Conservatives Battle Liberals In The Classroom

[paperview]

That's a stunning graph.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Political Chic...your left wing conspiracy theories and your right wing fear mongering never reach a plateau...

If there has been one significant change from the '60's, it's that the power has rested in the hands of the right... the left boarded Bobby Kennedy's funeral train and has not been heard from since...

The '60's saw us achieve the feat of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to earth, it spurred a boom in acquired knowledge, technical achievement and education ..

We now live in YOUR America babe...

The only thing America is number one in now is punishment...

Why would you attempt to hijack this thread, which is aimed at highlightling the unspeakable damage that the left and their 'useful idiiots' have done to a once-great education system, rather than beginning your own thread with you bogus graphs and more drivel that has nothing to do with education?

You can respond to the 'why' with one or more of the following:

1. You know nothing about education, and have no interest in it

2. It is an extention of your usual modus operendi, that is hoping against hope that anyone would share a conversation with you?

3. You never miss an opportunity to attack America's greatness?

4. To get a check from the Democrat Party based on the number of left-wing talking points you are able to insert?

5. Just passing time until the bars open up?

6. You're just taking a break from your old hobby, reading the obituary column and crossing the names out of the phone book.

7. Or- and most probably, even you don't have the slightest idea what you post has to do with this thread.

BTW, as for "We now live in YOUR America babe...," even you can't be this much out of reality.
And that would be 'Ms. Babe' to you.

Now, did I help fill part of your empty, mundane, jejune, sterile, monotonous, pitiful life?

 

[Bfgrn]

That's a stunning graph.

Just listen to the intrinsic urge to punish from the right from health care to education...

"Less government" has become a code word for punishment...because BIG military, BIG prisons and BIG Wars are never BIG government in their eyes... just helping Americans ...

Laws are like spiders' webs which, if anything small falls into them they ensnare it, but large things break through and escape.
Solon

 

[PoliticalChic]

That's a stunning graph.

Just listen to the intrinsic urge to punish from the right from health care to education...

"Less government" has become a code word for punishment...because BIG military, BIG prisons and BIG Wars are never BIG government in their eyes... just helping Americans ...

Laws are like spiders' webs which, if anything small falls into them they ensnare it, but large things break through and escape.
Solon

Oh, no.

See, this is what happens when I break one of my own rules!

Whenever Grin posts, I know all he wants is to continue the back and forth. His life is so empty that no matter how he is spanked, he loves any attention.

I see him as the masochist, and myself as the sadist, he says "Hit me, beat me, hurt me..."

And I say......"Nooooooo"

Now, see the mistake I made.

 

[Bfgrn]

Political Chic...your left wing conspiracy theories and your right wing fear mongering never reach a plateau...

If there has been one significant change from the '60's, it's that the power has rested in the hands of the right... the left boarded Bobby Kennedy's funeral train and has not been heard from since...

The '60's saw us achieve the feat of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to earth, it spurred a boom in acquired knowledge, technical achievement and education ..

We now live in YOUR America babe...

The only thing America is number one in now is punishment...

Why would you attempt to hijack this thread, which is aimed at highlightling the unspeakable damage that the left and their 'useful idiiots' have done to a once-great education system, rather than beginning your own thread with you bogus graphs and more drivel that has nothing to do with education?

You can respond to the 'why' with one or more of the following:

1. You know nothing about education, and have no interest in it

2. It is an extention of your usual modus operendi, that is hoping against hope that anyone would share a conversation with you?

3. You never miss an opportunity to attack America's greatness?

4. To get a check from the Democrat Party based on the number of left-wing talking points you are able to insert?

5. Just passing time until the bars open up?

6. You're just taking a break from your old hobby, reading the obituary column and crossing the names out of the phone book.

7. Or- and most probably, even you don't have the slightest idea what you post has to do with this thread.

BTW, as for "We now live in YOUR America babe...," even you can't be this much out of reality.
And that would be 'Ms. Babe' to you.

Now, did I help fill part of your empty, mundane, jejune, sterile, monotonous, pitiful life?

Actually I do know something about education...you were absent when it was being taught.

The problem with our education system is that it teaches children how to pass a test instead of how to solve a problem...it focuses on disconnected knowledge and creates dysfunctional intelligence...

Ironic, in you last hysterical paranoid rant you falsely slandered Dr Emanuel based on disinformation and innuendo...yet Dr Emanuel identified the symptoms of that disconnected knowledge and dysfunctional intelligence in The Perfect Storm of Overutilization.

Medical school education and postgraduate training emphasize
thoroughness. When evaluating a patient, students,
interns, and residents are trained to identify and praised for
and graded on enumerating all possible diagnoses and tests
that would confirm or exclude them. The thought is that the
more thorough the evaluation, the more intelligent the student
or house officer. Trainees who ignore the improbable “zebra”
diagnoses are not deemed insightful. In medical training,
meticulousness, not effectiveness, is rewarded.

