An Ethics Highschool Curriculum

This is the main board for discussing philosophy - formal, informal and in between.

Re: An Ethics Highschool Curriculum

Postby thinkdr » Sun Nov 08, 2020 9:17 pm

As you will recall, an outline for this proposed course is offered in the first post of this thread.

The fourth topic (which speaks of adding) alludes to the concept "added value" derived originally from the business world [under Capitalism], and now (creatively?) applied by the author to the field of human relations and interaction. It can best be formulated, as conceived by Peter Demerest - who, incidentally, is a Conservative - in the following manner:

"What choice can I make, and action can I take,
in this moment, to create the greatest net value?"


He came up with that 'Central Question' after he carefully and thoughtfully read my documents: my papers and my Kindle books.

Creativity is very-highly valued in this course, and I don't understand how Karpel Tunnel could have concluded otherwise. A discussion exploring the meanings of this concept, and endeavoring to narrow down on a suitable definition for the process, occupies some time in the class.

Yes, the course would preferably be based upon my writings, but if it just alone presented the conventional, traditional material now taught in college courses on Ethics, that would be better than nothing.

Questions? Your views?
:idea: For further reading and insight into the topics of Ethics check out these links, and thereby add to your reading enjoyment

THE STRUCTURE OF ETHICS
[NEW] :!:
http://www.myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/TH ... ETHICS.pdf


THE BREAKTHROUGH - We Can Get Along After All (2018)
http://myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/BREAKT ... %20all.pdf

LIVING WELL: how ethics helps us flourish
http://www.myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/LI ... ourish.pdf


BASIC ETHICS: a systematic approach
http://www.myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/BASIC%20ETHICS.pdf


ETHICAL ADVENTURES http://wadeharvey.myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/ETHICAL%20ADVENTURES.pdf

When you search Bing for the following pdf selection you may wish to start with page 20 in order to skip the technicalities:
Marvin C. Katz - ETHICS: A College Course
thinkdr
Thinker
 
Posts: 885
Joined: Sat May 12, 2012 7:05 pm

Re: An Ethics Highschool Curriculum

Postby thinkdr » Tue Nov 10, 2020 3:15 am

.

We have so much more in common than what divides us :!:

.............................Character matters! ......many more of us see that now.


Now is the time to abandon the harsh, extreme rhetoric and to actually listen to each other.


Do you agree? ....What do you say?
:idea: For further reading and insight into the topics of Ethics check out these links, and thereby add to your reading enjoyment

THE STRUCTURE OF ETHICS
[NEW] :!:
http://www.myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/TH ... ETHICS.pdf


THE BREAKTHROUGH - We Can Get Along After All (2018)
http://myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/BREAKT ... %20all.pdf

LIVING WELL: how ethics helps us flourish
http://www.myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/LI ... ourish.pdf


BASIC ETHICS: a systematic approach
http://www.myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/BASIC%20ETHICS.pdf


ETHICAL ADVENTURES http://wadeharvey.myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/ETHICAL%20ADVENTURES.pdf

When you search Bing for the following pdf selection you may wish to start with page 20 in order to skip the technicalities:
Marvin C. Katz - ETHICS: A College Course
thinkdr
Thinker
 
Posts: 885
Joined: Sat May 12, 2012 7:05 pm

Re: An Ethics Highschool Curriculum

Postby Karpel Tunnel » Tue Nov 10, 2020 5:35 am

thinkdr wrote:
Hi, KT

Please tell us what is wrong with a teacher filtering "this through their value system."
I didn't say it was wrong. But your presentation is as if ethical conclusions can be deduced to a collective agreement we will all have. This is simply not the case. The teachers will come from their diverse set of VALUES and deduce extremely different codes of behavior. A look around the country will see how this can take place.

Please, if you would be so kind, tell me clearly why "freedom" is a concept that only so-called Conservatives care about and not so-called Liberals?? ...And why does a person have to be one or the other??
I don't think I have every asserted that freedom is a concept that only so-called conservatives care about? I am pretty sure I have said that it will be prioritized (and also conceived) differently by people with different values and prioritizations of values.

Also, remind us of the values that you label as "conservative" and show why the systematic study of Ethics does not endorse them.

