Why did we abandon the idea of 'moral teachings' in education?

Why did we abandon the idea of 'moral teachings' in education?

Is it any wonder why things are so degenerate these days?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=MUyWmmWtcFM&feature=youtu.be&t=1h3m19s
wesjones.com/gatto1.htm
adamsmith.org/blog/economics/moral-hazard-and-crony-capitalism
investopedia.com/ask/answers/09/moral-hazard.asp
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Morals are subjective, and often tied to religious belief.

Parenting methods are subjective, but we can argue that certain methods make for a more virtuous and ideal individual. The same can be said for society's values.

Wrong. We took out absolutism like the teachings of Plato, which emphasized the importance of knowing truth through virtue.

Confucius is another great figure that should be taught in middle school and high school. Easy to read and has numerous life lessons.

The creed of impartiality and objectivity that has infected the liberal class teaches, ultimately, the importance of not offending the status quo. The ‘professionalism’ demanded in the classroom, in newsprint, in the arts of in political discourse is code for moral disengagement.

Trying to talk about anything subjective vs objective just leads to the dead end of nihilism and existentialism.
Analytic Coherentism masterrace.

Yeah sometimes rape can be moral, you're so fucking enlightened man.

There are very few morals people can agree on so schools don't teach shit other than generic stuff about how working hard is good, and family values are good.

Many high schools DO have a religious studies elective. I also know many with an ethics elective. They're just not mandatory, and it would be very controversial to make them mandatory.

If you want moral teachings in your childrens education, maybe choose a religious school, or a private school of some sort. Costs a lot of money though, better start working.

My post-secondary school was degenerate. They told us not to cheat on their tests, and also told us how to cheat on certifications. Isn't that kind of a fucked up thing to do to 19 year olds when you think about it, this duplicitous attitude towards cheating?

Thing is, a lot of great people were totally morally corrupt. There's utility in being immoral. Worlds fucked up man.

Morals are subjective goy.

Do as thou wilt.

School is mostly brainwashing and conditioning for a life of servitude.

Ayome who thinks morals are subjective needs to read Immnauel Kant first.

Restrict education to private entities that do the soak up as much time of the child's life, and spend it all efficiently

>Why did we abandon the idea of 'moral teachings' in education?
>Why did we
>(((Why)))

Don't worry about that
With Betsy Davos at the wheel, we'll be sending way more kids to Catholic school instead of (((public school)))

We can thank Crowely's new age movement for the moral corruption of the earth.

The judeo-anglo alliance used Crowely's nihilistic and luciferian "thou shalt do as thy wilth" destructive doctrine to destroy the moral fabric of the world.

get that Derridian post modern shit out of here kike

Have you seen what a public school is even like these days?

It doesn't matter what is being taught.

The bar for passing is extremely low. They don't teach spelling or vocabulary anymore. Any kid can get exceptions to do their work as late and as shitty as they want and never fail. If you are actually in any way disabled or disadvantaged, you can get multiple adult helpers to do your shit for you (at tax payer expense).

People wonder why the schools are constantly strapped for cash- it's because so much is pissed away on retards and dindus.

I like the idea of homeschooling, because public education goes at a snail's pace and encourages all sorts of awful behaviour, but I'm worried about stunting my child's social development.

Throwing you child into an environment full of children who have no decency will also have negative affects on social development.

Bad habits are contagious

On September 24, 1966 a baby boy was born. He was named Stefan. This little boy would suffer unimaginable child abuse at the hands of his family. But it would be worth it. For little did this boy know that he would go on to be the greatest philosopher that had ever existed. He would succeed where others had failed. He would live his values, though the heavens may fall, ridding himself of all hypocrisy. Were it not for Stefan Molyneux, we may have had to wait yet another 2500 years for a philosopher capable of advancing the human condition.

In order to bring virtue to the world, Stefan would have to prove that there was even such a thing as virtue. He would have to prove that morality was not just subjective preference, but based on objective principles. Knowing that he was the only one capable of such a task, Stefan set out on his quest. He would enter the dragon’s lair and slay the beast. Lest the world be lost for all eternity.