This mentality carries over into practice. Peer recognition
goes to the most thorough and aggressive physicians.
The prudent physician is not deemed particularly competent,
but rather inadequate. This culture is further reinforced
by a unique understanding of professional obligations,
specifically, the Hippocratic Oath’s admonition to “use
my power to help the sick to the best of my ability and judgment”
as an imperative to do everything for the patient regardless
of cost or effect on others.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Political Chic...your left wing conspiracy theories and your right wing fear mongering never reach a plateau...

If there has been one significant change from the '60's, it's that the power has rested in the hands of the right... the left boarded Bobby Kennedy's funeral train and has not been heard from since...

The '60's saw us achieve the feat of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to earth, it spurred a boom in acquired knowledge, technical achievement and education ..

We now live in YOUR America babe...

The only thing America is number one in now is punishment...

Why would you attempt to hijack this thread, which is aimed at highlightling the unspeakable damage that the left and their 'useful idiiots' have done to a once-great education system, rather than beginning your own thread with you bogus graphs and more drivel that has nothing to do with education?

You can respond to the 'why' with one or more of the following:

1. You know nothing about education, and have no interest in it

2. It is an extention of your usual modus operendi, that is hoping against hope that anyone would share a conversation with you?

3. You never miss an opportunity to attack America's greatness?

4. To get a check from the Democrat Party based on the number of left-wing talking points you are able to insert?

5. Just passing time until the bars open up?

6. You're just taking a break from your old hobby, reading the obituary column and crossing the names out of the phone book.

7. Or- and most probably, even you don't have the slightest idea what you post has to do with this thread.

BTW, as for "We now live in YOUR America babe...," even you can't be this much out of reality.
And that would be 'Ms. Babe' to you.

Now, did I help fill part of your empty, mundane, jejune, sterile, monotonous, pitiful life?

Actually I do know something about education...you were absent when it was being taught.

The problem with our education system is that it teaches children how to pass a test instead of how to solve a problem...it focuses on disconnected knowledge and creates dysfunctional intelligence...

Ironic, in you last hysterical paranoid rant you falsely slandered Dr Emanuel based on disinformation and innuendo...yet Dr Emanuel identified the symptoms of that disconnected knowledge and dysfunctional intelligence in The Perfect Storm of Overutilization.

Medical school education and postgraduate training emphasize
thoroughness. When evaluating a patient, students,
interns, and residents are trained to identify and praised for
and graded on enumerating all possible diagnoses and tests
that would confirm or exclude them. The thought is that the
more thorough the evaluation, the more intelligent the student
or house officer. Trainees who ignore the improbable “zebra”
diagnoses are not deemed insightful. In medical training,
meticulousness, not effectiveness, is rewarded.

This mentality carries over into practice. Peer recognition
goes to the most thorough and aggressive physicians.
The prudent physician is not deemed particularly competent,
but rather inadequate. This culture is further reinforced
by a unique understanding of professional obligations,
specifically, the Hippocratic Oath’s admonition to “use
my power to help the sick to the best of my ability and judgment”
as an imperative to do everything for the patient regardless
of cost or effect on others.

“Another key administration figure… is Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, a health policy advisor in the Office of Management and Budget and brother of Rahm Emanuel, the president's chief of staff…”is one of those responsible for inserting into the “healthcare bill” the ideas that we no longer should have rights, such as determining what care we can buy, or how long we should live, and doctors should no longer look to the Hippocratic Oath, and the particular patient, but neglect the patient in the interests of ‘social justice,’ and the society as a whole.Communitarianism emerged in the 1980s as a response to the limits of liberal theory and practice. Its dominant themes are that individual rights need to be balanced with social responsibilities, and that autonomous selves do not exist in isolation, but are shaped by the values and culture of communities…The critique of one-sided emphasis on rights has been key to defining communitarianism…"Rights talk" thus corrupts our
CPN - Tools


"Unfortunately, many American bioethicists give the impression that they have never given the philosophy or ethics which underpins their work much thought. One British philosopher has even complained that they are simply too stupid:

... it is all too evident that very many, perhaps the majority, of bioethicists are, to put it frankly, less than competent. I believe that this is a view a good number of philosophers share. The bioethics industry is, unfortunately, populated by many individuals whom one might even call second-rate philosophers. They have found themselves unable to grapple with the more technical or abstract areas of philosophy--or at least to make a name for themselves in such areas--but have found that it is relatively easy to forge a name for oneself in the bioethics business.

If this is true of second-rate philosopher-bioethicists, what about decision-theory bioethicists?

No one should subscribe to the reasoning of a bioethicist, even one as eminent as Dr Emanuel, without kicking the tyres. He should be asked two questions: what makes us human and what makes right right and wrong wrong. If we can agree on the philosophical bits, it is much more likely that we will agree on the practical consequences which flow from them.

Let's say that your mother has Alzheimer's and breaks her hip. Let's say that all the bioethicists on the hospital ethics committee have degrees in behavioral economics, psychology, decision theory or sociology. Would you find that reassuring? When tough decisions have to be made about her future, would you expect them to treat your mother as a unique human being with inalienable dignity? Probably not. Probably the thought would cross your mind that these guys may know a lot about quality-adjusted life years, but not a lot about how precious a human life is. In fact, the thought might cross your mind that this looks more like a death panel than an ethics committee.

