Later we compiled a comparison list of moral values of the religions we researched and are still deciding if it's safe to say most religions share universal values. If yes, perhaps teachers can be more confident about upholding these values in multicultural classrooms.
Continue to fill in the last questions on the back of that sheet and bring it to class next week.
Also, it's not too soon to start thinking about a topic for your paper. Whenever you've decided, write up a short paragraph describing what you want to explore and I'll give you feedback.
See you next week.
I found last night's class to fit very nicely with the thoughts and actions that I try to take in my life. I have grown up hearing from my parents that if you want to be a good person you have to do good things and I think that this is the argument that Aristotle was trying to make. The idea of the Golden mean is something that really spoke to me because it shows that there are extremes to everything but that we must work to be balanced people.
ReplyDeleteThe discussion of the different religions was also very enlightening for me because we were looking at religions that I have heard of before but with which I was not familiar. It was surprising to me how similar they really all all. I made a comment in my group that our religion (Sikhism) seemed perfect but after reflecting on that comment I realize that all religions in their pure form may seem perfect. In my opinion it is our interpretation of a religion that brings it to the state in which we find many religions today. I find that many people take from the religion what they want to prove and seem to ignore other aspects of it.
I did not grow up in a strongly religious household, but even in that house we were expected to uphold many of the moral beliefs that were discussed last night in class (treat everyone equally, do not lie/steal/murder). I think that this says a lot about ourselves as a society and human race, but at the same time I question why so many people stray from these beliefs. What do you think?
I think there is a difference in our perception about the ideal education. In my education system I graduated from, the ideal is to send good students to the university to achieve their higher education and work in the society as leaders. The society places teacher in high morality, from many pieces of our history that many kings and good figures sent their children to school and talked to the teacher as the only person who could raise the children right in their social, emotional, and academicals achievements. So that system gives the teacher morality over any other professionalism in the society. Is it an ideal for other cultures? When I came home from the school complaining about something I was wrong as I could not do my work and the teacher always right. Now in my society due to many things changed and hit strongly all the aspects of life, the teachers are highly affected because they tried to keep that morals and their principles in education. But when the stomach is empty, it is not going to eat morals or ideals. So it is too much for asking the teacher for idealism, it is good if we get something there but we cannot be demanding for that and will make it difficult for the teacher to fulfill our requirements because in this case we are ignoring their humanity and environment.
ReplyDeleteAnother idea that came to me in which the good cannot be harmed, some of the comments put it on soul. If we look to many good people in our human history, we stop at harm of the good individuals. An example of that as Gandhi as he changed many perceptions especially non-violent action of his people and nation, but he was assassinated by his own people. He is a great human figure and example. Are we talking about his soul from his side, if so yes that soul never get harmed or if we look at the situation from another angle, yes he got harmed even with all that goodness. I never took a philosophy class in my life but I think that the philosophers drew their analogy from the environment that they lived in and their ideas were results of reactions going on at their time in which they do not exist right now due to humanity continuous dynamic changes.
Religion Morals
ReplyDeleteIn the last discussion of religion morals, I believe that all the religions are shared one universal issue in which that all of the religions if they based on philosophical ideas or based on books, are looking to make good things of humans as share, support, care, protect, and be good to yourself and others. I do not think that there is one religion did not say or discuss that for the goodness of humanity. We are the people who make the changes and illegal judgments that this religion is good or bad. Who gives us the right to judge these religions and on what basis and we are allowed to do that in which we disrespect others. The bad actions of this group or that group is based on the group perception and misunderstanding the meaning of human existence. The continuous depletion of natural resource in un even distribution which made some people rich and some poor and the gap increasing between them, the terrorist fear and terror in all world countries, The US involvements in the wish to control others under view of power, the uncontrolled scientific and technological discoveries and advancements to fulfill the destructions of others, all these actions based on people perceptions but not religions. In the classroom, as an educator I have to initiate my student's understanding of this fact and always work to make this meaning is the centre of my education mission regarding religions. The classroom is not the right place to debate about religions and ideally suppose not to be. This could go through making of meaning for this education as respect of others in the classroom and in the community. It is good to make my students aware of that fact and realize the difference between the religions ideas and people perceptions. This understanding will give my students a chance to value other people roles in helping humanity's life going smoothly and sharing of the good things of classroom, communities, cultures, and finally the world. The world will be safe and the people can practice some fairness and equality.
While there are certainly real and distinguishable differences amongst the major religions of the world, many seem to share several moral values. The major commonalities included the preservation of life, telling the truth, not stealing (respecting others and their belongings), living a life of moderation, being compassionate towards others, and acting in a humble manner. These values can generally be summed up in the Golden Rule of doing unto others as you’d have them do to you. The belief in one God was also shared by many, but not all, of the religions we examined.
ReplyDeleteVancouver is obviously a very multicultural city in which peoples from all backgrounds converge and it is important to respect the varying beliefs of all. By compiling a list of the various values of the world’s major religions we are able to compare them and create a list of values that the vast majority of people would agree are morally valid. Accordingly, I feel that we can rightfully apply these shared values to our classroom rules. As teachers we must try and uphold these values as rules in our classrooms and also attempt to role model these common moral values to our students. As such, we ought to encourage our students to internalize these common values and respect each other by not lying, cheating, stealing, or in any way hurting other students. We already do uphold these values in our classrooms to a large degree, and by understanding that these values are common to most people and religions we can demonstrate the legitimacy of their rule.
