I use DOS 1.3 — Hanover

5 was the best version. Get actualized once in a while will you.

What is the name of what you teach? — tim wood

If you mean by this, what subjects do I teach, then the answer is quite a few over the years. I have worked mostly in bi-lingual schools so it is not as easy as you might think. Some of the course I have taught are;
English lit, grammar, writing.
Introduction to psychology.
Introduction to sociology.
Cultural history.

If you agree with the first part, and you're (apparently) a teacher, then what do you say the body of knowledge is that you can impart? — tim wood

Not sure exactly what you are asking here.

If "basic knowledge that will be useful in everyday life" is all you have to offer, then you have a problem. — tim wood

Critical thinking, investigation and evaluation, written and oral communication skills are some of the things I call basic knowledge. I expect my high school kids to be able to wipe their own noses and asses.

Most students are already masters of their lives - we might well call it mere survival - but it's what gets them through their days. It's what they trust and know, even if it amounts to their making virtues of their vices. — tim wood

Unfortunately they are not masters of their own lives, they only think they are. Most of them still are very dependent on mom and dad to keep their lives going. I would seriously have to disagree that most of these kids are fit to survive in the real world.
The kids today think that the internet, farcebook, twatter and so on are most important thing their is. Getting likes and followers out ways almost anything for some of them. And the sad thing is that some of them actually believe that there is nothing more they need to know than how to use these damn things.

On the basis of your description, I doubt that you have much to offer there. — tim wood

I will invite you to class one day so that you can judge from a better perspective. Mainly because there is not really a way to give a good description here.

And you forgot two: salesman and manipulator — tim wood

There are a lot more, I did not not really see the need to be exhaustive in the list. :wink:

This is true, but so general as to be useless. — jastopher

No, it is the main activity of a teacher.

Your definition of behavior is too narrow. You take it as whether they are good or bad boys and girls.

Everything that you do, from what books you pick to read to whether you pick your nose in public is part of it.

The purpose of any education is to impart ways of behaving that conform to the needs of the society.
Education in the rain forest tribe is not about sitting in a classroom learning from books but about learning what plants and animals you can eat, how to look after the forest, how to build shelters, in other words the needs of the society.

Today we need engineers and chemists, doctors and nurses, cops and politicians so the education system is geared to making people behave like them.

A teacher is a person in possession of a body of knowledge, with the skill to impart that knowledge to people who.... I have to pause here. — tim wood

I do that often as well, pause to take a deep breath. That is a reasonable take on what a teacher is supposed to be. But it goes way beyond that.
You have to be a mother, father, baby sitter, big brother sometimes as well. You also have to be a student, things change from day to day and you should be keeping up. Paying the students for doing their jobs is a job in itself, you have to be an accountant almost. You have to be a project manager to keep all of the little bits and pieces together and running smoothly and up to standards. Plus good understanding of the educational laws is most useful. Etc, etc, etc.
And you have to work hard at staying human and same.

What I'd like to hear from a candidate is a very simple statement of what he or she intends to teach, thinks important to teach, and why. — tim wood

I try to give my students basic knowledge that will be useful in everyday life. And a lot of them think that it is too much because "the information is available on google, so why should I learn it".

So, what is the purpose of education? — jastopher

To modify the behavior of those being educated.

Meeting an ex student, that hated me, on the street and getting a warm thank you

It's just that you should not let a hamster debate with a frog. Why don't you try a toad with a rat?

Is there a _____________ in the forum. We need one to ________________.

The Greeks won the Great Tomato War of 1386.

It makes _________ to be ______________

There is a very small light at the end of the tunnel or it's an incoming train and I am in the outbound lane. — ArguingWAristotleTiff

As long as you as are not going backwards on the inbound lane, no problem. :grin:

Somebody got the last word in the last forum. — Purple Pond

Because we all got locked out. you cannot continue the game without access to it.

Can a sentence end with the? — Lone Wolf

Did you not write this sentence ending with the? :smile:

The morality of bio-technology used to improve the human beyond the scope of normal humanity.

I just thought it was an important last word to have if any :wink: — Mr Phil O'Sophy

But it is not the last word is it?

Whenever I feel an itch I want to touch it.

Who is that _________, I would __________

If you do not do the job, someone else will.

And they might do it more efficiently. And get payed well for doing it. Therefore it is your duty to take the job and make the equipment just good enough to be accepted but not to good to kill a lot of people.

Strip away the miracles and everything else that simply can't be (with some care; the flood, for example, happened), and what endures is the Christian message of love. To be a Christian is to love like a Christian - neither as easy or simple as it sounds. But too simple for people who don't really understand it, and who need the dressing of myth. — tim wood

The message is good though little practiced, but that applies to all religions. Love thy neighbor, as long as he goes to the same church.
Unfortunately to remove the myths, miracles and magic trim from religions there would be few followers. Most of them are there for the blessing to cover their sins or ease their pains, to take away their troubles or just to have someone take the blame for a screwed up life.
Do you understand the urge to live for eternity? I shudder at the thought of it.