And how do you define "politics"?
Politics is values thought of related to societal issues and the application of these values at the societal level. I think the problem is not just with political values, but values in general, but the problem is present with political values.
Karpel Tunnel
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3625
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:26 pm

Re: An Ethics Highschool Curriculum

Postby Karpel Tunnel » Tue Nov 10, 2020 6:04 am

thinkdr wrote:HI, Karpal

Thank you for a fine contribution to the discussion. I believe I grasp your position: I see where you're coming from.

That "other teacher" of which you speak does not seem to be adhering to the major concepts of the curriculum here proposed. He does not show a familiarity with the system of Ethics on which this proposed course is based. Does he actually define Ethics the way The Structure of Ethics booklet does?
I find this an odd question. It seems obvious to me that we are dealing with a world where people prioritize values differently EVEN when they agree completely on the list of values (which is rare) AND define them the same way (which is rare) AND apply them the same way in practice (which is rare). Those 'rares' add up to, it seems to me, you're assuming somehow that everyone is going to unite behind your list of values, prioritize them the same way you do, define them the same way you do, and apply them the same way you want them to. IOW you have found the objectively demonstrable, logical list, prioritization and application of values. A kind of secular bible. Of course there are going to be vast numbers of teachers who, even if they share the same list of values you have, will have very different interpretations, prioritizations and application ideas. People are not simply making deductive errors from a priori values.
Yes, I agree that "Even accepting completely your list could lead to very different conclusions about how to behave, depending on the interpretation of those words and how they are prioritized" You have found a difficulty. Does that mean we should not go ahead with the project ..because there is a difficulty?
It's not merely a difficulty, it is precisely what has been faced by every person arriving with scripture (secular or sacred) and telling people these are the objective values. People disagree, not due to reasoning, though this also, but because they want different things. Love and hate different things.

What I see, and I mean this gently, since we all have issues with hubris, is that while you are extremely polite and engage in dialogue in a reasonable way, you lack humility in the way you present the issue. You don't seem to grasp that there are fundamental value differences that go way below the level of booklets and deduction and your sense of what the obvious, that is apriori values are. I have tended to respond with how conservatives might reorder your list because to me it sounds like you are a liberal in the way you conceive of the list and the prioritizations. To give a hint of some of the problems you are likely to run into. I could be wrong, perhaps you are not a liberal or are mixed, though my guess is people who identify as conservatives are going to find your work more offensive, because it comes off as condescending. People who don't agree with you are simply not following the reasoning correctly. When in fact they may look at life fundamentally differently. You assume we are more or less all the same and want the same things. And that differences come from problems in reasoning. I don't see it that way at all.

I have been assuming that what is taught in the References given below was rather clear and understandable. Maybe I was wrong. I realize I cannot make a student care if due to his upbringing and his background experiences he has already been conditioned to cheat, to embezzle, to be selfish, to give in to any temptation, to corrupt himself, and to be quite dishonest.
And here's an example. You couched every difference with your values, here, using pejorative terms. Right there a gap is going to open up with people with different values than you. Let's just look at the word selfish and imagine how conservatives and liberals might vary on what behaviors they label with a perjorative term like selfish rahter than a neutral or even positive term. And notice how you also make it binary 'give in to any temptation.' Rather than all the range of behaviors between utter abstemiousness and hedonism. If we put these at the level of politics I think it should be obvious that there is not some clear logical prioritization of pleasure seeking and putting one's self, family, neighborhood or nation first and how much.

I mean you could have given up your computer and sent nearly all your money to a charity dealing with poor drinking water in the third world. You chose a spot on a wide spectrum and there are people who will judge you selfish, whereas in US middle class circles you may be on the more giving, in terms of charities, end of that spectrum. And there is NO logical argument that will prove that you, pr the anarchist who gives everything to charity, or the less generous than you middle class guy, or the high achiever not charitable giver who prioritizes achieving technlogical progress in his field, has made the objectively correct amount of giving. And their kids are, if you are incredibly lucky, going to be the ones in classes that base their curriculum on your booklet.

So what are their families going to think when their kids come home having understood that you know what the right amount of giving is and what is selfish? And how are you going to look to those who think you let yourself off too easy?