One issue with teleology that does not come up in our readings is the element of unpredictability that comes along with variables that cannot be considered or even imagined. The especially applies act-utilitarianism or rule-utilitarianism since they deal with determining the future effect of an action. But consider the first example for act- utilitarianism when Janice wanted to go to the beach, what if it rained that day or what if she drowns in the ocean these events will change the decision she should have made in order to enhance the good. If we consider a more abstract level what of the deciding to go see a movie rather than spending time with family, it is possible, which we all know from experiences that you might dislike the movie thus making your decision the wrong one.
ReplyDeleteIt is interesting to consider these ways of viewing ethics and how they relate to teaching. Deontology doesn’t seem to be a good fit for a teacher since every kids situation us uniquely different meaning that our decisions based on their needs could not be universal for example, Jonnie has a rough home life and is often late to school since he relies on his alcoholic mother for a ride and she is often reluctant to get out of bed in the morning thus Jonnie is late. If we were lenient on Jonnie for his tardiness then we would have to apply this universally so that Jason who is late because he thinks he is special and rules don’t apply to him would not learn his lesson. Utilitarianism make sense for teaching either since it is often required to cause students some discomfort in the pursuit of an education.
Aristotle believed that “virtues are habits that fall in the middle between the two extremes of excess (too much of a trait) and deficiency (too little of it)”. One of the questions on last week’s handout pertained to Aristotle’s Golden Mean of friendship in terms of the teacher-student relationship. I feel that on one extreme you would have a teacher and student acting as friends by spending time with each other away from school. They also might be engaged in phoning, texting, or emailing each other during off-school hours. To take this to the very extreme, they would be taking part in illegal activities such as sexual behaviour or taking drugs together.
ReplyDeleteContrarily, a teacher-student relationship might be so distant and cold that the child is negated any real opportunity to properly learn. For instance, a teacher might verbally berate the students in the class. Or perhaps a teacher might simply sit at their desk and ignore the class while the students are forced to copy notes out of a text. Either way the environment is not conducive to optimum learning.
I suppose that Aristotle would suggest that the optimum teacher-student relationship would be one in which mutual respect was shared. The teacher would have to be personable and able to relate to the students and understand how to create activities that the children find engaging. I believe that this teacher would also share some of their own personal experiences with the class and not be afraid to show emotions. The teacher would need to uphold the authority figure in the relationship, however showing an interest in the students in their out-of-school activities ought to be encouraged. For example, I think that most kids respond well when a teacher asks them how their soccer game went last night. I also think this teacher ought to role model appropriate behaviour to the students, and not be one who lived by the motto “do as I say, not as I do”.
It seemed to me--and to a few others, judging from the above comments--that there are several core morals that are shared by all of the religions we looked at. What I was left thinking after class was, "Why do religions exist? What purpose does religion serve? What need does it fulfill in people?"
ReplyDeleteI think the handout mentioned it's been speculated that religions are made out of humans' fear of death. This is a very interesting concept to me and one I have thought about before. I think people have a desire to believe there is something outside of themselves and that there is more to life than just, well, life. But what does the possibility of the afterlife mean for our morals on earth? If I do good to get into heaven, is that really the right reason to do it? (I've kind of talked about this in previous posts, and it's something that interests me quite a lot. I might write about some variation of this in my paper, so if you have any comments or recommendations it would be greatly appreciated!) Critical thinking skills are something I plan to focus on with my students because honing those skills is essentially what studying English is all about. In that way, I hope to be a model to my students and impart to them the skills necessary to determine how one should act in society. Through critical thinking and logic, students should find their morals from within and then be able to acknowledge that they act morally because they determined themselves that it is the way people should act, not because religion or their teacher told them so. I want my students to give themselves credit for the people they become and I want them to consider the power they have over their lives; the reason to be good or bad does not exist without but rather within, and they have the ability to face their lives in whatever direction they want.
I think too much credit is given to religion for morality, and I think Thursday's class is a good indication of how morality is something that is out there, not something that one must get from a religion.
As teachers we should try and teach the idea of the golden mean to students so that their school career will be more balanced. Having the correct mixture of social interactions and studying is key. I would like to compare the life of a drug addicted person to the Aristotelian idea of the golden mean. These types of people live their lives to the excess in the direction of satisfying cravings. So according to Aristotle they would be using more the animal part of the brain and not the rational (which makes us human) mind. The use of the animal mind allows for the fulfillment of basic functions. Rather than dreaming of more complicated and healthy ways of living their lives. If achieving happiness is the main goal of life and these people achieve happiness from drug use then this will always be what they are making their lives all about. They become so obsessed about solving the craving for their drug of choice that they end up being highly deficient in other parts of their lives. Physically their bodies deteriorate from not being able to think about eating. Their habit forming behavior has led them to live their lives in a manner that is below the golden mean. These types of people can excuse their detrimental to themselves and society behaviors because of Aristotle's idea of continence and incontinence. They are satisfying their needs and if it is through wrongdoing then they can excuse it due to ignorance.
ReplyDeleteIs religion developed as a way to face death? I think that this has a lot to do with its formation. We will never really know if god did form the twelve commandments and give them to Moses. Was Moses someone who created these ideals as a way to influence his followers? We all have our own ideas about the afterlife or what happens after death. I choose to believe that their is a higher power that we can look up to if we choose. I was having a conversation with Allie on the bus after class and I was trying to show how a soul can exist in a person. If you have ever been to an open casket funeral then you may know what I am trying to say. When you look at the body of the person that only a week ago you had a relationship with lying in the casket they seem somehow empty. I also see how religion is tied in with community. It gives people the opportunity to get together once a week, listen to thoughtful scripture, and spend time in a self reflective state. In my opinion if all the people in a community got together once a week to share their experience strength and hope it would lead to a tight and supportive community.