That is a good point. Although I feel this is the first time Religion has adopted a philosophy that is directly antithetical to its previous practices showing a form of "desperation" in its need to be attractive to the population. — SnowyChainsaw

I am not sure just how opposing this philosophy really is to the present one. I suspect they will actually be going back in time to become what they once were, a major part of the political ruling class. Sucking up more to the rich and powerful to maintain their own powers. The vatican bank has actually been doing this for many years, investing in all sorts of companies that whilst being frowned upon for the evil, sinful products they make bring huge sums of capital into the bank.

Christianity is a business, they cannot go on losing paying customers and closing up shops.

Ok so after reading the article its not as interesting as I'd hoped. — SnowyChainsaw

Oh, my first thought after reading it was will the addiction pass on to off springs like some drugs do? The second question was If so, for how long has it been passed down now?

What does this all say about me? Wondering. — Posty McPostface

I would say that you are an organized think.

I use different colored pens to denote different reasons for grades I give.

Red for crappy work.
Blue for late presentation.
Black for accepted final grade.
Sometimes other color, with side notes to explain reason.
It saves writing the explanations along side each of the grade.

OK, whatever you say.

Language is more flexible than the dictates of your Chambers English Dictionary (1998 edition). — Sapientia

In everyday use, I would quite agree with you. But on a philosophy forum, I don't. And it is not my dictionary by the way, I have no idea who owns it either.

The study of ethics is about what is good and what is evil, it is a rational not an emotional activity.

People react to moral situations emotional most of the time.
People react to ethical dilemmas by analyzing it in the light of good or bad.

Not the same thing.

Like you do, only my definition is more broad. We've literally just been over this. I think a more encompassing definition works better than one such as yours which only takes into consideration academic study. Ethics is more than that. It deals with matters relating to ethics: morality, moral judgement, moral agency, moral dilemmas, right, wrong, actions, intentions, consequences, and all the rest. — Sapientia

I think I see the problem here.

The Chambers English Dictionary (1998 edition) highlights important distinctions between ethics and morals:
Ethics
The science of morals, that branch of philosophy which is concerned with human character and conduct: a system of morals, rules of behaviour: a treatise on morals.

Moral
Of or relating to character or conduct considered as good or evil: ethical: conformed to or directed towards right, virtuous: esp. virtuous in matters of sex: capable of knowing right and wrong: subject to the moral law.

Morality
Quality of being moral: that which renders an action right or wrong: the practice of moral duties apart from religion: virtue: the doctrine of actions as right or wrong.

Ethics can also be counted in everyday use as a guiding principle as to decide what is good or bad. They are the standards which govern the life of a person such as a doctor or lawyer.

It's an ethical situation to begin with - all moral dilemmas are. — Sapientia

The situation I described is a moral dilemma, not an ethical situation.

How do you define ethics?

Any moral dilemma comes under the umbrella of ethics. — Sapientia

I asked a simple question, how does ethics come into the situation.

I am not being pedantic, I am truly interested in what you think.

These two points suggest that Religious Ideology is capable of adopting principles from more socially agreeable ideologies as well as a motivation for doing so, however, I need to add that this is not an evolution of Religion, but rather a replacement of it. — SnowyChainsaw

Adopting principles or taking them over. Christianity is well know for taking over other ideologies and presenting as if they are their own. How many pagan holidays are still celebrated?
As B.C. says, it is doubtful that we will see the end of religion soon it is too adaptive to just shrivel and die.
Brain scanning has revealed a lot the brains activity and workings and it appears that studies were being done to see the effects of religion on the brain. Apparently there are difference between religious and non-religious brains.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/religious-effect-brain-drugs-mormon-utah-reward-centre-nucleus-accumbens-a7446301.html

There is also apparently some research being done into the God gene hypothesis. Basically that the human carries a gene that makes it need to believe in something. Sounds like BS to me but who knows.

Either way as the saying goes, if it makes people happy they will go for it. Religion makes people happy.
They have someone to blame for the bad that happens, apart from the politicians.
They have someone to thank for the good things because they are not going to thank the politicians.
And they think they are going to end up winners in the end because they are going to heaven.

Ethics deals with morality and moral judgement, yes? — Sapientia

No, ethics is the philosophical study of morality and moral judgement. Tiny difference but not the same as dealing with.

You want an example? Pick any moral dilemma featuring ‘personal’ (i.e. involving direct physical harm) or ‘impersonal’ (i.e. involving indirect or remote harm) actions. — Sapientia

OK. My dog cannot move to my new house with me. I have only 2 options.
Leave it with the guy next door who just lost his dog to starvation or have it put down because there is no pet sanctuary to leave him in.

How does ethics come into the situation?

I don't know why I'm even humouring you. — Sapientia

Oh dear, have I done something to upset you. My most sincere apologizes.

The role of emotions ought to be obvious to anyone who has given it the slightest thought. Empathy? Guilt? Shame? Approval? Disapproval? Outrage? The feeling of justice or injustice?

These don't strike you as relevant? — Sapientia

No. In ethics it would be useless.