No doubt the ASBH would respond, “Trust us! We are honourable men. Decent people like us would never ignore your mother's dignity.” Hopefully this is true of most members of the ASBH. But “trust us” is not a very persuasive argument.”

MercatorNet. A voice for human dignity. Our focus is parenting and family issues, bioethics, religion, philosophy and entertainment.

 

[Oddball]

That's a stunning graph.

Just listen to the intrinsic urge to punish from the right from health care to education...

"Less government" has become a code word for punishment...because BIG military, BIG prisons and BIG Wars are never BIG government in their eyes... just helping Americans ...

Laws are like spiders' webs which, if anything small falls into them they ensnare it, but large things break through and escape.
Solon

Nice rant from Big Strawman, yet again.

Even so, how is Big Edumacation supposed to have any better results?

 

[Polk]

Educated people reject Socialism, hence our sabotaged educational system tries to keep people ignorant.

You consider anything to the left of Pinochet to be "socialist".

 

[Dr.Traveler]

The problem with our education system is that it teaches children how to pass a test instead of how to solve a problem...it focuses on disconnected knowledge and creates dysfunctional intelligence...

This.

I find that students wipe the memory tapes as soon as they pass the test on the material. They can pass college algebra, they can pass trigonometry, but once they get to Calculus I, they're dead in the water. They've forgotten the exponential rules they memorized to pass college algebra and as such can't apply the power rule to a simple cube root of x.

There is an argument to be made for an approach that allows students to discover results on their own, especially if the goal is to create students capable of surviving the typical second semester (Integral) Calculus course.

Mathematics courses can be taught "algorithmically" prior to that point. Namely, ask a student to memorize an algorithm, teach them to recognize the application of that algorithm, then allow them to plug and chug away like happy little calculators. Students taught in such a manner will have sufficient capability to survive the day to day world and the mathematics involved, and will possess a rudimentary mathematics knowledge for application to other topics.

However, starting early in a standard Integral Calculus course, that approach fails. Solving integrals is not an algorithmic process. It is much closer to the reasoning involved in a proof based, or axiomatic approach, to Euclidean geometry or the Trigonometric Identities material in a standard Trigonometry rotation. Students learn to use algorithms such as Trigonometric Substitution and Partial Fractions not as the end of a problem, or even as the total solution, but as one tool in a full toolbox of tricks.

I'd have to look at the NCTM's agenda in that report, but I would guess that they, like the AMS (American Mathematical Society) and the MAA (Mathematical Association of America) are deeply concerned about the number of American born Math Ph'D's in America (an issue the National Security Agency is starting to get deeply concerned about too). The approach the NCTM is advocating will produce more American Ph'D's, though it could be problematic for students lacking basic reasoning skills.

Historically, it is interesting to notice that what the NCTM is advocating is how math used to be taught. If you don't buy that, you should look at Euclid's Elements, which for nearly 2000 years was the standard book of mathematical education. It is a harsh and unforgiving book that absolutely does not teach math from an algorithmic view. This method is coming back at the 200+ level in colleges across the nation as the Moore Method, which I've considered using in my own 300 level Geometry course.

 

[Polk]

The problem with our education system is that it teaches children how to pass a test instead of how to solve a problem...it focuses on disconnected knowledge and creates dysfunctional intelligence...

This.

I find that students wipe the memory tapes as soon as they pass the test on the material. They can pass college algebra, they can pass trigonometry, but once they get to Calculus I, they're dead in the water. They've forgotten the exponential rules they memorized to pass college algebra and as such can't apply the power rule to a simple cube root of x.

There is an argument to be made for an approach that allows students to discover results on their own, especially if the goal is to create students capable of surviving the typical second semester (Integral) Calculus course.

Mathematics courses can be taught "algorithmically" prior to that point. Namely, ask a student to memorize an algorithm, teach them to recognize the application of that algorithm, then allow them to plug and chug away like happy little calculators. Students taught in such a manner will have sufficient capability to survive the day to day world and the mathematics involved, and will possess a rudimentary mathematics knowledge for application to other topics.

However, starting early in a standard Integral Calculus course, that approach fails. Solving integrals is not an algorithmic process. It is much closer to the reasoning involved in a proof based, or axiomatic approach, to Euclidean geometry or the Trigonometric Identities material in a standard Trigonometry rotation. Students learn to use algorithms such as Trigonometric Substitution and Partial Fractions not as the end of a problem, or even as the total solution, but as one tool in a full toolbox of tricks.

I'd have to look at the NCTM's agenda in that report, but I would guess that they, like the AMS (American Mathematical Society) and the MAA (Mathematical Association of America) are deeply concerned about the number of American born Math Ph'D's in America (an issue the National Security Agency is starting to get deeply concerned about too). The approach the NCTM is advocating will produce more American Ph'D's, though it could be problematic for students lacking basic reasoning skills.