This still doesn't convince me that souls exist, though I will consider this if I ever see the dead body of someone I knew. To me, the person seeming empty does not suggest a lack of soul, but rather a lack of life. If only one week before you had talked to this person and shared something with this person, of course seeing them dead in a casket isn't going to live up to the idea you have of them; of course something will be "missing," but there is no evidence to suggest that something is a soul.
ReplyDeleteI need something falsifiable, Christian! You know this haha. Anyway, a great bus ride nonetheless.
I too found the discussion regarding the similarities and differences between the various religions very interesting. A belief in a higher power, of something greater than oneself, can be both comforting and humbling. To me, the difference between the various religions was primarily evident in the various ways that we expressed our devotion, the practice of our faith. For example, communication to our higher power was done through meditation, prayers with specific wording, prayers involving prostration several times a day, or prayers that are chanted. Although each practitioner of the various religions are using different methods, we still are taking time each day to connect and try to discern our higher power’s will for us. I believe that educators’ fears not to offend and to be politically correct has caused us to shy away from any meaningful discussion of religion in the classroom. Looking at the commonalities rather than the differences between the various religions would be beneficial to students.
ReplyDeleteI noticed that there was at least one very large difference between the morals in the religions we looked at in class. Some of the religions, such as Sikhism, tolerated violence whereas others, such as Buddhism, do not. What was perhaps even more interesting was that some religions were not clear on their position with regards to violence. To me, this is a major reason that we cannot say that they all share universal values as violence is a pretty fundamental feature. Furthermore, looking at the list I compiled from class, it is difficult to find many universal morals. Don’t steal and don’t murder are obvious ones. After that it gets more difficult. What is sexual responsibility? How do we explain family values to kids that have horrible home lives? If nothing else, we can try to maintain the ethics of equality and the golden rule, as these two are the most applicable in the classroom.
ReplyDeleteRe: why religions exist... I heard an interesting interview on the radio a couple of months ago. I can't remember the speaker and I can't speak to the validity of the statements, but it certainly is thought provoking. I'm heavily paraphrasing here, but the gist is correct. The person spoke of a study that showed that upwards of 80% of Christians in the USA were very scared on their deathbed. This of course makes a person question the effectiveness of the religion. I don't simply mean that religion is response to the fear of death, but more that the idea of death could mean joining God in heaven. Shouldn't a devout follower in many cases welcome death (and not just Christians)? Another way to look at this in a broader context is to wonder how many people are actually enacting the ethical behaviour that they think they believe in.
Although I firmly believe that public school classrooms should be secular places, I also believe that many human ideals are expressed in any number of different human endeavors. To my mind, religious attitudes, traditions and scholars have had a positive—and negative!—influence on education. In terms of the positive, I am interested in the ideas of Dr. Allan MacKinnon (a member of the Faculty of Education at SFU) who has written about Taoism and education. MacKinnon speaks of teaching “at the elbows” of students. Taoist notions of humility and authenticity can be seen in this notion.
ReplyDeleteThat said, I have had a personal experience with what I would see as the negative influence of religion in the classroom. As a Grade 5 student in southern Ontario I was forced to recite “The Lord’s Prayer” each morning before class. In Grade 6, this practice was discontinued. As a child, I remember feeling that the morning prayer was artificial and inappropriate for a public school setting with a mixed group of faiths (and lack thereof) in attendance. Oddly (perhaps), to me the lack of the prayer seemed to ring a note of authenticity in the classroom.
That said, I have had a life-long interest in religious matters. The writings of Marcus Aurelius, Michel de Montaigne and Jacques Derrida have influenced me in this regard.
Retributive Justice
ReplyDeleteIn Abbotsford, they have encouraged all administrators to be trained in restorative action (formerly, restorative justice—I guess Justice was too judgmental). I believe restorative action is based on/the same as retributive justice. The idea behind restorative action is getting everyone involved in the event together and talking it out in a moderated environment.
When I did the training, it was interesting to hear case studies where the people running the restorative action said they would have given a more severe penalty to the “perpetrator” than the victim did. I spoke with an administrator who was actually had restorative action in dealing with someone who broke into her house and stole items. She said it was difficult, but productive. She said that you do feel that you are “heard” as the victim. At the end of her process, the man who broke into her house ended up returning jewelry that had belonged to her mother. I find the process behind this rather cumbersome, but the results seem beneficial. Also, you can use some of the techniques in a less rigid way to get some of the same results.
Religious Ideals
It is interesting to look at the “commandments” of different religions to find the similarities and differences between religions. What I find even more interesting, however, is looking at how those ideals fit in with the overall ethics of the people practicing those religions. As I was researching Sikhism, I discovered that one of the religious beliefs is that everyone has equal status in the eyes of God. If this is so, why is there such disparity in the traditional treatment of boys versus girls and why is it that some Sikhs are still very aware of the caste system? I guess, just like other religions, practitioners are still striving for the ideal, but have not yet achieved it.
In my research I also came across the web site about the ethics of war and how different religions view war. The web site is http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/war/
It’s interesting to note that some major religions share basic beliefs or codes of behaviour, and as Kevin mentioned, these beliefs are a useful guide to creating a code of conduct or a value system within the classroom (and outside of it). I also agree that when students have an opportunity to learn about all of the different world religions in school, there are benefits. I understand that religious practice creates community, and that many people derive comfort and meaning from their faith.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I can’t escape the fact that religions can be the source of conflict, death, destruction and conduct that flies in the face of moral behaviour. More often than not, religious differences result in conflict rather than community and sharing. When taken too literally, codes of morality inherent in religions can be dangerous and lead to injustice and inequality.
I`ve been thinking about the Golden Mean as it relates to the Buddha`s teaching of the Middle Way, or Middle Path, which leads to a balanced life. The Buddha was born a Prince and led a life of extreme luxury. Upon leaving the comforts of the palace he sought to attain Enlightenment through extreme asceticism (denial of food, water, shelter), but failed. He later sought a middle way between these two extremes; a Middle Way. The metaphor of the strings on a musical instrument comes to mind; if the string is too loose then it will not produce the desired sound, and if the string is too tight it may break. According to the teachings of the Buddha, it is only through a path of moderation between the extremes of indulgence and self-mortification that the mind and soul become balanced and one is ultimately able to achieve the goal of Enlightenment.
ReplyDeleteReturning to the idea of Forms...When I read that Aristotle rejected Plato’s concept of two worlds—the ideal world of Forms and the physical world—I started wondering how this affected ideas about the supernatural at that time, and how this shift has since influenced thinking on the subject of God. If Aristotle rejected the idea of a second, perfect world was he also rejecting the existence of the Gods? I have always thought of the Gods (and God) as existing in a dimension similar to what Plato describes as the Ideal world of Forms. Also, does Jung’s concept of the Archetype reclaim what Aristotle rejected in the first place? Am I correct in thinking that Forms are similar to Archetypes?
I have started to consider what educational issue my term paper will focus on when I read about utilitarianism this week. I think I might look at a particular elementary school class that I am familiar with, and focus on a few issues using a utilitarian viewpoint. Acting ethically using the standards of utilitarianism would entail one to take actions that would cause the most happiness possible. Viewing a typical elementary classroom through a utilitarianism lens would lead me to believe that there are frequent ethical dilemmas. In particular, there is one classroom in Burnaby that has an autistic child with extremely challenging behaviours, as well as students who are ESL and a student who is considered an advanced learner. With such a diverse class, how can anyone’s needs be fully met? Using Bentham’s “hedonistic calculus”, it is unclear how a teacher in the above scenario could strike a balance in her delivery of the curriculum so that everyone’s “happiness” counts equally. Unless some other issue strikes my fancy, I believe this is the path I am going to pursue
ReplyDeleteAristotle’s virtue ethics seem to be quite intuitive to me in a certain light. If something is worth doing, it is worth doing well. The good teacher is one who is in tune with her students, who creates a nurturing, stimulating, and safe learning environment, one who is willing to go above and beyond for her students if it might increase their learning. Students in her class learn socially, emotionally, physically, and academically. She is performing to the best of her ability and is capable in her field. Although this idea of essential function is fairly easy to see in terms of a person as a profession, it muddies when being applied to a person as a person.
ReplyDeleteWhat is our main function as people? Do we even have one? These are questions that have been stimulating debate for hundreds of years, yet Aristotle’s virtue ethics seems to suggest that the answer should be common sense. Is there even such thing as common sense? Although I agree that one should strive to be the best version of oneself, if the best version of me leaves something to be desired one day, does this make one not a good person, or simply a generally good person on an off day?
Neitzsche would argue that denying an aspect of oneself in order to please the masses is doing oneself a disservice. According to his theories, the dictates of the weak are what have created this idea of acting in a moral manner and it has caused a transfer of power, the ultimate goal of the weak. Thus, the strong should thrive and win and earn the glory, and if some get hurt in the process, it’s still for the greater good.
I think a combination of views is likely the best way to go. A sprinkling of Kant to ensure that we are doing what we think is right and some Neitzsche to ensure that doing the right thing is balanced with maintaining the drive to reach our full potential. We will need some Mill to remind us to consider the others that our choices may affect and some Aristotle so that we try to balance our animal tempers with our rational faculties. Easy, right?
~b
Sorry I just realized that my postings haven't been showing up. My apologizes for the volume, but here's all that I have written to date.
ReplyDeleteI'll start with this weeks entry.
Wednesday, June-09-10
I grew up in a household that was split between one side of the family being very religious and the other thinking that “religion is a crutch”. As a result, I have spent many years trying to understand why people have faith in deities. I have not studied any one religion extensively, but I have tried to learn bits and pieces whenever I can. From my shallow exposure to many religions, I have come to conclude that they fill a human need for guidance. Being human is a very complicated affair. We are constantly challenged by conflicting choices. In the absence of any framework, how does one decide how to prioritize needs? How do we build interacting communities if no one is playing by the same rules?
Religion isn’t the only framework available, of course. We have discussed Aristotle and Plato’s ideas on how to live. This week, we are reading about Kantian ethics with Ross’s fine tuning and utilitarian ideas.
When my father-in-law became a Canadian citizen a few years back, the judge who gave him his citizenship had an interesting perspective. He addressed the diverse group of people saying that in Canada we do not have a share sense of history, we don’t all agree on our religions, and we all have different customs. He asked what, then, could hold us together as a people. His answer was that we all had to uphold the same laws as outlined by our judicial system. That was how we made sure that everyone was playing the game with the same rules.
