Letters to the Editor
-
You know what you get?
When you cross an agnostic, a dyslexic and an insomniac?
A person who lays awake at night questioning the existence of Dog.
-
4-timbuktom
Anyone or group seeking "a single unparadoxical, unambiguous, murderous truth." is dangerous and impossible to deal with.
Religious fundamentalists to not have a corner on that market, though they are the most common group to fit that description.
There is "iron in your words of life"...the bible is metaphorically, mythically amazing and science and what it has taught us about our cosmic neighborhood is numinous, and multi-valent. The Universe, right before us, is more magnificent than any conception of God I've come across.
-
ELYDOG.......
First things first, as an American Indian who struggles daily with the misperceptions of our culture, the drum group I participate in is not a "drum circle." We get that all the time, unfortunately, and the problem with it is too many people associate that with what you see in the parking lot at a Ratdog or Phish show. Not that there is anything wrong with that, but we have enough problems with well-meaning folks screwing up our culture. I am not attacking, I am educating.
Your bringing up Custer as a Christian and mentioning the atrocities and opinions of Christians of the past speaks to what I was saying in my letter back on page 15. Stuff like past crimes and crazy museums with hotties Adam and Eve hangin' with the brontosaurs has as much to do with me and other moderate Christians as a black gangster performing a drive-by has to do with Barack Obama. It's simply lazy thinking.
Should we have turned down the kind offer of the local Mennoite church to let us practice our drum songs in their basement because they are Christian and so was Custer? Of course not. I no more blame them for Custer than I think all atheists are as shrill and rude as Richard Dawkins when he makes personal insulte to those he dieagrees with during debates.
And for those who call me stupid and a sheep for believing in God, I am not an idiot. Yes, I take that personally. I can imagine you that think this are saying "don't be so sensitive, I didn't mean you." That's the path of a coward who doesn't have the cajones to back up their blanket statements. I suppose Salon's Anne Lamont is also a sheep and a moron? Once again, I go back to a common theme - despite what Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris believe, we are not all fools and to blame for stuff like this museum, Jerry Falwell, and fundamentalist violence.
And finally, ELYDOG, Harris and Dawkins certainly seem to me like they want religion eliminated.
-
Custer
Jaime,
I used to go to pow-wows up here in Minnesota, and was a supporter of the American Indian Movement (AIM.) I wrote stories on Wounded Knee and we raised money for that occupation. The pow wows I went to, usually Lakota, but sometimes Ojibwe, consisted of about 6-8 men sitting around in a circle pounding on one big drum and singing. Hence why I call them 'drum circles.' My guess is the kids at Phish concerts learned this from Native Americans, and not visa versa.
The reason I bring up Custer is because it was Christians, admitedly a long time ago, who KILLED Indians in the name of Christianity. It wasn't atheists. My guess is most right wing Republicans who are still holding down Indians in South Dakota see themselves as good Christians. And lets not get started on fundamentalist Hindis or Muslims who want to kill those of other faiths - similar to old Custer.
The Klan used a cross as it's symbol. Which is not to say that Black people are the same when they go to church, as I see the religion of 'oppressed' groups as far different than those of the white monied establishment. Even poor white southern folks who are religious are different than the Elmer Gantries and political operators and corporate bosses who play them.
Atheists have a beef with moderate Christians in several ways. One is they have not confronted the right as Christians. Two, their ideas lead to accomodating magical thinking in society, which has concrete social impacts. Three, on a philosophical level, they are just plain wrong. Idealism is a dying philosophy. And I don't mean idealism in the sense of 'believing in good things' I mean in the sense that what is the most important is what cannot be tested or observed, only believed. I.E. there are no material roots to these ideas, yet they are more real than reality.
-
Why do they make Adam and Eve look like a couple of California new age yuppies?
So, Adam and Eve are a couple of white people... Did God create them in his image, or did the conservative, Republican, fundamentalists create them in theirs? And is there really any difference?
-
Clockwork Smurf
Thank you for your reply. I’m sorry it took me so long to reply, as I’m just now getting an opportunity to rejoin the discussion. There’s a lot to digest in your post, and if I miss some points along the way I apologize.
My understanding of your underlying thesis in the reply is that a large sector of modern education is populated by teachers unqualified to teach respective disciplines. I think that may, indeed, be the case in some areas. You note that many successful scientists are lured away to research or private sector work, etc., instead of into the classroom where their expertise might lend itself to better scientific achievement among students.
I see several issues here: 1) just because someone is a successful scientist doesn’t make them a good teacher (you already said as much; I’m not making a point you didn’t already make) 2) there is an administrative component to the problem (and a larger socio-economic and cultural component to the problem) if there is not enough incentive for individuals to become teachers. And, frankly, in many cases, there probably isn’t. The pay’s lousy, and the environments are sometimes hostile (and I don’t necessarily mean physically, though that certainly does occur, as well). 3) Some component of this lies with the students themselves. You say that my drift from science may have been a factor of my teachers failing to do their job in such a way that I “got it.” Yet I had some very excellent teachers, including a math teacher who was so insightful and encouraging and helpful and patient! Still I struggle with mathematics, and always have and though many years have passed, I still struggle with many aspects of math and science, both the practical application and the underlying theory. I don’t think I’m stupid, but I don’t think I’m “wired” for math and science as well as some of my peers (and perhaps better than others).
However, it seems part of what you’re saying is the classic, “Those that can, do, those that can’t, teach.” If I’m mistaken, I apologize, and would welcome correction. But if that is what you suggest, I feel it insults not only the teachers and their profession but also those in their care. There are poor performers in every occupation, from farming to astrophysics to firefighting to accounting. Surely the field also has some exemplars, and like any field, there are also those who are neither outstanding nor terrible.
If there are science courses being taught by people without an understanding of the underlying science, then I acknowledge that is a failing of the system. Nevertheless, I think a part of the problem is that the field of education is somehow seen as not a good field to go into, despite it’s importance, and so there is a dearth of good teachers (as you have asserted). I’m not sure that’s the teachers’ fault, though. In addition, I believe that students have a responsibility, as well. It would be nice if every school had inspirational teachers that have students eyes’ aglow, but the reality of human interaction is that not every student learns in the same way, or brings the same motivations to the classroom. Also, upon further reflection, another point may be that it is incumbent upon higher institutions and state governments to demand different certification. An Education Master’s may no longer suffice. Perhaps those degrees need to find specialization, so that future educators demonstrate understanding of underlying principles (in sciences, math, history, literature, any discipline) before qualification to teach a subject. Lastly, education needs to return to a place of reverence in our society, where teachers are respected and encouraged. I don’t they’re completely denigrated, but I do think there is less respect for the profession than there once was.
I think the last point you make in your reply is one of the most striking ones. I agree with it, and think that is a fundamental principle that should apply to teachers in any discipline. The corollary is that all students should strive to understand how the rules and tables were formed, as well. Perhaps we need to eliminate certain tests, and therefore remove the roadblock that inspires students to merely memorize the result so they can score well on the test, rather than truly understand what’s going on within the principle itself.
I’ve gone long-winded, but thank you again for your reply. I’ve enjoyed reading your thoughts on this topic.
No kings,
Robert