Why Our Children Don’t Think There Are Moral Facts
Posted by frodo_b 10 years, 6 months ago to Philosophy
You type: | You see: |
---|---|
*italics* | italics |
**bold** | bold |
While we're very happy to have you in the Gulch and appreciate your wanting to fully engage, some things in the Gulch (e.g. voting, links in comments) are a privilege, not a right. To get you up to speed as quickly as possible, we've provided two options for earning these privileges.
Even though he might not understand how to prove to himself that E=MC2, it's still a fact and is true. He could easily go back to school and learn enough physics and math that he could then go and test it for himself. He's as dangerous as common core.
Example:
My 6 year old great niece, a kindergartner, just last week was sitting with her legs crossed on the floor in her classroom, she was wearing jeans and her underwear waist band was sitting higher than the waist band of her jeans... a boy sitting behind her grabbed the waist band of her underwear and yanked it upward and gave her a wedgy. My great niece, without hesitation, spun around, punched him in the nose and made him bleed. My niece (her mother) got a phone call from the teacher who said, "She punched him in the nose and that is bullying." My niece said, "that is not bullying, that's a reaction to defend herself. She did the right thing...anyone who touches my girl's underwear will get a punch in the nose...and if you want to take this further, the boy was sexually harassing her, maybe we should pursue that point..."
How can a grown teacher even have the nerve to call that bullying? Too many teachers are just not smart...I wish parents would notice this. They lack the ability to reason and they're "teaching" our kids to do the same.
I think of those moral questions as axioms. Making them rest on proof results in circular reasoning. The only objective test for axioms is whether you can derive contradictory propositions from them. So I would consider some of these value claims to be axioms, not facts.
The author appears to have the unstated premise that facts are more important, so when we say fundamental values cannot be proven, he says it's tantamount to telling kids values don't matter.