Kahlyn
Here's the rest of the stuff that I thought I had posted:
ReplyDeleteMonday, May-17-10
My name is Kahlyn. I am currently doing my Environmental Education Diploma. I teach secondary science in North Vancouver. I did a BSc. in biology at SFU, my BEd. specializing in computers at UBC, and I went to Aichi Gakusen College in Toyota, Japan when I was 19. In my 12 years of teaching, I have prepped 20 different courses in five departments. I currently teach Science 8, Science 9 and Biology 11. I consider myself a teacher above being a scientist.
Right now, I’m trying to juggle Educ 452 and this course on top of teaching full time and raising a seven-year old girl and four-year old boy. Wish me luck.
My interest in this course stems from the changes made to the science curriculum. We are no longer teaching facts that someone who has been dead a long time figured out. In Grade 8, we talk about water systems and our impact on them. I have to deal with cloning and assisted reproductive techniques in my Science 9.
Although I don’t currently teach it, Science 10 has a unit that includes human generated problems like invasive species. Of course, Biology 11 always has to face the evolution debate.
I hope that I can be resource person to those of you starting out.
Sunday, May-23-10
ReplyDeleteI work with teens. When they enter my school in Grade 8, they try to leave their childhoods behind. They want to be seen as “cool”. Parents, by definition, are not cool. They no longer wish to emulate the behaviour of their parents. Now, they must look to new role models for guidance.
Media becomes an important source of information on conduct. Many are drawn to the allure of celebrities. For some, they believe that if they behave the same way as celebrities, they will get as much attention. All teens are looking for some sort of per acceptance.
Given the unwitting influence of celebrities, should celebrities be held to a higher moral code? The opposite seems to be the reality. Celebrities are in the business of getting attention, not providing moral framework for youth.
Some politicians build careers on a moral stance. My group looked at Mandela. He sought to bring equity to all people of South Africa. He became a role model for youth. His personal conduct didn’t really have to enter into his politics given that he was imprisoned for 27 years. His interactions would have been managed by others. Other politicians may also try to achieve moral things, but they face complex situations in which maintaining a moral compass may be difficult. Compromise keeps them in power.
Teachers play a role in shaping the conduct of our students. We form communities with rules of conduct. If we are seen breaking our own rules, then the students can’t trust our rules. For this reason, among others, we are held to a higher level of conduct.
Tuesday, June-01-10
So Meghann, you’re the one who got me sick. It must be the curse of Environmental Education lack of rest. So, I also missed Thursday.
What is the basis on which we should form our decisions in order to be ethical human beings? As small children we follow the values outlined by parents. As we grow, we have more contact with other influences: school, peers, religious institutions, and media (among others). Young do not necessarily have any comprehension of why they make the value judgements they do. They follow the social norms of their sphere. Are these social norms universal? Could I travel any where in the world and expect everyone to agree on “good” and “bad”? My experience would lead me to say “No”. Even the dichotomous notion of “good” and “bad” is not universal. I studied at a college in Japan. One of the courses I had to take was Japanese sociology. I was taught that Japanese see behaviour as a balancing act between seven conflicting human realms. I’m sorry, I can’t remember them all, but “loyalty” and “bravery” were two examples. The goal is not to be “good” or “bad” but to manage to keep the seven realms in balance so that happiness can be achieved. I like this view of human nature better than the two sided view I grew up with. I think this concept touches upon the complexity of being human.
I like the Plato/Aristotle idea that people are responsible for their actions even in complex situations because they are responsible for forming their own characters. One common factor I see in my students who are failing to succeed is a lack of responsibility for their behaviour. Those who blame all their misfortunes on others see no way of taking control of their situation and, therefore, see no way of improving it.
Unfortunately I was not able to make it to class last week, but looking at the notes, I agree with Socrates when he says focusing on pleasure itself puts one at risk of depending too much on the opinions of others. Also, placing great emphasis on pleasure would definitely put us in danger of being like animals. Humans would be at risk of being too savage like and greedy. As a result, humans need to place less emphasis on pleasure and realize their wants can affect the ones around them. Consequently, we must make choices and form habits in order to deter ourselves from being overly selfish. Happiness involves the balance in all aspects of life.
ReplyDeleteAlso, I would agree with Rachel when she states that religion can be the source of conflict. There are many religious differences that exist and what one may find acceptable, another may not. We see this difference in religion in public school as children come from many different backgrounds. It is important in this situation to keep the classroom a neutral atmosphere not imposing any specific religious belief upon anyone. Religious beliefs are meant to guide and support an individual, however, these beliefs can often be interpreted in different ways which some may find offensive. In this case, I believe it is important to keep the classroom a neutral and comfortable space where students should not feel threatened by their fellow classmates.
June 9, 2010
ReplyDelete1) I was re-reading the excerpts from Aristotle’s Nichomachean Ethics: Book 1 and realized that I am a lot more at home and comfortable with Aristotle’s ideas on ethics than those of Socrates/Plato. Aristotle believed that “none of the moral virtues are planted in us by nature” and therefore “it is no small matter whether one habit or another is inculcated in us from early childhood.” (McLachlan. pp. 60/61). I much prefer this to Socrates idea that we are all innately good!
Every Monday morning at our school, we have a short homily at the assembly as to what good habits we should strive for in that particular week. This week it was showing kindness by paying compliments to others. As I listened to the students reading this out, I realized we were trying to live up to Aristotle’s ideals of choosing to act in a certain ‘just’ manner and developing this characteristic in ourselves. I went on to reinforce this idea with my Kindergarten group a couple of hours later by modeling the idea of thinking of positive things we could all say about one another. At the Kindergarten level this is a constant daily practice.