And how do you look to philosophers who notice that you don't seem to grasp how hard and complicated this is, nor that you are basically pushing your values as if they are logically deduced and don't realize how much reliance what is obvious to you is based on your values and your unproven foundations.

One course, even if it assigns doing a good deed as homework, will not make that student care about not hurting others. Most of the other students, though, who take this course may learn to care about someone other than themselves.
We have an enormous history of various moralities giving tasks to children to teach them what to feel. I think the problems are much more complicated than some of them not caring about hurting others. Guilt, giving when one should not be put in the position to give: how will the teachers figure out which kids are being sexually abused or shamed at home and the last thing they need is some moralizing adult teaching them to be giving? As one example amongst many. I mean, it's as if we haven't had moral education from a wide variety of sources fail for reasons you do not seem to even be aware of.
As you know, this course does teach Individuality to be a high value ! Conformity is the least in value,

And here you seem to me to be failing to understand implicit teaching and content teaching. While the content may not prioritize conformity your attitude and the teaching of morality itself is enacting conformism. Seeing children unenthusiastic about homework assignments sending them off to give to someone as selfish is a perfect attitude to at least try to create conformism.

So, my point is not 'hey this is going to be hard, don't bother', it's more like 'I am not sure you really understand the problem, nor do I think you realize that you are actually promoting YOUR values while promoting them as objective and rational, which will entail an implicit message of if you don't agree with me you are irrational which further entails I know what you really want, you want what I want.' I think that has both practical AND correctness problems. IOW it is both alienating AND not really the case.

And I am not arguing this because I think your values are wrong. My sense is we might prefer many of the same behaviors in the people we come in contact with. I am precisely NOT arguing that you values are wrong or you should have other values (for example conservative ones, if those are not your values). I think a look at the problems liberals have had in trying to convince conservatives about a wide variety of issues would reveal the problems of this approach both epistemologically and practically. I am not saying your booklet has nothing new in it, but in a general way it has been done before many times and it has , I think, often actually increased the gaps between people with different values.
Karpel Tunnel
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3625
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:26 pm

Re: An Ethics Highschool Curriculum

Postby thinkdr » Wed Nov 11, 2020 2:37 am

Greetings, K.T.

Thank you for devoting all that time in straightening me out. Your intentions are good.. You are not just being critical for criticisms' sake. You truly would like to live in a more-ethical world, just as I, and many others, would also.

However, I get the impression that you have not really read the books, booklets, and papers upon which you are basing your warnings and objections. Nor are you obliged to do any reading if you're not that into it. My evidence for what I say is that you spend a lot of space knocking down straw men; you don't show, for exaple, that you read my explanation of "selfishness." You write as if I meant by it was "degree of generosity." Yet I explained, and gave examples to illustrate, that what I intended that concept to mean is pushiness, extreme self-centered conduct unbecoming in an adult, being inconsiderate, and having that "What's in it for me?" attitude.

In addition, you write as if I was 'religiously' advocating a specific single set of values that you refer to as 'the list.' I don't know what you're talking about! I am not "selling" or promoting any list. Time and again I say that the new paradigm for Ethics is highly tentative. It is a proposed theory. Its foundation is unproven, but what philosophy (of, say, Plato, Kant, Heidegger, Leibniz, etc.) or what science has a proven foundation?? Every system or frame-of-reference is built on some unproven premises or unproven propositions -- so why are you holding me to a higher standard?

It would be nice to "close the gap" between people emphasizing different values, but my proposed theory of Ethics never claimed to do that. Yet you spend a lot of time complaining that I didn't. I only implied that some day it might be possible to achieve more compatibility by deliberately setting out to cohere the values that people believe-in and hold dear as their core beliefs. That project would take a campaign by a nonprofit group which focused on doing that. I would support such a movement, but it was not my task. I am merely offering a synthesis of ethical-theory ideas under one unified framework: it includes Mencius, Shinto, Virtue
Theory, Consequentialism, Deontology, Aristotle, Sidgewick, Bradley, G.E. Moore, William James, etc.