Historically, it is interesting to notice that what the NCTM is advocating is how math used to be taught. If you don't buy that, you should look at Euclid's Elements, which for nearly 2000 years was the standard book of mathematical education. It is a harsh and unforgiving book that absolutely does not teach math from an algorithmic view. This method is coming back at the 200+ level in colleges across the nation as the Moore Method, which I've considered using in my own 300 level Geometry course.

I agree 110%.

 

[Bfgrn]

Why would you attempt to hijack this thread, which is aimed at highlightling the unspeakable damage that the left and their 'useful idiiots' have done to a once-great education system, rather than beginning your own thread with you bogus graphs and more drivel that has nothing to do with education?

You can respond to the 'why' with one or more of the following:

1. You know nothing about education, and have no interest in it

2. It is an extention of your usual modus operendi, that is hoping against hope that anyone would share a conversation with you?

3. You never miss an opportunity to attack America's greatness?

4. To get a check from the Democrat Party based on the number of left-wing talking points you are able to insert?

5. Just passing time until the bars open up?

6. You're just taking a break from your old hobby, reading the obituary column and crossing the names out of the phone book.

7. Or- and most probably, even you don't have the slightest idea what you post has to do with this thread.

BTW, as for "We now live in YOUR America babe...," even you can't be this much out of reality.
And that would be 'Ms. Babe' to you.

Now, did I help fill part of your empty, mundane, jejune, sterile, monotonous, pitiful life?

Actually I do know something about education...you were absent when it was being taught.

The problem with our education system is that it teaches children how to pass a test instead of how to solve a problem...it focuses on disconnected knowledge and creates dysfunctional intelligence...

Ironic, in you last hysterical paranoid rant you falsely slandered Dr Emanuel based on disinformation and innuendo...yet Dr Emanuel identified the symptoms of that disconnected knowledge and dysfunctional intelligence in The Perfect Storm of Overutilization.

Medical school education and postgraduate training emphasize
thoroughness. When evaluating a patient, students,
interns, and residents are trained to identify and praised for
and graded on enumerating all possible diagnoses and tests
that would confirm or exclude them. The thought is that the
more thorough the evaluation, the more intelligent the student
or house officer. Trainees who ignore the improbable “zebra”
diagnoses are not deemed insightful. In medical training,
meticulousness, not effectiveness, is rewarded.

This mentality carries over into practice. Peer recognition
goes to the most thorough and aggressive physicians.
The prudent physician is not deemed particularly competent,
but rather inadequate. This culture is further reinforced
by a unique understanding of professional obligations,
specifically, the Hippocratic Oath’s admonition to “use
my power to help the sick to the best of my ability and judgment”
as an imperative to do everything for the patient regardless
of cost or effect on others.

“Another key administration figure… is Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, a health policy advisor in the Office of Management and Budget and brother of Rahm Emanuel, the president's chief of staff…”is one of those responsible for inserting into the “healthcare bill” the ideas that we no longer should have rights, such as determining what care we can buy, or how long we should live, and doctors should no longer look to the Hippocratic Oath, and the particular patient, but neglect the patient in the interests of ‘social justice,’ and the society as a whole.Communitarianism emerged in the 1980s as a response to the limits of liberal theory and practice. Its dominant themes are that individual rights need to be balanced with social responsibilities, and that autonomous selves do not exist in isolation, but are shaped by the values and culture of communities…The critique of one-sided emphasis on rights has been key to defining communitarianism…"Rights talk" thus corrupts our
CPN - Tools


"Unfortunately, many American bioethicists give the impression that they have never given the philosophy or ethics which underpins their work much thought. One British philosopher has even complained that they are simply too stupid:

... it is all too evident that very many, perhaps the majority, of bioethicists are, to put it frankly, less than competent. I believe that this is a view a good number of philosophers share. The bioethics industry is, unfortunately, populated by many individuals whom one might even call second-rate philosophers. They have found themselves unable to grapple with the more technical or abstract areas of philosophy--or at least to make a name for themselves in such areas--but have found that it is relatively easy to forge a name for oneself in the bioethics business.

If this is true of second-rate philosopher-bioethicists, what about decision-theory bioethicists?

No one should subscribe to the reasoning of a bioethicist, even one as eminent as Dr Emanuel, without kicking the tyres. He should be asked two questions: what makes us human and what makes right right and wrong wrong. If we can agree on the philosophical bits, it is much more likely that we will agree on the practical consequences which flow from them.

Let's say that your mother has Alzheimer's and breaks her hip. Let's say that all the bioethicists on the hospital ethics committee have degrees in behavioral economics, psychology, decision theory or sociology. Would you find that reassuring? When tough decisions have to be made about her future, would you expect them to treat your mother as a unique human being with inalienable dignity? Probably not. Probably the thought would cross your mind that these guys may know a lot about quality-adjusted life years, but not a lot about how precious a human life is. In fact, the thought might cross your mind that this looks more like a death panel than an ethics committee.