On a funny note, later on this week, I was puzzling over the following sentence:
“In other words, acts are called just and self-controlled when they are the kind of acts which a just or self-controlled man would perform; but the just and self-controlled man is not he who performs these acts, but he who also performs them in the way just and self-controlled men do.” (p.61) (Tautology? Or am I missing something vital?)
I phoned my daughter to express my difficulty and her spontaneous remark was “Well, you can tell he was taught by Plato!” (She has studied Socrates and Plato much more extensively than I.)
2) I was also thinking of Aristotle’s Golden Mean as I worked with my Kindergarten students. At the early elementary level we are faced with teaching children to be proud of their achievements in a graceful manner that is not boastful and demeaning of others. We need to teach them to be risk takers but not foolhardy; to share but not be taken advantage of etc. It is a constant round of praise and judicial modeling, reading and discussion as you hopefully shape them into kind and caring individuals with a robust sense of self-worth.
3) When it comes to ‘voluntary’ or ‘involuntary’ actions I realize that we hold even young children responsible for being able to distinguish whether they have decided to act in a certain manner (e.g. name-calling, shoving) and hold them responsible. We also do not allow them under some circumstances to claim ignorance. A child who is running own the hall, and knocks down another, is held accountable because they should have known that one possible consequence of running (against the school rules) is harming another.
I can see why Aristotle still has a powerful influence on our justice system today.
I thought it would have been interesting to extend the discussion of religion in schools by looking at some of the past and present controversies around religion that happen in Canadian schools. Topics such as banning Christmas celebrations in schools and Religious holidays would have been interesting topics. There was also the case, in Quebec, where a thirteen year old Muslim girl was not allowed to attend school because she was wearing the Hijab. On the flip side, a Muslim school in Quebec forced their non Muslim teachers to wear the Hijab. On March 3 2010 a women who wore the full face veil to her French language class was expelled from school in Montreal. Moderate Muslim groups supported this move as did the government. It brought up the question of how far Canada can go before we draw the line. A survey done in 2010 showed that 70% of British Columbians ( 80% was the average of all the provinces) want a restrictions on the Niqab and the Burka (which shows none of the face and has the fabric mesh in front of the eyes, Often worn by women in Afghanistan).
ReplyDeleteThere was also a case where a Sikh student was suspended for bringing a “weapon” to school, that “weapon” was his ceremonial dagger. In February 2009 a thirteen year old boy was charged in an assault using the Kirpan while in his high school. The charges were dropped but the public outcry to ban the Kirpan immediately after the alleged assault reveals a lot of tension still exists on this subject. One example that I found interesting was labelled as example of discrimination against the atheist by a Catholic school board. The book The Golden Compass was ordered to be removed from shelves because it was considered an atheist book. This has lead to the question “what about the books that show support to other religions? Must they be banned as well.”
In this week of class I find myself very inclined towards Aristotle's ideas. He presents many similar views in which I agreed to as part of Ethics. Things like human's areinstrinsically motivated, as we practice and move forward through experience, practicing virtue and forming habits, which eventually will become who we are. I especiallly agree with his two intellectual virtue where excellence will develop through experience and time and knowing how to apply principals to particular situations. I believe what Aristotle describes about happiness and the two intellectual virtue are closely related to one another. Since having intellectual virtue is an essential part of element to sustain happiness and the ability to function well. For example, in the period of Renaissance, many poeple who are interested and accomplished in many areas are also at the same time in control of who they are and what they do. They achieve virtue and happineses through making proper decision which leads to further self-development.
ReplyDeleteA second point in class which lead me to further reflection would be the question about which is more important, who you are or what you do? In the first two classes our group had a strong debate on which one is more important. Many people lean on the side of "who you are" as more important but I believe the actions on what you do is more important and will indicate who you really are in the end. Even if you think about doing good works and being nice to people that will mean nothing until you put your thoughts into action. Just like what Edmund Burke states, "the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." Therefore, I believe that putting words and thoughts into action is the most important part in ethics. It is easy to dream and imagine a better life, but we will need to give form to our thoughts with decisive action to make it happen and make a real difference in doing ethical actions in daily life.
I enjoyed the exercise in class of outlining the "top 5-7 values" of various religions. My grand-parents are very religious (Catholic) and "forced" my dad to attend mass, sometimes twice a week, every week he lived under their roof. However, this religious background has not translated into my upbringing (my mum's somewhat anti-religion, and she wears the pants in their relationship). This has left me with a fairly inaccurate idea of what various religions entail. Their "moral teachings" are a combination of being based on biblical stories, and "real life lessons", so it's hard to figure out where the religion begins and ends. It was not only enlightening, but often shocking for me as I heard the values each religion held; Buddhists aren't supposed to do drugs? How come many of my pot-head friends ascribe to this faith? That was just one of the many questions that entered my head as we went through the lists.
ReplyDeleteI have the opportunity (read: mandatory assignment) to interview a Christian minister for my humanities 130 (into to religion) class with the aim to shed some light on his religion and beliefs. This past education seminar has definitely altered the approach that I'm going to take to this interview - curiosity as opposed to basing my questions on what I thought I already knew.
Further, I have taken a number of philosophy courses during my undergrad career, but I've never had the opportunity to compare the teachings of Aristotle, Plato, etc. with religion. Again, personally I find it really interesting to see how often the two intersect - at least in theory. Self improvement, being the best you can be, being honest, etc. aren't viewed differently between the "good Christian" or the "all loving existentialist", they're shared traits, and this is the first time I've seen them as such. But maybe i'm just naïve and inexperienced with life...
