6 ms·

Why is it bothersome that the goverment decides that it is illegal for schools to teach a lie? Schools are a social(ist) institution put in place by the goverm

Why is it bothersome that the goverment decides that it is illegal for schools to teach a lie? Schools are a social(ist) institution put in place by the goverment to ensure people have an equal access to knowledge - a foundation. Schools also have to follow a certain curriculum which would give this foundation. A school cannot simply choose to not teach reading or writing, or teach that the earth is flat because they beleive this is the right thing to do. This has come up previously with different topics over the years. In many countries it is explicitly illegal for schools to teach that the Holocaust ever happened, or use text books that alledge this. And, this is probably a good thing.

13years 11y ago
Because banning gives a government the power to hide the truth. Who gets to decide something is a lie? The majority may all be in favor this time, but what gets banned next? There is no issue with schools deciding it is not in their interest to teach a subject; however, not being allowed to discus a subject is same as book burning. How about letting schools teach the subject along with skills on how to do proper investigation and scientific research and logical reasoning. In other words, how about teaching the kids how to logically reason through fact or fiction so they are prepared to analyze other subjects appropriately.
- olavk 11y ago
  By that line of reasoning schools should no teach anything at all. 2+2=5 is just as valid math as 2+2=4, anything else would be allowing the government to hide the truth!
  - 13years 11y ago
    That is not what I stated. Banning is saying that we can't discuss why 2+2 is not 5, because that subject is banned. If a lot of people come often come to a wrong conclusion, you should be able to teach and discuss why that happens. Banning subjects is running away from debate and discussion. It fails to teach logical analysis and investigation.
    - mikeash 11y ago
      If any of my math classes had wasted a bunch of time on, "While we know that 2+2=4, there are a bunch of people who believe that 2+2=5, here's why they're wrong," I would have been rather annoyed. The space of things that are wrong is too vast to explore thoroughly. Stick to what's right.
      - 13years 11y ago
        I didn't expect anyone to take the example as a literal. The example was only a concept in response to the original poster who used it as a concept prop for their argument. "Stick to what's right" lol, that's the point. Who decides what is right? The government? The teachers? Education should be more about how to learn and how to discover truth, not about force feeding what some bureaucrat thinks is right or wrong or important. The greatest period of geniuses per capita in history were during time of when the socratic method was used for teaching.
        olavk 11y ago
        Off topic I know, but what time is you talking about with "genius per capita"? I wonder how this have been measured.
        13years 11y ago
        So here are a couple of references. This one makes the assertion, but doesn't describe how it was derived. http://www.winwenger.com/socmeth3.htm http://www.winwenger.com/socmeth3.htm However, this one does describe how probably such an estimate has been derived and used. http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2007/09/mysterious-genius-of-athens.html http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2007/09/mysteri... And as an additional FYI. Some more modern related research. http://www.wired.com/2013/10/free-thinkers/ http://www.wired.com/2013/10/free-thinkers/
        olavk 11y ago
        Sure golden age Athens had many brilliant minds, but the relation to the Socratic method is dubious. The Socratic method was pioneered by Socrates in opposition to contemporary education, which is the environment where all these minds grew up. So it is absolutely not the case that everyone in golden age Athens was educated through the Socratic method. It seems to have been more of a fringe school. After all, Socrates was controversial enough to be executed for corrupting the young! If the satire in Aristophanes "The Clouds" represents the mainstream view, Socrates was considered kind of a nutcase. In any case, the Socratic method might be useful for teaching critical thinking and philosophy, but it has pretty limited use for the natural science, since it doesn't help you to discover new facts about the world, only to think logically about the facts you already know. The Socratic method will not help you decide if the earth is round or flat, and neither will it help you decide if evolution or creationism is the most correct theory. You need observations and experiments in addition to logic to discern that.
- Oletros 11y ago
  > however, not being allowed to discus a subject is same as book burning They are allowed to discuss a subject, but not on the science class because it is not science. Or do you think that it has to be allowed to teach that the Earth is flat in science class?
gizi 11y ago
"Why is it bothersome that the goverment decides that it is illegal for schools to teach a lie?" Creationism is not a lie. It is just not science. But then again, the same holds true for evolutionism, which is also not a lie. It is just also not science.
- mikeash 11y ago
  I don't like the word "lie," because it implies too much about people's motivations. A lie is a statement that the person believes to be false but says anyway. Creationists usually believe their own proclamations, so it's not a lie. It is, however, false. Creationism is false, both in large and in detail, in that it makes a great deal of claims that are demonstrably untrue.
- olavk 11y ago
  What is "evolutionism"? I've never heard that word before. Ah, Wikipedia has the answer: "In the creation-evolution controversy, creationists often call those who accept the validity of the modern evolutionary synthesis "evolutionists" and the theory itself as "evolutionism." Some creationists and creationist organizations, such as the Institute of Creation Research, use these terms in an effort to make it appear that evolutionary biology is a form of secular religion.[8][9]" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionism

13years 11y ago

Because banning gives a government the power to hide the truth. Who gets to decide something is a lie? The majority may all be in favor this time, but what gets banned next? There is no issue with schools deciding it is not in their interest to teach a subject; however, not being allowed to discus a subject is same as book burning. How about letting schools teach the subject along with skills on how to do proper investigation and scientific research and logical reasoning. In other words, how about teaching the kids how to logically reason through fact or fiction so they are prepared to analyze other subjects appropriately.

olavk 11y ago
By that line of reasoning schools should no teach anything at all. 2+2=5 is just as valid math as 2+2=4, anything else would be allowing the government to hide the truth!
- 13years 11y ago
  That is not what I stated. Banning is saying that we can't discuss why 2+2 is not 5, because that subject is banned. If a lot of people come often come to a wrong conclusion, you should be able to teach and discuss why that happens. Banning subjects is running away from debate and discussion. It fails to teach logical analysis and investigation.
  - mikeash 11y ago
    If any of my math classes had wasted a bunch of time on, "While we know that 2+2=4, there are a bunch of people who believe that 2+2=5, here's why they're wrong," I would have been rather annoyed. The space of things that are wrong is too vast to explore thoroughly. Stick to what's right.
    - 13years 11y ago
      I didn't expect anyone to take the example as a literal. The example was only a concept in response to the original poster who used it as a concept prop for their argument. "Stick to what's right" lol, that's the point. Who decides what is right? The government? The teachers? Education should be more about how to learn and how to discover truth, not about force feeding what some bureaucrat thinks is right or wrong or important. The greatest period of geniuses per capita in history were during time of when the socratic method was used for teaching.
      - olavk 11y ago
        Off topic I know, but what time is you talking about with "genius per capita"? I wonder how this have been measured.
        13years 11y ago
        So here are a couple of references. This one makes the assertion, but doesn't describe how it was derived. http://www.winwenger.com/socmeth3.htm http://www.winwenger.com/socmeth3.htm However, this one does describe how probably such an estimate has been derived and used. http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2007/09/mysterious-genius-of-athens.html http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2007/09/mysteri... And as an additional FYI. Some more modern related research. http://www.wired.com/2013/10/free-thinkers/ http://www.wired.com/2013/10/free-thinkers/
        olavk 11y ago
        Sure golden age Athens had many brilliant minds, but the relation to the Socratic method is dubious. The Socratic method was pioneered by Socrates in opposition to contemporary education, which is the environment where all these minds grew up. So it is absolutely not the case that everyone in golden age Athens was educated through the Socratic method. It seems to have been more of a fringe school. After all, Socrates was controversial enough to be executed for corrupting the young! If the satire in Aristophanes "The Clouds" represents the mainstream view, Socrates was considered kind of a nutcase. In any case, the Socratic method might be useful for teaching critical thinking and philosophy, but it has pretty limited use for the natural science, since it doesn't help you to discover new facts about the world, only to think logically about the facts you already know. The Socratic method will not help you decide if the earth is round or flat, and neither will it help you decide if evolution or creationism is the most correct theory. You need observations and experiments in addition to logic to discern that.
Oletros 11y ago
> however, not being allowed to discus a subject is same as book burning They are allowed to discuss a subject, but not on the science class because it is not science. Or do you think that it has to be allowed to teach that the Earth is flat in science class?

gizi 11y ago

"Why is it bothersome that the goverment decides that it is illegal for schools to teach a lie?" Creationism is not a lie. It is just not science. But then again, the same holds true for evolutionism, which is also not a lie. It is just also not science.

mikeash 11y ago
I don't like the word "lie," because it implies too much about people's motivations. A lie is a statement that the person believes to be false but says anyway. Creationists usually believe their own proclamations, so it's not a lie. It is, however, false. Creationism is false, both in large and in detail, in that it makes a great deal of claims that are demonstrably untrue.
olavk 11y ago
What is "evolutionism"? I've never heard that word before. Ah, Wikipedia has the answer: "In the creation-evolution controversy, creationists often call those who accept the validity of the modern evolutionary synthesis "evolutionists" and the theory itself as "evolutionism." Some creationists and creationist organizations, such as the Institute of Creation Research, use these terms in an effort to make it appear that evolutionary biology is a form of secular religion.[8][9]" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionism