I'm wondering about your opinion. If it were your choice, would you rather make the education:
- agnostic to opinions, teaching facts and learning critical thinking at a risk of people developing opinions which you may find unacceptable
- modeling people to cater to their physical, mental and social health and peace at a risk of discriminatory judgment
- endorsing rationalism and logic over empathy and public opinion
- make people share your moral standing to promote good
Please boost :-)
@jackdaniel 1 and 3 come across to me as the same thing. How are they different? How would you classify evidence-based lifestyles?
Rationalism is not the only way to live. Hedonism, stoicism, some kind of tribal life for fun, nationalism (i.e in a sense from before the XX century), separatism and many other life styles could be developed from the first model of education. Basically it is a philosophy, where you give someone tools and leave them be, while the third option is to make a decision how they should be (i.e not irrational).
@jackdaniel Thanks! That was helpful.
I don't understand the question.. If you mean: should they be taught? Definitively yes. Maybe word "facts" is too narrow – by that I mean presenting significant narratives relevant to humanity without giving your pupils the "right interpretation" of them.
I agree it is impossible to fully separate these things and that world can't be ideal with this regard. But there is a difference between trying to separate them and presenting cherry-picked facts to support some opinion.
By "opinion-agnostic" I mean trying to minimize the impact of my own convictions on the knowledge I try to present *even* if the knowledge is inconvenient to what I believe in (be it a moral standing or religion).
You are interested in MY opinion? How flattering. 🤔
However, your survey makes one assumption, that it is possible to present facts without colouring them with one's own opinion (or to present facts in a way to maximize the pupil's mental health, etc). I think that is very hard, if at all possible.
I may have misunderstood your question. If so, please clarify.
@alexshendi of course I mean collective "your" of peers on the mastodon :) if it sounded like a marketing trick then I'm sorry, I hate them myself. As of clarification, I've tagged you in a separate status (https://mastodon.social/@jackdaniel/103325257745519066)
Pool is not about complete approach to education but rather about principles on which such approach should be constructed.
I believe that each option is mutually exclusive in sense of what you call "politics" and the "base"; curriculum and methodology are things which are chosen after the first two were chosen. Let me give you an example:
If you decide, that the goal of humanity is goodness, then you chose curriculum and methodology to /convince/ the audience to agree with you.
I disagree with you. Fact that you put ethical questions in your post show that you are more inclined towards procuring good (last option).
The other options would not address any of these questions directly (but only as a consequence of executing strategies based on that principles).
As an addendum I'll add, that I think that each option has inherent positive and negative value to them if taken (or neglected) to the extremum and I agree, that it is not possible to fully pick only one.
"Education is all about ethical questions" is a very strong statement which reinforces my conviction about where would /I/ categorize your opinion. That said I understand you do not accept the question; thank you for a discussion.
Server run by the main developers of the project It is not focused on any particular niche interest - everyone is welcome as long as you follow our code of conduct!