugger.
Off Topic AGAIN.
Sorry.
I don't have anything against teenage singers per se, but they still annoy me. Especially when their target audience is 12 year old girls and they're singing about sex/drugs/suicide.
After much consideration, I find that the view is worth the asphyxiation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I may disagree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
Dreamer
4,308 posts
Location: York, England
4,308 posts
Location: York, England
Posted:
Incidentally, in american it goes roughly
5-10yo
11-13
14-18
...roughly. and patriach is from america.
threads always go off topic. meh. its a great discussion, nonethless.
I would have more to say, but I figure most people have hit the major points more strongly than i would have wanted to anyway, and who wants a moderate?
Incidentally, in american it goes roughly
5-10yo
11-13
14-18
...roughly. and patriach is from america.
threads always go off topic. meh. its a great discussion, nonethless.
I would have more to say, but I figure most people have hit the major points more strongly than i would have wanted to anyway, and who wants a moderate?
Keep your dream alive
Dreamin is still how the strong survive
Shalom VeAhavah
New Hampshire has a point....
GOLD Member
Self-Flagellation Expert
3,414 posts
Location: Bogged at CG, Australia
Self-Flagellation Expert
3,414 posts
Location: Bogged at CG, Australia
Posted:
OWD: I think the main thing i'm trying to raise is roughly equal to either point two or point three. The problem comes when comparing two conflicting viewpoints, devoid of any social situation. Or, in differing situations. One person who believes killing people is okay, one who doesn't (simplified example, and probably really easy to pick to pieces, but quick and easy to hopefully explain what i mean). In normal, day-to-day life, the first is not good. But, in a wartime situation, it is.
Our view on racism is socially accepted as right. Equal opportunity is a good thing, lack of racism is a good thing.
Would that be different had hitler won the war?
OWD: I think the main thing i'm trying to raise is roughly equal to either point two or point three. The problem comes when comparing two conflicting viewpoints, devoid of any social situation. Or, in differing situations. One person who believes killing people is okay, one who doesn't (simplified example, and probably really easy to pick to pieces, but quick and easy to hopefully explain what i mean). In normal, day-to-day life, the first is not good. But, in a wartime situation, it is.
Our view on racism is socially accepted as right. Equal opportunity is a good thing, lack of racism is a good thing.
Would that be different had hitler won the war?
"beg beg grovel beg grovel"
"master"
--FSA
"There was an arse there, i couldn't help myself"
--Rougie
GOLD Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Posted:
Both points 2 and 3 demonstrate that some points of view are wrong.
Few people people would say that killing is always wrong.
It's rational to say that killing for fun is wrong, that killing to rob is wrong; yet killing in self defence is right.
The fact that you can't lump it into one all encompassing rule is not a problem.
My real opinion on this stuff is that 'morality', 'right', 'wrong' etc tend to lead to confusion.
My previous post above was a logical argument that demonstrated that the view you proposed (which seemed to be saying that it was 'wrong' to condemn someones elses viewpoint as 'wrong') was inconsistent.
I believe in treating people fairly- if others believe in treating people unfairly, and in causing unnecessary pain to others- then I oppose that. I'll call them 'wrong', and I'm then using that term in the sense which most people understand it.
You seem intent on disabling the useful sense of the term 'wrong', by philosophical means.
That's fine; I've tried to show in my previous post that your approach is flawed; and, additionally, when it comes down to it, if you're going to insist on using moral terms in that sense, i'll simply continue to oppose those viewpoints that condone treating people unfairly, and inflicting suffering on others- on the grounds that I don't want to tolerate those kinds of view.
By your own reasoning, if I choose to do that, there's nothing you can do to critisise that, because, in your view, no viewpoint is morally wrong.
Written by: MiG
OWD: I think the main thing i'm trying to raise is roughly equal to either point two or point three.
Both points 2 and 3 demonstrate that some points of view are wrong.
Written by: MiG
The problem comes when comparing two conflicting viewpoints, devoid of any social situation. Or, in differing situations. One person who believes killing people is okay, one who doesn't (simplified example, and probably really easy to pick to pieces, but quick and easy to hopefully explain what i mean). In normal, day-to-day life, the first is not good. But, in a wartime situation, it is.
Few people people would say that killing is always wrong.
It's rational to say that killing for fun is wrong, that killing to rob is wrong; yet killing in self defence is right.
The fact that you can't lump it into one all encompassing rule is not a problem.
Written by: MiG
Our view on racism is socially accepted as right. Equal opportunity is a good thing, lack of racism is a good thing.
Would that be different had hitler won the war?
My real opinion on this stuff is that 'morality', 'right', 'wrong' etc tend to lead to confusion.
My previous post above was a logical argument that demonstrated that the view you proposed (which seemed to be saying that it was 'wrong' to condemn someones elses viewpoint as 'wrong') was inconsistent.
I believe in treating people fairly- if others believe in treating people unfairly, and in causing unnecessary pain to others- then I oppose that. I'll call them 'wrong', and I'm then using that term in the sense which most people understand it.
You seem intent on disabling the useful sense of the term 'wrong', by philosophical means.
That's fine; I've tried to show in my previous post that your approach is flawed; and, additionally, when it comes down to it, if you're going to insist on using moral terms in that sense, i'll simply continue to oppose those viewpoints that condone treating people unfairly, and inflicting suffering on others- on the grounds that I don't want to tolerate those kinds of view.