Comments? Questions? Reviews?
:idea: For further reading and insight into the topics of Ethics check out these links, and thereby add to your reading enjoyment

THE STRUCTURE OF ETHICS
[NEW] :!:
http://www.myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/TH ... ETHICS.pdf


THE BREAKTHROUGH - We Can Get Along After All (2018)
http://myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/BREAKT ... %20all.pdf

LIVING WELL: how ethics helps us flourish
http://www.myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/LI ... ourish.pdf


BASIC ETHICS: a systematic approach
http://www.myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/BASIC%20ETHICS.pdf


ETHICAL ADVENTURES http://wadeharvey.myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/ETHICAL%20ADVENTURES.pdf

When you search Bing for the following pdf selection you may wish to start with page 20 in order to skip the technicalities:
Marvin C. Katz - ETHICS: A College Course
thinkdr
Thinker
 
Posts: 885
Joined: Sat May 12, 2012 7:05 pm

Re: An Ethics Highschool Curriculum

Postby thinkdr » Sat Nov 14, 2020 12:58 am

Do you agree with the proposition that morality and being ethical makes social life, and/or society, possible by minimizing criminal behavior and violent conflict?

If you do agree then do you CARE if moral and ethical understanding and ethical practice become more widespread?

[Answering the following question is optional:] If you do care, how do you propose to arrange it to happen? Do you have any suggestions? Can you think of any steps that would tend to make such comprehension and awareness - and the action that ensues from that understanding - more likely?

....Awaiting your response........
:idea: For further reading and insight into the topics of Ethics check out these links, and thereby add to your reading enjoyment

THE STRUCTURE OF ETHICS
[NEW] :!:
http://www.myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/TH ... ETHICS.pdf


THE BREAKTHROUGH - We Can Get Along After All (2018)
http://myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/BREAKT ... %20all.pdf

LIVING WELL: how ethics helps us flourish
http://www.myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/LI ... ourish.pdf


BASIC ETHICS: a systematic approach
http://www.myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/BASIC%20ETHICS.pdf


ETHICAL ADVENTURES http://wadeharvey.myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/ETHICAL%20ADVENTURES.pdf

When you search Bing for the following pdf selection you may wish to start with page 20 in order to skip the technicalities:
Marvin C. Katz - ETHICS: A College Course
thinkdr
Thinker
 
Posts: 885
Joined: Sat May 12, 2012 7:05 pm

Re: An Ethics Highschool Curriculum

Postby MagsJ » Sat Nov 14, 2020 1:48 am

A response, if you please..
MagsJ wrote:_
It depends on whether it would be, say.. teached in a module attached to Social Science or some other apt class..?

What the structure for the curriculum for it, would look like..?
_
I don’t think it would be for naught, as RE/Theology class teaches ethics and morality does it not, so perhaps educational institutions that do not teach those classes should teach Ethics, as a module attached to existing classes.

I think it is a subject that is currently much-needed, but needs to be relevant to current climes and issues.
The possibility of anything we can imagine existing is endless and infinite.. - MagsJ
I haven't got the time to spend the time reading something that is telling me nothing, as I will never be able to get back that time, and I may need it for something at some point in time.. Huh! - MagsJ
You’re suggestions and I, just simply don’t mix.. like oil on water, or a really bad DJ - MagsJ
User avatar
MagsJ
The Londonist: a chic geek
 
Posts: 21571
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: Suryaloka / LDN Town

Re: An Ethics Highschool Curriculum

Postby thinkdr » Sun Nov 15, 2020 12:22 am

MagsJ wrote:?
_
I don’t think it would be for naught...

I think it is a subject that is currently much-needed, but needs to be relevant to current climes and issues.

I agree.
Dan also agrees that ethics is "currently much needed."

By the way, MagsJ, have you read how Dr. Hartman and I define "Ethics"? It is what I have spoken of as 'the new paradigm' within the Unified Theory of Ethics. As you may have noted, that definition is explained in the writings, some of which are listed in the References below, and others are cited in the Bibliographies and weblinks given therein.

Are you aspiring to instruct Philosophy some day? Bertrand Russel had the right approach. He analyzed concepts which formerly were taken for granted ....such as "Number." He applied Logic to the task. Thus he had plenty of material for teaching others. To me, Philosophy is the continuous clarification and analysis of vague concepts. {If successful, this results in getting these concepts ready to be handled by a science ...once the concepts are precise enough.}
In a science measurement is introduced, and the concepts are very clearly related to one another. Now the ambiguity and vagueness is reduced to a minimum.

In a future post I shall exhibit the traditional usage of the term "ethics" which would be presented to new students at the outset of a course on the topic. The follow-up to that would be content from the References below

As to the structure of the curriculum about which you inquire, that would vary from school district to school district. Members of The Board of Education would have to approve of it, and a Curriculum committee would then fit it in according o their regular practice.

To MagsJ, and to everyone: Which of the writings below proved to be the most meaningful or helpful to you?
:idea: For further reading and insight into the topics of Ethics check out these links, and thereby add to your reading enjoyment

THE STRUCTURE OF ETHICS
[NEW] :!:
http://www.myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/TH ... ETHICS.pdf


THE BREAKTHROUGH - We Can Get Along After All (2018)
http://myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/BREAKT ... %20all.pdf

LIVING WELL: how ethics helps us flourish
http://www.myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/LI ... ourish.pdf


BASIC ETHICS: a systematic approach
http://www.myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/BASIC%20ETHICS.pdf


ETHICAL ADVENTURES http://wadeharvey.myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/ETHICAL%20ADVENTURES.pdf

When you search Bing for the following pdf selection you may wish to start with page 20 in order to skip the technicalities:
Marvin C. Katz - ETHICS: A College Course
thinkdr
Thinker
 
Posts: 885
Joined: Sat May 12, 2012 7:05 pm

Re: An Ethics Highschool Curriculum

Postby obsrvr524 » Mon Jan 04, 2021 1:35 pm

I ran across this quote recently -
James S Saint » Wed Oct 19, 2016 4:13 pm wrote:
    Ethics should be taught BEFORE any higher education, especially concerning any Science and most especially any science of psychology.

It reminded me of this thread.
Member of The Coalition of Truth - member #1

              You have been observed.
    Though often tempted to encourage a dog to distinguish color I refuse to argue with him about it
obsrvr524
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1890
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2019 9:03 am

Re: An Ethics Highschool Curriculum

Postby thinkdr » Sun Jan 10, 2021 6:30 am

obsrvr524 wrote:I ran across this quote recently -
James S Saint » Wed Oct 19, 2016 4:13 pm wrote:
    Ethics should be taught BEFORE any higher education, especially concerning any Science and most especially any science of psychology.

It reminded me of this thread.


Yes, thank you. You offer a profound idea for reflection and subsequent action and implementation.

I thoroughly agree with you and with James Saint.

I would go further and argue that Ethics should be taught to students, in language and visuals they can comprehend, of as young an age as possible ...even 3 and 4-year olds. At least in junior-high school.

In doing this teaching, I hope and trust that the approach used, the orientation, the basic content, would compare favorably with the subject matter of the Unified Theory of Ethics ...which itself is continually being revised and upgraded as new and better ideas come along.
[One may note such an upgrading occurring over time as the various documents, papers, and booklets are issued, a sampling of which are listed below.]

Comments? Evaluations? Views?
:idea: For further reading and insight into the topics of Ethics check out these links, and thereby add to your reading enjoyment

THE STRUCTURE OF ETHICS
[NEW] :!:
http://www.myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/TH ... ETHICS.pdf


THE BREAKTHROUGH - We Can Get Along After All (2018)
http://myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/BREAKT ... %20all.pdf

LIVING WELL: how ethics helps us flourish
http://www.myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/LI ... ourish.pdf


BASIC ETHICS: a systematic approach
http://www.myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/BASIC%20ETHICS.pdf


ETHICAL ADVENTURES http://wadeharvey.myqol.com/wadeharvey/PDFs/ETHICAL%20ADVENTURES.pdf

When you search Bing for the following pdf selection you may wish to start with page 20 in order to skip the technicalities:
Marvin C. Katz - ETHICS: A College Course
thinkdr
Thinker
 
Posts: 885
Joined: Sat May 12, 2012 7:05 pm

Previous

Return to Philosophy



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users