Of course through morality; or rather, through moral judgement. Emotions are essential, and diminished emotional processing or reactivity, as in, for example, psychopaths, has been shown to have an adverse effect on moral judgement. — Sapientia

The key words here are emotions and morality. I still don't understand how ethics comes into the deal.
would it be to much to ask for an example? Thank you in advance.

You want me to educate you on what you already know, but deny to save face? — Sapientia

What need could I possibly have to save face? It is not like I am going to run into you or anyone else from here on the street and get embarrassed.

I don't believe for a second that you're ignorant if the relation between emotion and ethics. — Sapientia

Honestly speaking, I am. I have the idea in my head that emotions are sort of internal, innate feelings that people have. They come into play when certain things happen to people. But I can see no relation other than through morality that they could be linked.
I suppose that ethics could study and analyze the relationships between emotions and moral behavior, it would seem counter productive to do so emotionally.

Please explain it to me. Maybe some of those that have little experience with ethics can learn something as well.

What an absurd thing to say. — Sapientia

So maybe you could explain how that would work them. Educate me.

No, I have the gall to talk about you in plain sight. :grin: — Sapientia

That is nice to know.

In the context of ethics, it's the opposite. — Sapientia

Ethics based on emotions are not ethics. Emotions are mostly irrational and very subjective that would render any system based on then as mostly useless when really needed.

Don't care about much these days lol — Lone Wolf

Down in the dumps are we. Cheer up mate, it ain't all bad, or at least it ain't supposed to be. Smile and be happy. :grin:

You can suggest that I'm reading too much into it, but I don't think that my interpretation was way off the mark. — Sapientia

Are you talking about me behind my back? :cool:

Apparently I wasn't the only one who took it that way, and his subsequent reply seems to align with such an interpretation. — Sapientia

Birds of a feather and all that I suppose could explain it maybe.

A remark like that in the context of a discussion like this is going to come across in the way that I described: unmoved, casual, indifferent... — Sapientia

A person that discusses from emotional points of view rarely make any real sense.

Tis the art of inquisitive sarcasm. Makes a lot of people flustered. — Lone Wolf

Bollocks. You, just like me, wanted to know what the hell he was talking about.

Why? — Lone Wolf

I spent 4 days thinking about a the perfect answer to that, and then you beat me to it. :lol:

How long does it take you to type all this crap stuff? — CuddlyHedgehog

That would depend entirely on the quantity and quality of the crap stuff sir.

Could I get you anything else?

To my way of thinking, the value of the ideas does not depend on the truth of the stories in which they're told. — tim wood

So then, most of the ideas could have been expressed in simple forms? So what was the point of making it so complex that you need a book called Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible to be able to read correctly?

This is what has always baffled me about the bible.
God creates a guide book for his people, or at least inspires them to collect the information and put it all together.
People are supposed to use it to live a decent life and know how to serve him.
But no one really agrees about the meaning of the rules that it lays out because it is translated from several different language that one really agrees about the meaning of the words used.
Now I understand that the world has changed a lot since the bible was written, but surely a god would have known that it would happen and try to give something that would last for a while.
If god had really intended to help his people would it not have been easier to stick with the twenty commandments and avoid the confusion?
In short, why the hell would a god want to create something that would cause all sorts of problems for his people?

What difference does it make? Granted it's a question that can be asked - you asked it! But it's not relevant to the meaning. Note that the same question is asked of the The Iliad, The Odyssey, the works of Shakespeare, etc. — tim wood

Yes, I guess you are right. It is no different from other books.

My own guess is that many of the ideas - the significant ones, anyway - in the Bible have roots in pre-Ur history. — tim wood

Goodness gracious, would that not mean that some of the bible might actually be more than 5,000 years old?

No. it's a book that lists all the words and their meanings in English. — tim wood

My apologies, I should have said " a book that helps explain the bible". Obviously by giving meanings to the words.
But that does not answer my question about why they put all of the pieces together in such a way so to make into the bible. What was their motivation? Why did they leave pieces out at the beginning? Why did the add new pieces and remove pieces later on?
I mean if the damn thing is supposed to be holy and god inspired, did the people not understand the instructions about how to put it together? Was it left to them by god to create the perfect word of god? How could god inspire a book for his people that only a few would even be able to read and understand, giving them a monopoly on interpretations about his holy words?

I think your first comment got it right, it is a work of historical fiction.

That explains the behaviour of many priests. — CuddlyHedgehog

If the truth be known, most.

being there is person is the only way. — charleton

Yes I guess it would, if you are rich enough to be able to.

I am not. So I make do. :wink:

It's about decency. — andrewk

So now it is indecent to say what you think?

If there is an issue that literally affects the ability of others to survive, and you don't take it seriously, the decent thing to do is stay out of it. — andrewk

I never said that I did not take it seriously, I asked simply why I should do so. I got no answer. Nothing implied that I was not doing so except

Such a blasé attitude to a deadly serious issue. — Sapientia

I found a statue somewhere in Africa, no idea where I was visiting, called the Fetish Priest. Thought that was kind of funny.