No doubt the ASBH would respond, “Trust us! We are honourable men. Decent people like us would never ignore your mother's dignity.” Hopefully this is true of most members of the ASBH. But “trust us” is not a very persuasive argument.”

MercatorNet. A voice for human dignity. Our focus is parenting and family issues, bioethics, religion, philosophy and entertainment.

It might serve you to actually understand the content, nuances and ramifications of what YOU post...You right wing paranoid types latch onto "words" that create unrealistic FEAR...

COMMUNITARIANISM....omg!!!! What a scary word...

But what's missing from you and your paranoid bluster is the key word you highlighted: balance...

From YOUR link...

Communitarians are critical of community institutions that are authoritarian and restrictive, and that cannot bear scrutiny within a larger framework of human rights and equal opportunities. They accept the modern condition that we are located within a web of pluralistic communities with crosscutting tugs and pulls, and genuine value conflicts within them, and within selves. But, as Jean Bethke Elshtain notes in her elaboration on the communitarian individual who happens to be a woman, "the contract model [of liberalism] leaves little space for those contributions of women that have been linked to the human life cycle, to the protection and nurturance of vulnerable human existence. In contractarian terms, women become individuals only when they, too, join the ranks of the sovereign-self ideal. In the rights-absolutist climate of opinion, women are likely to be seen as victims or suckers if they fail to join the 'separated' celebration with anything less than total enthusiasm."

The "Responsive Communitarian Platform," drafted by Amitai Etzioni, Mary Ann Glendon and William Galston in November 1991, sketches out the basic framework. It urges that we start with the family and its central role in time-intensive moral education, ensuring that workplaces provide maximum supports for parents through working time innovations, and warning against avoidable divorces in the interests of children first. The second line of defense is reviving moral education in schools at all levels, including the values of tolerance, peaceful conflict resolution, the superiority of democratic government, hard work and saving. It also argues for devolving government services to their appropriate levels, pursuing new kinds of public-private partnerships, and developing national and local service programs.

The communitarian values that would place a woman that chooses to be just a "mother" on par with women that "join the ranks of the sovereign-self ideal" would be the SAME values that would "treat your mother as a unique human being with inalienable dignity"

You have the I-shoe on the wrong foot...

 

[Si modo]

Useful idiots.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Actually I do know something about education...you were absent when it was being taught.

The problem with our education system is that it teaches children how to pass a test instead of how to solve a problem...it focuses on disconnected knowledge and creates dysfunctional intelligence...

Ironic, in you last hysterical paranoid rant you falsely slandered Dr Emanuel based on disinformation and innuendo...yet Dr Emanuel identified the symptoms of that disconnected knowledge and dysfunctional intelligence in The Perfect Storm of Overutilization.

Medical school education and postgraduate training emphasize
thoroughness. When evaluating a patient, students,
interns, and residents are trained to identify and praised for
and graded on enumerating all possible diagnoses and tests
that would confirm or exclude them. The thought is that the
more thorough the evaluation, the more intelligent the student
or house officer. Trainees who ignore the improbable “zebra”
diagnoses are not deemed insightful. In medical training,
meticulousness, not effectiveness, is rewarded.

This mentality carries over into practice. Peer recognition
goes to the most thorough and aggressive physicians.
The prudent physician is not deemed particularly competent,
but rather inadequate. This culture is further reinforced
by a unique understanding of professional obligations,
specifically, the Hippocratic Oath’s admonition to “use
my power to help the sick to the best of my ability and judgment”
as an imperative to do everything for the patient regardless
of cost or effect on others.

“Another key administration figure… is Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, a health policy advisor in the Office of Management and Budget and brother of Rahm Emanuel, the president's chief of staff…”is one of those responsible for inserting into the “healthcare bill” the ideas that we no longer should have rights, such as determining what care we can buy, or how long we should live, and doctors should no longer look to the Hippocratic Oath, and the particular patient, but neglect the patient in the interests of ‘social justice,’ and the society as a whole.Communitarianism emerged in the 1980s as a response to the limits of liberal theory and practice. Its dominant themes are that individual rights need to be balanced with social responsibilities, and that autonomous selves do not exist in isolation, but are shaped by the values and culture of communities…The critique of one-sided emphasis on rights has been key to defining communitarianism…"Rights talk" thus corrupts our
CPN - Tools


"Unfortunately, many American bioethicists give the impression that they have never given the philosophy or ethics which underpins their work much thought. One British philosopher has even complained that they are simply too stupid:

... it is all too evident that very many, perhaps the majority, of bioethicists are, to put it frankly, less than competent. I believe that this is a view a good number of philosophers share. The bioethics industry is, unfortunately, populated by many individuals whom one might even call second-rate philosophers. They have found themselves unable to grapple with the more technical or abstract areas of philosophy--or at least to make a name for themselves in such areas--but have found that it is relatively easy to forge a name for oneself in the bioethics business.

If this is true of second-rate philosopher-bioethicists, what about decision-theory bioethicists?