By your own reasoning, if I choose to do that, there's nothing you can do to critisise that, because, in your view, no viewpoint is morally wrong.
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
GOLD Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Posted:
Both points 2 and 3 demonstrate that some points of view are wrong.
Few people people would say that killing is always wrong.
It's rational to say that killing for fun is wrong, that killing to rob is wrong; yet killing in self defence is right.
The fact that you can't lump it into one all encompassing rule is not a problem.
My real opinion on this stuff is that 'morality', 'right', 'wrong' etc tend to lead to confusion.
My previous post above was a logical argument that demonstrated that the view you proposed (which seemed to be saying that it was 'wrong' to condemn someones elses viewpoint as 'wrong') was inconsistent.
I believe in treating people fairly- if others believe in treating people unfairly, and in causing unnecessary pain to others- then I oppose that. I'll call them 'wrong', and I'm then using that term in the sense which most people understand it.
You seem intent on disabling the useful sense of the term 'wrong', by philosophical means.
That's fine; I've tried to show in my previous post that your approach is flawed; and, additionally, when it comes down to it, if you're going to insist on using moral terms in that sense, i'll simply continue to oppose those viewpoints that condone treating people unfairly, and inflicting suffering on others- on the grounds that I don't want to tolerate those kinds of view.
By your own reasoning, if I choose to do that, there's nothing you can do to critisise that, because, in your view, no viewpoint is morally wrong.
Written by: MiG
OWD: I think the main thing i'm trying to raise is roughly equal to either point two or point three.
Both points 2 and 3 demonstrate that some points of view are wrong.
Written by: MiG
The problem comes when comparing two conflicting viewpoints, devoid of any social situation. Or, in differing situations. One person who believes killing people is okay, one who doesn't (simplified example, and probably really easy to pick to pieces, but quick and easy to hopefully explain what i mean). In normal, day-to-day life, the first is not good. But, in a wartime situation, it is.
Few people people would say that killing is always wrong.
It's rational to say that killing for fun is wrong, that killing to rob is wrong; yet killing in self defence is right.
The fact that you can't lump it into one all encompassing rule is not a problem.
Written by: MiG
Our view on racism is socially accepted as right. Equal opportunity is a good thing, lack of racism is a good thing.
Would that be different had hitler won the war?
My real opinion on this stuff is that 'morality', 'right', 'wrong' etc tend to lead to confusion.
My previous post above was a logical argument that demonstrated that the view you proposed (which seemed to be saying that it was 'wrong' to condemn someones elses viewpoint as 'wrong') was inconsistent.
I believe in treating people fairly- if others believe in treating people unfairly, and in causing unnecessary pain to others- then I oppose that. I'll call them 'wrong', and I'm then using that term in the sense which most people understand it.
You seem intent on disabling the useful sense of the term 'wrong', by philosophical means.
That's fine; I've tried to show in my previous post that your approach is flawed; and, additionally, when it comes down to it, if you're going to insist on using moral terms in that sense, i'll simply continue to oppose those viewpoints that condone treating people unfairly, and inflicting suffering on others- on the grounds that I don't want to tolerate those kinds of view.
By your own reasoning, if I choose to do that, there's nothing you can do to critisise that, because, in your view, no viewpoint is morally wrong.
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
GOLD Member
Self-Flagellation Expert
3,414 posts
Location: Bogged at CG, Australia
Self-Flagellation Expert
3,414 posts
Location: Bogged at CG, Australia
Posted:
Personally, i'd agree with you in that treating people fairly, not causing undue pain and the like are good things. And, i'll agree that i don't want to tolerate people not doing those things.
I'm just doing my best to present the other side of the argument, which is rather tricky, cos i can't back anything up with my personal beliefs.
Does that make sense, what i'm aiming for?
Personally, i'd agree with you in that treating people fairly, not causing undue pain and the like are good things. And, i'll agree that i don't want to tolerate people not doing those things.
I'm just doing my best to present the other side of the argument, which is rather tricky, cos i can't back anything up with my personal beliefs.
Does that make sense, what i'm aiming for?
"beg beg grovel beg grovel"
"master"
--FSA
"There was an arse there, i couldn't help myself"
--Rougie
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,762 posts
Location: York University, United Kingdom
Pooh-Bah
1,762 posts
Location: York University, United Kingdom
Posted:
Well you're very calmly and rationally pointing out that they must have reasons for their beliefs. Therefore what they believe makes sense to them.
However knowing that someone has a reason for what they do is worlds apart from approving of it.
It's nice to know that there is someone trying to see it from the opposing point of view rather than just unilaterally condemning it.
Well you're very calmly and rationally pointing out that they must have reasons for their beliefs. Therefore what they believe makes sense to them.
However knowing that someone has a reason for what they do is worlds apart from approving of it.
It's nice to know that there is someone trying to see it from the opposing point of view rather than just unilaterally condemning it.
After much consideration, I find that the view is worth the asphyxiation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I may disagree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
Similar Topics
Using the keywords [d oh racist teenie girl band] we found the following existing topics.
- Forums > d'oh - a racist teenie girl band [108 replies]
Show more..
© 1998 - 2024 Home of Poi
All prices converted to United States dollars using XE.com