Do reading and free thinking cause some problems in society

[Shinji-Katawane]

In "Autobiogrpahies and the History of reading" Katherin Tinsley and Carl F. Kaestle report that their resech on autobiographies suugests that:

"Many books encounterd by young people supported their family or ethnic culture: indeed parents strove to ensure that outcome. Most books introduced into schools supported the main stream culture and capitilist institutions. The politics of literacy is precisely the struggel to manage the potentail opertunities and disruptions presented by reading"(literacies 693).

If these assumptions are true then what can we make of society today?

[Bleeding Art]

I realy can't understand what that all said because you constantly mispell words and misplace vowels. Try running a spellcheck on all that and try again so that maybe someone can understand what you're trying to say, alrighty?

[Shinji-Katawane]

Utakan

I realy can't understand what that all said because you constantly mispell words and misplace vowels. Try running a spellcheck on all that and try again so that maybe someone can understand what you're trying to say, alrighty?

some people cant spell and some peoples computers dont have a word processor that wants to work. I was quotting a paper I was given today in my english class to spark a discussion.

[airsswordsman]

shinju-katwane

In "Autobiogrpahies and the History of reading" Katherin Tinsley and Carl F. Kaestle report that their research on autobiographies suggests that:

"Many books encounterd by young people supported their family or ethnic culture: indeed parents strove to ensure that outcome. Most books introduced into schools supported the mainstream culture and capitilist institutions. The politics of literacy is precisely the struggel to manage the potentail opertunities and disruptions presented by reading"(literacies 693).

If these assumptions are true then what can we make of society today?

It simply means that the idea of democracy is doomed to fail.

[Shinji-Katawane]

airsswordsman

shinju-katwane

In "Autobiogrpahies and the History of reading" Katherin Tinsley and Carl F. Kaestle report that their research on autobiographies suggests that:

"Many books encounterd by young people supported their family or ethnic culture: indeed parents strove to ensure that outcome. Most books introduced into schools supported the mainstream culture and capitilist institutions. The politics of literacy is precisely the struggel to manage the potentail opertunities and disruptions presented by reading"(literacies 693).

If these assumptions are true then what can we make of society today?

It simply means that the idea of democracy is doomed to fail.

Hasn;t it already failed time and time again? I think their stating that its a way to try to control the masses and keep free thinkers at a minimum.

[in red blue green]

It has nothing to do with democracy failing. It simply means that people tend to want people to think like them, and so teachers and school boards and parents refuse their kids books about "odd" or "wrong" topics. But books merely teach. Yes, they may change someone's life, but it's main purpose is to broaden your horizon, not to instill morals and values into children.

But, I think free thinkers are bred just like brats are bred. If parents are critical and forcing kids to follow their path by forcing them to go to their church everyday (for example) and shoving their values down their kids throat. I have to thank whoever/whatever is up there that my mother is so accepting. Yes, my mother will discuss her opinion with me, but she will allow me to follow my own path. Now, my father, he would argue his opinions.

And that's where free thinkers are born. It all depends if the parents discuss or argue. I don't believe it has anything to do with books.

[Shinji-Katawane]

well you do have some points. Though have you ever wondered why teachers dont discuss or debate topics that are controversial and where people have opinions?

Its because they are afraid of those that challenge the ordinary though and the way the system is built.

[This Is My Corn]

shinju-katwane

well you do have some points. Though have you ever wondered why teachers dont discuss or debate topics that are controversial and where people have opinions?

Its because they are afraid of those that challenge the ordinary though and the way the system is built.

I don't think that that's always true. My U.S. History teacher in particular had the students do debates in order to spark conversations on controversial topics.

[Shinji-Katawane]

littlewolfwarrior

shinju-katwane

well you do have some points. Though have you ever wondered why teachers dont discuss or debate topics that are controversial and where people have opinions?

Its because they are afraid of those that challenge the ordinary though and the way the system is built.

I don't think that that's always true. My U.S. History teacher in particular had the students do debates in order to spark conversations on controversial topics.

Ok. A better way is do they join in? Hardley.

Maybe it depends on the school you are in.

[xolanni]

I think that democracy has not failed but those who were "selected" to uphold the system did.

[Shinji-Katawane]

xolanni

I think that democracy has not failed but those who were "selected" to uphold the system did.