No one should subscribe to the reasoning of a bioethicist, even one as eminent as Dr Emanuel, without kicking the tyres. He should be asked two questions: what makes us human and what makes right right and wrong wrong. If we can agree on the philosophical bits, it is much more likely that we will agree on the practical consequences which flow from them.

Let's say that your mother has Alzheimer's and breaks her hip. Let's say that all the bioethicists on the hospital ethics committee have degrees in behavioral economics, psychology, decision theory or sociology. Would you find that reassuring? When tough decisions have to be made about her future, would you expect them to treat your mother as a unique human being with inalienable dignity? Probably not. Probably the thought would cross your mind that these guys may know a lot about quality-adjusted life years, but not a lot about how precious a human life is. In fact, the thought might cross your mind that this looks more like a death panel than an ethics committee.

No doubt the ASBH would respond, “Trust us! We are honourable men. Decent people like us would never ignore your mother's dignity.” Hopefully this is true of most members of the ASBH. But “trust us” is not a very persuasive argument.”

MercatorNet. A voice for human dignity. Our focus is parenting and family issues, bioethics, religion, philosophy and entertainment.

It might serve you to actually understand the content, nuances and ramifications of what YOU post...You right wing paranoid types latch onto "words" that create unrealistic FEAR...

COMMUNITARIANISM....omg!!!! What a scary word...

But what's missing from you and your paranoid bluster is the key word you highlighted: balance...

From YOUR link...

Communitarians are critical of community institutions that are authoritarian and restrictive, and that cannot bear scrutiny within a larger framework of human rights and equal opportunities. They accept the modern condition that we are located within a web of pluralistic communities with crosscutting tugs and pulls, and genuine value conflicts within them, and within selves. But, as Jean Bethke Elshtain notes in her elaboration on the communitarian individual who happens to be a woman, "the contract model [of liberalism] leaves little space for those contributions of women that have been linked to the human life cycle, to the protection and nurturance of vulnerable human existence. In contractarian terms, women become individuals only when they, too, join the ranks of the sovereign-self ideal. In the rights-absolutist climate of opinion, women are likely to be seen as victims or suckers if they fail to join the 'separated' celebration with anything less than total enthusiasm."

The "Responsive Communitarian Platform," drafted by Amitai Etzioni, Mary Ann Glendon and William Galston in November 1991, sketches out the basic framework. It urges that we start with the family and its central role in time-intensive moral education, ensuring that workplaces provide maximum supports for parents through working time innovations, and warning against avoidable divorces in the interests of children first. The second line of defense is reviving moral education in schools at all levels, including the values of tolerance, peaceful conflict resolution, the superiority of democratic government, hard work and saving. It also argues for devolving government services to their appropriate levels, pursuing new kinds of public-private partnerships, and developing national and local service programs.

The communitarian values that would place a woman that chooses to be just a "mother" on par with women that "join the ranks of the sovereign-self ideal" would be the SAME values that would "treat your mother as a unique human being with inalienable dignity"

You have the I-shoe on the wrong foot...

I know it's a terrible mistake to encourage you by answering your spittle-strewn posts, but you are so attention-needy.

But-I don't want a random reader to think you have any sense, so...

Having no-doubt absorbed the government school dogma, you cannot understand this key word:
rights.

"Commie-unitarians" such as Dr. Zeke and you think Americans have to give up rights for the collective.

This nation was founded on liberty. Not equality. Liberty.

: the quality or state of being free: a : the power to do as one pleases b : freedom from physical restraint c : freedom from arbitrary or despotic control d : the positive enjoyment of various social, political, or economic rights and privileges e : the power of choice

Now for readers of this post, I commend to you an understanding of communitarianism.

"Though the term communitarianism is of 20th-century origin, it is derived from the 1840s term communitarian, which was coined by Goodwyn Barmby to refer to one who was a member or advocate of a communalist society. Central to the communitarian philosophy is the concept of positive rights, which are rights or guarantees to certain things. These may include state subsidized education, state-subsidized housing, a safe and clean environment, universal health care, and even the right to a job with the concomitant obligation of the government or individuals to provide one. To this end, communitarians generally support social security programs, public works programs, and laws limiting such things as pollution."

Communitarianism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Did you find those views in the Constitution?

"Communitarians would, again, shift the balance, arguing that the "I" is constituted through the "We" in a dynamic tension."
CPN - Tools

Get it? We all work for the greater good, the master.

From each according to his ability, to each according to his need (or needs) is a slogan popularized by Karl Marx in his 1875 Critique of the Gotha Program

Now, if you lean in that direction, you are assuming that all would benefit equally in the "we..."
better re-read 'Animal Farm' to see that some animals are more equal than others.

 

[rdean]

Didn't seem like a very good article to me.

From the Article:

Hung-Hsi Wu, a Berkeley mathematician, expressed the view of many of his peers when he wrote in 1997 that the brand of mathematics purveyed by the NCTM’s 1989 report “has the potential to change completely the undergraduate mathematics curriculum and to throttle the normal process of producing a competent corps of scientists, engineers, and mathematicians.”

