1. Education divorced from moral instruction is incomplete. It's no good knowing how to achieve a particular physical effect if you have no good basis for selecting which physical effects you wish to achieve.
2. It is impossible to divorce moral instruction from religion if one wishes to cover morality in a comprehensive fashion.
3. It is not appropriate for state-run schools to provide religious instruction.
4. Therefore, state-run schools cannot provide a complete education.
This does not mean that state-run schools are failures or have nothing to offer in education. The can be an important core of an education that includes supplemental education from parents, churches, civic organizations, etc. Or, some parents may send their kids to non state-run schools where the moral instruction is more fully integrated.
Sex education is merely one area where the science/morality divide is more noticeable.
posted
I think there need to be some sort of normative story outside of facts in order for the facts to make sense.
Posts: 5600 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'd agree that facts never "speak for themselves" -- they have to be interpreted and put into some sort of contextual structure. I'd lean more toward Mission than Baroque, myself, but that's because I think it's hard enough to address the facts directly without a mess of furbellows and ornamentation.
We can certainly devise an experiment to test that theory, though.
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:We can certainly devise an experiment to test that theory, though.
nah,
What would you test for, efficacy or propriety? Whether it works can be tested for, but that won't tell you much besides the fact that it works. Hell, war works, it doesn't mean that it's proper.
And I don't know how one can experiment for propriety. It seems like someone has to think about it, it's the same reason we don't like our politicians putting their finger in the wind to tell them which way to vote.
posted
I'd test for efficacy, and I'd discuss propriety. I don't think we are really disagreeing, you know. Just different emphases placed on the various facets of the same general answer.
posted
what kind of experiment are we talking about?
Perhaps sewing dead body parts together and creating a living being to see if s/he has sex or stays abstinent? sounds interesting, kinda like necrofelia (spelling?), but interesting
Posts: 283 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