Nowadays,especially in recent years, the number of Chinese immigrants to Canada is is increasing. Quite of them are teens and they are now approaching to a different education system other then then one they got used to. The common notion is that both these immigrated parents and children feel that they have more leisure than lots of heavy workload. What they can do after school is gaming and other miscellaneous activities.
ReplyDeleteWhat surprises me is that gaming in Canada is treated as a complement to education. Many Chinese parents banning their children from computer games, hanging out with friends and so. They consider gaming is a way to let their children run wild. This may be right in certain points, but they ignore the fact that children do learn things such as organizational skills, multi-tasking skills and team work trough games they play and these are not limited to video games. The education ethics towards learning should be constrained to academic readings and writing and formal classes. Just like what Aristotle asserts that "Education is the best provision for old age", we are going to keep learning and educating through our whole life time. We definitely do not want to get bored while we're learning.Having said that, gaming is necessary to be a part of education and it should be not be omitted.
"“You will never do anything in this world without courage. It is the greatest quality of the mind next to honor.” This is another quote from Aristotle. For many educators around the world, how to evoke the courage from students themselves towards studying and learning is a critical issue as education is matter of life and not just exams and papers.
"Christianity began as a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. When it went to Athens, it became a philosophy. When it went to Rome, it became an organization. When it went to Europe, it became a culture. When it came to America, it became a business."
ReplyDeleteI find the blending of culture, or the influence of culture on religion to be very interesting. One culture they say a cow is sacred, another culture says throw another burger on the BBQ, a third says lets all eat salad instead. I believe, at the core, all religions are the same. They only differ in areas of the identity of God, the nature of man, the concept of heaven, hell and salvation. I think all religions if they believe they teach the truth, have a point of exclusion, even all inclusive religions like Hinduism, which has a pantheon of gods, exclude monotheistic religions because they are inherently contradictory. There is a better chance that they are all wrong at the same time than that they are all right.
For me the question is, "How do I model good morals in a plurastic society without contradicting myself." Do I go the route of a vague utilitarianism, most good out for the most people? How does this work when there is a special needs student in the classroom? Is it even the schools responsibility to teach truth or teach fact?
Last class was quite intersting. Allie I like your write up. We share many of the same thoughts about religion. I would say I was raised a Christian (until my brother swore in the lobby and we got kicked out, no lie) As I got older I started to question religion and its purpose. When I had my daughter we stated attending the Jodo Shishu Buddhist temple in the Valley which led me to Japan on what could be called a pilgramage to the head temple in Kyoto. At this point I would not consider myself religious, but I find there are more questions than answers.
ReplyDeleteThat takes me to more questions on the group exercise we did in class. Eventhough we laid out the moral values of the religions, it is clear that many religious people do not live by the moral values of their religions. In my mind than, are they religious if they are not true practisers?
In our classnotes it was stated that, "Aristotle says education is the fundamental element for the success of citizens, and in turn, the entire city-state." I think Aristotle thinking fits with what I am learning in my designs for learning social studies class: that the purpose of teaching social studies is to create citizenship/citizens. My only problem with this is: what makes a "perfect" citizen? what is citizenship? and who gets to make those definitions for our education system?
The world’s religions tell us much about their moral values, and many religions share many similar ethical beliefs. I believe that it is important and possible to uphold these universal values in the classroom, and, depending on the context, not necessarily from a religious standpoint. Obviously our public school classrooms are composed of a multifaceted array of cultures, backgrounds and faiths, and it’s essential to therefore draw on some of the stand-out strands of moral values that are shared by most religions to create an inclusive representation of those values, for all students involved. In my 405 practicum, I focused my novel unit on what it means to be a morally good person, and the class explored these questions by studying the characters involved. We learned a lot about being just and generous, and had a chance to decide for ourselves what constitutes a moral/good individual in literature and in real life. It is possible to include an exploration of moral and ethical behaviours as well as to present examples of such behaviours within our curriculum. I think the questions of what’s good and what’s bad, what’s right and wrong, and how do we get to decide on one or the other in any situation are all based on our personal beliefs, and I believe that these questions on living a moral and ethical life are very pertinent to all individuals, regardless of age group, culture, faith and other aspects.
ReplyDeleteI appreciate Aristotle’s practical ideas, especially how they relate to schooling (reflecting on and solving problems, critical thinking, developing character and skills through practice, etc.), but I think his idea that humans are the highest beings on the hierarchy of life forms, thanks to their faculties of reason, may be in conflict with some cultures, such as with First Nations cultures. As we have learned in class, many First Nations spiritual beliefs uphold the idea that all beings are equal and that none take precedence over others. So in applying Aristotle’s ideas or beliefs into the classroom, one needs to be careful about which students’ values could be erased or disregarded in the process, and in that sense the teacher needs to exercise his or her own right judgment and sensitivity on what to emulate and what not to emulate to the students when teaching moral values and beliefs, especially when they’re modeled on one (or more) thinker(s).
