Yea, they should waste time not teaching you education even though that's what they're paid to do! Yea!

by Anonymous 13 years ago

you're so cool..

by Anonymous 13 years ago

gee thanks!

by Anonymous 13 years ago

How do you "teach" someone to be a good person without breaking out the Ludovico treatment?

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Since I guess not that many people have read A Clockwork Orange, allow me to explain. You cannot program someone to be a good person. People have free will. They choose how they behave, be it good or bad. If you teach someone to be good, then you take away their capacity for choice. And someone who cannot make their own choices sounds more like a machine than a human to me. And yes, I got that from a //book//. Which I read in //school//. How about that?

by Anonymous 11 years ago

But likewise you can't make someone a musician but you can teach them how to play. If you teach a hundred students to play, you'll get 10 good musicians when they leave school. If you teach 0, it's highly likely that 0 would become musicians. Maybe the post doesn't mean //making// the students into good people, but showing them how.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

But the issue with morality is that there's no sheet music for it. As spareseconds said below, there is no definite right or wrong. It's nearly impossible to teach someone morals without letting your cultural beliefs bleed over.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

There are //some// things... Like teaching what definitely //not// to do. I mean there are things that are wrong for all cultures ever, and there are things that make good people in all cultures ever. You can't teach morals, but you can teach a person with morals to do better things.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

It's not the job of your school to teach you to be a good person.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Well yeah, otherwise why would this post have been made?

by Anonymous 11 years ago

You can't teach someone to be a good person, you have to figure it out on your own. Quite often you can learn from books...

by Anonymous 11 years ago

This is the stupidest thing I've ever heard. The purpose of going to school is to get an education that'll help you be successful in the real world. Having morality but not knowing 2+2 is going to get you nowhere. Having intelligence but being a cruel jackass will at least get you a job and earn you a living. I'd rather be a little mean if I can actually fucking feed myself. **Morality is subjective**. You can't teach a specific guideline of morals to a group with varying opinions. Teaching everyone one way to think is essentially brainwashing them. For example, gay marriage. If the teachers taught everyone gay marriage //is// a sin, you're removing the possibility for the fighting of equal rights. If teachers taught gay marriage //is not// a sin, then religious students will have a hard time distinguishing their teacher's and parents' beliefs. Either they'll fail the class or lose faith in their religion. Doing this would be a //REALLY// crappy idea. Morality belongs to individuals, not a whole fucking class. If everyone had the same opinions imposed on them by their teachers, the world be a damn boring place and If everyone had the same ideas, NO CHANGE would EVER happen.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Not that I don't agree with you, but like others said, there are certain values that are the same in all cultures Also, why can't it be both? Show people the endless possibility and the non-existence of of absolute right or wrong If that makes sense XD I'm really not good with wording this kind of stuff

by Anonymous 11 years ago

True. Some morals, like murder, war, etc. are the same in all cultures. However, I've never really had someone "teach" me that those things were wrong. As I grew, learned, and gained experience, I've caught on. In a way, those things are actually taught in school. History teaches the effects or war. Books teach general morality. By not forcing a list of strict viewpoints on students, it allows them to form their own thoughts. If someone told a child every day for years that eating green things is horrid and barbaric, he likely would never do that. If they never spoke a word of which foods to prefer, he may find that he quite enjoys green foods. That's why it's so important for teachers to remain indifferent on controversial topics when teaching.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

I think teachers should, at times, be able to voice their own opinion I guess XD As long as they don't state it as if it is the truth Doing a great job of explaining myself...

by Anonymous 11 years ago

If that were to happen, it should only happen in a high school class, preferably history or debate class, or whenever the topic comes up, where they can face rebuttal. Before that, little kids are just too impressionable.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

That's true, though that is what I'm talking about Sorry, I can be very unclear at times

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Is this a joke? I hope to god this is a joke. I have no clue how this got a positive score.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

If that's what you want, send your children to a parochial school. I'm actually less likely to do what someone says about morality if they say their view is objective, like my current school does. Of course, I go to a Catholic school and I'm an atheist so I rarely, if ever, do the things they tell me I should do.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

It's entirely possible to do both. In fact, the idea my english teacher based all our lessons on this year was "What does it mean to be good?"

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Morality is something to be taught to children by their parents or guardians. Interpreting a novel allows for one to learn how to look at things from different points of view, something that can be used in the real world when making decisions.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

I think sometimes the way they make us interpret things in novels that are not there is ridiculous, but learning to be a good person in school? That's not something that can be taught, and "good" is subjective.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

I think what they meant is instead of having students figure out why the author made the sky periwinkle blue instead of baby blue and focusing on minor details that have no meaning USUALLY in the book other then to bring the story to life and instead make a few notes how a character was affected by a bad choice say murdering someone. That's just how I'm seeing it though. There are a few morals I believe people should always know; don't expect to be treated wonderfully if you are an ass, work hard if you give a damn, and tip your waitress when they deserve it and worked hard.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Moral relavtisim. What does being a good person mean? What is good and what is bad are subjective. There are no set rules or standards for being good and even if there were, we'd end up with automated robots with no theory of mind whatsoever nor creativity. What schools should do is educate students about Maths, Science and even literature. Maths gives you problem solving skills and increases the capacity of your perception and thinking, while literature might seem insignificant to you when relating to 'life skills or morals' yet a book, especially ones given at school present ideas that are thought provoking or morals in an eloquent, more dolled up indirect way. So basically what schools do is give you th skills that you need to obtain to determine what you perceive as good and bad, an with better education comes better judgement.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

So why'd you YYA the post?

by Anonymous 11 years ago

I meant to NW it. I didn't notice until you pointed it out. But it is obvious from comment where I stand on this.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Because each person's definition of that is different, and if your's is different they are basically saying you're a bad person, and all of those 'be good people' lessons and stuff end up in this fake, mushy shit usually.

by Anonymous 11 years ago