What do you mean by that?

The leaders in charge fear those that are differnt. Which is one reason the green party will never get into office.

If more books that were based on theoretical aspects of life and religions were published that challenged society today dont you think that society would fall and a new one would form?

[Starlock]

shinju-katwane

littlewolfwarrior

shinju-katwane

well you do have some points. Though have you ever wondered why teachers dont discuss or debate topics that are controversial and where people have opinions?

Its because they are afraid of those that challenge the ordinary though and the way the system is built.

I don't think that that's always true. My U.S. History teacher in particular had the students do debates in order to spark conversations on controversial topics.

Ok. A better way is do they join in? Hardley.

Maybe it depends on the school you are in.

It is not the place of school teachers (at least in the K-12 level, and even in college and beyond) to interject with their own personal opinions. This is seen as indoctrination of the students and a teacher can get fired for that. A very good teacher at my high school was fired for this very reason. That is why they do not join into these conversations on controvertial topics and just lead the discussion.

[satan_scat_bebop]

shinju-katwane

"Many books encounterd by young people supported their family or ethnic culture: indeed parents strove to ensure that outcome. Most books introduced into schools supported the main stream culture and capitilist institutions. The politics of literacy is precisely the struggel to manage the potentail opertunities and disruptions presented by reading"(literacies 693).

that's because school is nothing more than an agent of socilization.

[Shinji-Katawane]

Starlock

shinju-katwane

littlewolfwarrior

shinju-katwane

well you do have some points. Though have you ever wondered why teachers dont discuss or debate topics that are controversial and where people have opinions?

Its because they are afraid of those that challenge the ordinary though and the way the system is built.

I don't think that that's always true. My U.S. History teacher in particular had the students do debates in order to spark conversations on controversial topics.

Ok. A better way is do they join in? Hardley.

Maybe it depends on the school you are in.

It is not the place of school teachers (at least in the K-12 level, and even in college and beyond) to interject with their own personal opinions. This is seen as indoctrination of the students and a teacher can get fired for that. A very good teacher at my high school was fired for this very reason. That is why they do not join into these conversations on controvertial topics and just lead the discussion.

I understand that point. It just seems weird that in a topic that is conytroversial that they are supossed to be teaching they would not be able to start out the debate with their points before letting the studnets go.

Shoulndt their points be considered valid if they are tecahing the studnets how to debate properly and how to proplery support their thoughts, ideas, and opinions?

I personally think that even if it was on a small leaval they should be allowed to atleast use how they would act in a debate as a basis of showing them how to proplery debate and discuss with evidnecae and suppoirt.

[Starlock]

shinju-katwane

Starlock

shinju-katwane

littlewolfwarrior

shinju-katwane

well you do have some points. Though have you ever wondered why teachers dont discuss or debate topics that are controversial and where people have opinions?

Its because they are afraid of those that challenge the ordinary though and the way the system is built.

I don't think that that's always true. My U.S. History teacher in particular had the students do debates in order to spark conversations on controversial topics.

Ok. A better way is do they join in? Hardley.

Maybe it depends on the school you are in.

It is not the place of school teachers (at least in the K-12 level, and even in college and beyond) to interject with their own personal opinions. This is seen as indoctrination of the students and a teacher can get fired for that. A very good teacher at my high school was fired for this very reason. That is why they do not join into these conversations on controvertial topics and just lead the discussion.

I understand that point. It just seems weird that in a topic that is conytroversial that they are supossed to be teaching they would not be able to start out the debate with their points before letting the studnets go.

Shoulndt their points be considered valid if they are tecahing the studnets how to debate properly and how to proplery support their thoughts, ideas, and opinions?

I personally think that even if it was on a small leaval they should be allowed to atleast use how they would act in a debate as a basis of showing them how to proplery debate and discuss with evidnecae and suppoirt.

Yes, they should be able to interject their opinion. But sadly, people become highly critical of the school system and if they aren't happy with it, they take their 'revenge' either by underfunding schools or outright filing lawsuits. It's also for these reasons why religion gets left out of many school cirriculums, even if it be a simple course on religious diversity. It's truly sad, isn't it?

Some teachers get around this by arguing for both sides. I've had a few teachers who have done this, or taking a 'devil's advocate' position. In this way they avoid coming off as indoctrinating.