Don't worry, if some kid wants to be a scientist, engineer or mathematician, not even a "bad" school will stop them.

You can't just "learn" to be a scientist, you have to be "driven".

The fact that any "conservatives" would have an opinion on math is funny to me. To a conservative, math means "finger counting" and very basic algebra. To an engineer, real math starts at third level calculus and differential linear equations. Same for a novice actuary or a statistician.

And then for a conservative to push "science"? What's that about? Uh oh! Science means evolution. Since evolution is now supported by biology, botany, physiology, astronomy, paleontology, geology, plate tectonics, genetics and every other branch of science I can thinks of, seems science is the last thing a conservative would want their kid to learn.

Not sure where the debate is? As long as conservatives want to push a "mystical agenda", I can't figure out what they mean by "educational reform". Does that mean, don't pay teachers?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Didn't seem like a very good article to me.

From the Article:

Hung-Hsi Wu, a Berkeley mathematician, expressed the view of many of his peers when he wrote in 1997 that the brand of mathematics purveyed by the NCTM’s 1989 report “has the potential to change completely the undergraduate mathematics curriculum and to throttle the normal process of producing a competent corps of scientists, engineers, and mathematicians.”

Don't worry, if some kid wants to be a scientist, engineer or mathematician, not even a "bad" school will stop them.

You can't just "learn" to be a scientist, you have to be "driven".

The fact that any "conservatives" would have an opinion on math is funny to me. To a conservative, math means "finger counting" and very basic algebra. To an engineer, real math starts at third level calculus and differential linear equations. Same for a novice actuary or a statistician.

And then for a conservative to push "science"? What's that about? Uh oh! Science means evolution. Since evolution is now supported by biology, botany, physiology, astronomy, paleontology, geology, plate tectonics, genetics and every other branch of science I can thinks of, seems science is the last thing a conservative would want their kid to learn.

Not sure where the debate is? As long as conservatives want to push a "mystical agenda", I can't figure out what they mean by "educational reform". Does that mean, don't pay teachers?

Ah, deanie-weenie, thanks for poppin' up just when we needed an example of the kind of mindless dolt this 'progressive' system turns out.

Nor did you have to comment, "Didn't seem like a very good article to me..." 'cause it wouldn't be without Archie and Jughead in it.

 

[Si modo]

Don't worry about 'bad' schools, says rdean. That about sums up what the left wants - useful idiots.

 

[Bfgrn]

“Another key administration figure… is Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, a health policy advisor in the Office of Management and Budget and brother of Rahm Emanuel, the president's chief of staff…”is one of those responsible for inserting into the “healthcare bill” the ideas that we no longer should have rights, such as determining what care we can buy, or how long we should live, and doctors should no longer look to the Hippocratic Oath, and the particular patient, but neglect the patient in the interests of ‘social justice,’ and the society as a whole.Communitarianism emerged in the 1980s as a response to the limits of liberal theory and practice. Its dominant themes are that individual rights need to be balanced with social responsibilities, and that autonomous selves do not exist in isolation, but are shaped by the values and culture of communities…The critique of one-sided emphasis on rights has been key to defining communitarianism…"Rights talk" thus corrupts our
CPN - Tools


"Unfortunately, many American bioethicists give the impression that they have never given the philosophy or ethics which underpins their work much thought. One British philosopher has even complained that they are simply too stupid:

... it is all too evident that very many, perhaps the majority, of bioethicists are, to put it frankly, less than competent. I believe that this is a view a good number of philosophers share. The bioethics industry is, unfortunately, populated by many individuals whom one might even call second-rate philosophers. They have found themselves unable to grapple with the more technical or abstract areas of philosophy--or at least to make a name for themselves in such areas--but have found that it is relatively easy to forge a name for oneself in the bioethics business.

If this is true of second-rate philosopher-bioethicists, what about decision-theory bioethicists?

No one should subscribe to the reasoning of a bioethicist, even one as eminent as Dr Emanuel, without kicking the tyres. He should be asked two questions: what makes us human and what makes right right and wrong wrong. If we can agree on the philosophical bits, it is much more likely that we will agree on the practical consequences which flow from them.

Let's say that your mother has Alzheimer's and breaks her hip. Let's say that all the bioethicists on the hospital ethics committee have degrees in behavioral economics, psychology, decision theory or sociology. Would you find that reassuring? When tough decisions have to be made about her future, would you expect them to treat your mother as a unique human being with inalienable dignity? Probably not. Probably the thought would cross your mind that these guys may know a lot about quality-adjusted life years, but not a lot about how precious a human life is. In fact, the thought might cross your mind that this looks more like a death panel than an ethics committee.

No doubt the ASBH would respond, “Trust us! We are honourable men. Decent people like us would never ignore your mother's dignity.” Hopefully this is true of most members of the ASBH. But “trust us” is not a very persuasive argument.”

