Pragmatism as Anti-Authoritarianism
commonwealmagazine.org
Pragmatism as Anti-Authoritarianism
1–10 of 100 posts
Re: Pragmatism as Anti-Authoritarianism
#2[flagged]
Re: Pragmatism as Anti-Authoritarianism
#3[flagged]
Any teaching that assumes that the student is a biggot that needs to be corrected, and that the student should just accept his truth on the basis of his/her authority as a teacher, is obviously a fairly bad way of teaching.
The teacher should make the knowledge he wants to impart approachable and use an angle that the student can accept so as to convince him/her.
Re: Pragmatism as Anti-Authoritarianism
#4[flagged]
Any teaching that assumes that the student is a biggot that needs to be corrected, and that the student should just accept his truth on the basis of his/her authority as a teacher, is obviously a fairly bad way of teaching. The teacher should make the knowledge he wants to impart approachable and use an angle that the student can accept so as to convince him/her.
That's not what teaching is. What you're thinking of is called selling.
Re: Pragmatism as Anti-Authoritarianism
#5[flagged]
Any teaching that assumes that the student is a biggot that needs to be corrected, and that the student should just accept his truth on the basis of his/her authority as a teacher, is obviously a fairly bad way of teaching. The teacher should make the knowledge he wants to impart approachable and use an angle that the student can accept so as to convince him/her.
Many teachers, professors and daycare workers have been trained to believe that this is an absolute, fundamental ground truth about their students and the air that they breathe; this is an increasingly prevalent worldview in the sphere of education, and we're likely to see further developments as it strengthens its hold.
Re: Pragmatism as Anti-Authoritarianism
#6[flagged]
An idea only worthy of medieval scholasticism. I would hope that as a society we have evolved from such a war like perspective on education, as if the student and the teacher are at odds and the teacher must triumph over the students in a final "educational" victory, when in reality the ideas are simply hamfisted and pushed onto the student, while no true learning or discussion exists.
Re: Pragmatism as Anti-Authoritarianism
#7[flagged]
Any teaching that assumes that the student is a biggot that needs to be corrected, and that the student should just accept his truth on the basis of his/her authority as a teacher, is obviously a fairly bad way of teaching. The teacher should make the knowledge he wants to impart approachable and use an angle that the student can accept so as to convince him/her.
the quote does not make any assumption about bigotry of the student, but rather of the parents.
Re: Pragmatism as Anti-Authoritarianism
#8[flagged]
Is this any different than Popper’s paradox of tolerance?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance#Discussio...
Re: Pragmatism as Anti-Authoritarianism
#9[flagged]
Is this any different than Popper’s paradox of tolerance? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance#Discussio...
A purely intolerant society would necessarily also have to have some tolerance, or else it would collapse upon itself when there is no acceptable in group. Thus a natural stable zone in between total tolerance and total intolerance exists. Karl Popper's and Richard Rorty's views on tolerance are only rationalizations which attempt to position democracies intolerance as somehow justifiable in the name of "tolerance". What is stopping an autocratic regime from stating the exact same thing? They are intolerant towards x group or y idea to preserve tolerance to w group or z idea. Truthfully humanity has a certain capacity for tolerance, as defined by a zone between total tolerance and total intolerance. This capacity may have increased over time (although I would argue for technological reasons, not for cultural of philosophical reasons), but it will never reach total intolerance or total tolerance. They have both deluded themselves in the hubristic and elitist view that our shifting of the tolerance zone is in some way a testament to an increase in potential tolerance or tolerance "capacity", and have come up with such schizophrenic arguments which claim that a tolerant society must be intolerant. While natural law continues to prove them wrong and they themselves prove their positions wrong.
Re: Pragmatism as Anti-Authoritarianism
#10[flagged]
"We are not so inclusivist as to tolerate intolerance such as yours."
This is exactly what you shouldn't do. As long as you can talk to people you should. These people are talking, they aren't out there being violent or murdering people, they are just sitting there talking, if you attack verbally them like this then their kids will hate you as well. Like "my parents aren't racist, they just want us to get the best books we can get instead of just forcing us to read books based on the skin of the authors", do you really think that view is so intolerant that we need to create a huge rift in society to fight it? I don't.