I found the question regarding which type of friendship is better to be very interesting. My initial reaction was that the least favorable friendship is a friendship “based on utility” (class handout June 3, 2010) because, in my opinion, it is the friendship where people are least likely to be selfless and do good simply out of the goodness of their heart or because they genuinely care about their friend. According to virtue ethics, “[o]ur function in the… roles” “[of] a mother, father, son, daughter, sister, brother, friend or neighbour” “is to relate to each other, to strengthen and deepen our connectedness, not only with family, but with friends…” (Jane Ann McLachlan, 2010, p. 44). I think that people are able “to relate to each other” (McLachlan, 2010, p. 44) in a friendship “based on…pleasure” (class handout, June 3, 2010); in fact, this type of friendship is formed because people are able “to relate to each other” (McLachland, 2010, p.44). Often, people like to spend time together if they are able “to relate to each other” (McLachlan, 2010, p.44). If people like to spend time together, they are bound “to strengthen and deepen [their] connectedness…with [each other]…” (McLachlan, 2010, p. 44). I also think that people are able to do the latter in a friendship “based on… goodness” (class handout, June 3, 2010) because in order for people to “like each other for who they are” (class handout) they need to find out a lot about each other, which they can do by “strengthen[ing]… their connectedness…with [each other]” (McLachlan, 2010, p.44); by “strengthen[ing]… their connectedness…with [each other]” (McLachlan, 2010, p.44), they will trust each other enough to reveal information about themselves. Thus, one can see that people in these two friendships have “virtues [, like] understanding, sensitivity, acceptance, empathy and caring” (McLachlan, 2010, p.44).
ReplyDeleteIt looks like the functions addressed above, such as “relat[ing] to each other, strengthen[ing] and deepen[ing] our connectedness…with friends…” (McLachlan, 2010, p.44) can also be fulfilled in a friendship “based on utility” (class handout, June 3, 2010). For example, by being in a “mutually beneficial” (class handout, June 3, 2010) friendship, both people can “strengthen… [their] connectedness” (McLachlan, 2010, p.44); they rely heavily on one another. Moreover, according to Aristotle, “happiness is acting in conformity to one’s function” (McLachlan, 2010, p.42), “the… goal of every action is some good, and the end of all actions is happiness” (p.42). Also, in order to be in a friendship “based on utility” (class handout, June 3, 2010), people need to understand each other and what the other person wants; understanding is an essential virtue in “connections between people” (McLachlan, 2010 p.44). At the same time though, I think that this understanding and connectedness that may seem to be present in a friendship “based on utility” (class handout, June 3, 2010) is merely superficial and not “deep” (McLachlan, 2010, p.44) (a term that is used to articulate the function of relationships). One may easily say that in a friendship based on utility, “the… goal of every action is some good” (McLachlan, 2010, p. 42): both people in the friendship want to help each other. However, would that goal of doing good disappear in a utility based friendship if both people were not receiving something in return for their help/action? I found that my concern and questions surrounding the utility based friendship could be best summarized by the reading that we will talk about during next class, addressing the question at the center of Teleology: “whether an action is good because it is based on a good moral principle or because it has good consequences” (McLachlan, 2010, p. 65).
Our discussion last week in regards to the commonalities of religions has led me to think about the differences between beliefs and practice much the way our look at beliefs, morals and actions seemed related but not quite the same thing. When we look at the major religions we see a set of values or ethics but often when we look at the beliefs and actions that emerge we can see a dichotomy between the beliefs and the rules or tenants of the faiths that I find interesting.
ReplyDeleteAs someone with no faith or spiritual partiality I find myself wondering at times what it is like to be guided by the tenants of a faith and to use those threads of judgment when formulating ethical judgments of the world around us. I did my BA in history it has been a personal conclusion that almost all major conflicts throughout history have had a religious angle to them. (I am painting in broad strokes) so I wonder often how the moral beliefs of these religions justify that. I also found myself wondering about the more self interested ethical systems like Taoism and Buddhism and even to a degree the first nations understanding of spirituality and what it was about those that practiced those faiths that led to a less dogmatic form of moral and ethical structures within their faiths? So while we can agree that all faiths profess basic moral Values in common the history of these faiths have all had many examples when those values were laid aside?
I have worked in corrections over the years where restorative justice models have been used with some success. I have also seen various examples of this within our inner city schools specifically with those in the first nations communities. I was recently in a workshop for FASD and the discussion found itself on this idea or concept of restoration. From a clinical stand point it is a very difficult concept to generalize that action A effected person A so now much later we see the reproductions of those actions and we are going to restore the damage done. For those struggling with FASD this is an insurmountable task due to physical damage during development that has led to an inability to generalize the repercussions of their actions. But what of the majority of society what value does something like this play. If you look at the ways our courts are currently being characterized in the press victims feel like they have less and less rights and criminals seem less and less dissuaded by the punitive aspects of our legal system. And while I understand the physical limitations those with FASD face in trying to process these concepts I wonder in our more insular communities if we have removed the accountability of the individual.
ReplyDeleteTonight, while talking in our groups, we touched on several classroom scenarios where a teacher took action in the interests of the Greater Good – but what is that exactly? And who gets to decide?
ReplyDeleteSocrates and Plato would probably say that a person who is objective and rational should decide and Mill would say to objectively measure what would lead to the most happiness. But no one can ever be completely objective. What’s more, so much of our thinking is directed by the subconscious we can never fully take into account all the forces at work on our reason; so how reliable is reason? I guess the best we can do is to first acknowledge that we can’t be fully objective and then to think through the problem or action while taking into account as many of all the prejudices and emotions that influence you as is possible. Perhaps this is why some philosophers, such as Aristotle and Kant, built in the escape hatch of “intention”, because, in any given situation, all we can really do for certain is direct our thoughts and actions with the intent of doing good.
In reference to my previous post regarding restorative justice on June 10.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading page 148 of our text, I see that retributive justice is not the same as restorative justice. The distinguishing factor seems to be that restorative justice is focused on the "victim" and the "punishment" is flexible and decided upon by those involved. Punishment meted out through retributive justice, on the other hand, "must be appropriate to the crime and uniform for anyone committing a similar crime". Sorry for any confusion.