MercatorNet. A voice for human dignity. Our focus is parenting and family issues, bioethics, religion, philosophy and entertainment.

It might serve you to actually understand the content, nuances and ramifications of what YOU post...You right wing paranoid types latch onto "words" that create unrealistic FEAR...

COMMUNITARIANISM....omg!!!! What a scary word...

But what's missing from you and your paranoid bluster is the key word you highlighted: balance...

From YOUR link...

Communitarians are critical of community institutions that are authoritarian and restrictive, and that cannot bear scrutiny within a larger framework of human rights and equal opportunities. They accept the modern condition that we are located within a web of pluralistic communities with crosscutting tugs and pulls, and genuine value conflicts within them, and within selves. But, as Jean Bethke Elshtain notes in her elaboration on the communitarian individual who happens to be a woman, "the contract model [of liberalism] leaves little space for those contributions of women that have been linked to the human life cycle, to the protection and nurturance of vulnerable human existence. In contractarian terms, women become individuals only when they, too, join the ranks of the sovereign-self ideal. In the rights-absolutist climate of opinion, women are likely to be seen as victims or suckers if they fail to join the 'separated' celebration with anything less than total enthusiasm."

The "Responsive Communitarian Platform," drafted by Amitai Etzioni, Mary Ann Glendon and William Galston in November 1991, sketches out the basic framework. It urges that we start with the family and its central role in time-intensive moral education, ensuring that workplaces provide maximum supports for parents through working time innovations, and warning against avoidable divorces in the interests of children first. The second line of defense is reviving moral education in schools at all levels, including the values of tolerance, peaceful conflict resolution, the superiority of democratic government, hard work and saving. It also argues for devolving government services to their appropriate levels, pursuing new kinds of public-private partnerships, and developing national and local service programs.

The communitarian values that would place a woman that chooses to be just a "mother" on par with women that "join the ranks of the sovereign-self ideal" would be the SAME values that would "treat your mother as a unique human being with inalienable dignity"

You have the I-shoe on the wrong foot...

I know it's a terrible mistake to encourage you by answering your spittle-strewn posts, but you are so attention-needy.

But-I don't want a random reader to think you have any sense, so...

Having no-doubt absorbed the government school dogma, you cannot understand this key word:
rights.

"Commie-unitarians" such as Dr. Zeke and you think Americans have to give up rights for the collective.

This nation was founded on liberty. Not equality. Liberty.

: the quality or state of being free: a : the power to do as one pleases b : freedom from physical restraint c : freedom from arbitrary or despotic control d : the positive enjoyment of various social, political, or economic rights and privileges e : the power of choice

Now for readers of this post, I commend to you an understanding of communitarianism.

"Though the term communitarianism is of 20th-century origin, it is derived from the 1840s term communitarian, which was coined by Goodwyn Barmby to refer to one who was a member or advocate of a communalist society. Central to the communitarian philosophy is the concept of positive rights, which are rights or guarantees to certain things. These may include state subsidized education, state-subsidized housing, a safe and clean environment, universal health care, and even the right to a job with the concomitant obligation of the government or individuals to provide one. To this end, communitarians generally support social security programs, public works programs, and laws limiting such things as pollution."

Communitarianism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Did you find those views in the Constitution?

"Communitarians would, again, shift the balance, arguing that the "I" is constituted through the "We" in a dynamic tension."
CPN - Tools

Get it? We all work for the greater good, the master.

From each according to his ability, to each according to his need (or needs) is a slogan popularized by Karl Marx in his 1875 Critique of the Gotha Program

Now, if you lean in that direction, you are assuming that all would benefit equally in the "we..."
better re-read 'Animal Farm' to see that some animals are more equal than others.

We...an interesting word...where can we find that word...and concept...

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.


There is no "I" in either document...We is plural, not a singular reference... I don't believe anyone should forfeit their rights, but again, your strict right wing ideology has no balance or moderation...you don't have the right to to do as one pleases if in doing so it infringes on another person's rights...

We live in a society, not a jungle...survival of the fittest sounds noble, but more than half of "We, the people" living in this society are either dependents or vulnerable...the young, the old and the disabled...

Every one of your ghoulish and paranoid fears would come to fruition in YOUR social model... Maybe you need to read up on far right ideologies like yours...the Nazi's

 

[Oddball]

Looks like we finally got to Godwin's law!

Who was it again, who said "Moderation in the defense of liberty is no virtue"?

Oh yeah.....Barry Goldwater.

Poseur.

 

[Annie]

Looks like we finally got to Godwin's law!

Who was it again, who said "Moderation in the defense of liberty is no virtue"?

Oh yeah.....Barry Goldwater.

Poseur.

LOL! Bfgrn is a thread killer.

 

[rdean]

Don't worry about 'bad' schools, says rdean. That about sums up what the left wants - useful idiots.

I said, "Don't worry, if some kid wants to be a scientist, engineer or mathematician, not even a "bad" school will stop them."

But you quoted me as saying, "Don't worry about 'bad' schools, says rdean."

LSOS