This Dragon would not be easily defeated. It was cunning. “‘Tis a childish quest”, argued the dragon. “Only a child believes in such simple black and white morality.” Stefan marched closer to the beast, sword drawn. He did not come this far to be stopped by petty non-arguments. The dragon opened its jaw and spit fire. Asking, “Would you not force a man to press a button to save a million lives?” Stefan was not swayed by this. Hypothetical, disaster scenarios do not change moral principles. Raising his sword to the air, aiming for the neck of the Dragon, Stefan thought back to his childhood. He remembered the times when his teachers told him it was wrong to use force to get what you want. He remembered the moral lectures he received for the pettiest of actions, while the adults committed true immorality. With a final swing, Stefan screamed “I LISTENED!!!!!!!.” The Dragon’s head fell to the ground, and with it, thousands of years of moral relativism.

>We took out absolutism like the teachings of Plato, which emphasized the importance of knowing truth through virtue.

Yup. Read a lot on Plato and Sparta, I'm fond of the mandatory conscription system they had in place in the latter, minus the pederasty, but I think it encouraged certain important values and a sense of community / pride that is if anything discouraged these days. And I like the former's conception of virtue as the highest state of the individual, and something that should be taught and encouraged in the citizenry above all else.

Because for some reason it was decided life would be better if the average person were to think more like Homer Simpson than Immanuel Kant.

I disagree about all the helpers and the not teaching topics anymore. In fact, the opposite is true. Kids today must learn more than kids even 20 years ago. However, I agree that we need to stop funding public schooling for the mentally disabled. Too many resources are poured into them, and it is hurting our normal students

t. Public school teacher

Absolute horseshit.

why do you think? to subvert america.
kys faggot shill

youtube.com/watch?v=MUyWmmWtcFM&feature=youtu.be&t=1h3m19s

>the liberal class teaches, ultimately, the importance of not offending the status quo.

False. The liberals teach the importance of respecting each other. If anyone had ever actually respected you, you'd probably understand why this is important.

Whenever anybody says that "morals are subjective," punch them in the face. They can't say that it's wrong and they would be "imposing their morality on others" if they tried.

Fine. What are these objective moral principles you talk about and why do'nt they depende on opinion?

You apparently don't understand the concept of nihilism.

People who don't understand what atheism is, nor can they grasp what nihilism is, tend to believe the two might be related

Nihilism generally is considered in two forms:

(1) Existential nihilism, which argues that life is without objective meaning, purpose, or intrinsic value, or
(2) Moral nihilists, who assert that morality does not inherently exist, and that any established moral values are abstractly contrived.

Men make morals. That's relative. Then men create gods to enforce the morals. The difference is, the god-fabricators feel they can get away with mislabeling their morals "absolute" when they are the worst illusion of absolute.

Theists have such damaged cognitive abilities that they cannot see this blatant false dilemma fallacy in their analysis.

An atheist's life has far more meaning to him because it is the only life he has. He knows it is up to him to make purpose for himself, not wait for some deity to hand it to him or decide his "destiny". On the other hand, a theist cares nothing for this life and couldn't care less if the world is destroyed as long as he gets his imaginary "afterlife".

So the evidence completely contradicts the hsyteria of theists who claim nilhilism #1.

Morality is a man-made concept. Men invent rules, then men fabricate "gods" to enforce the rules. That's been the unwavering constant of all made-up gods in history. This also reinforces the idea of nihilism #2. Ask any theist if he believes in Zeus and the Ancient Greek morals. When he says no, then he proves that the theists are the #2 nihilists. What moral system you adhere to is far more closely related to where you are born and what gods you were forced to serve at the time.

People usually recognize evil, even if they are reluctant to recognize good. Some might look at an apparently heroic action and imagine a selfish motive behind it--the desire for fame, or praise, or monetary reward. Few people, however, will hesitate to call evil by its name. Yet, once they have done so, they have placed themselves in a bind. They have bound themselves by law. Because evil is possible only as the perversion of something good, the opposite of something good, the denial of something good. Once people acknowledged a transcendent standard of good. They themselves have placed the world under a law.

They can't escape the bind by saying that law exists, but merely as a utilitarian stopgap, to ensure the safety of the greatest number of people either. For even then they are invoking transcendent standards: the notion, for example, that the greater good: or that anyone should be concerned with another person's safety. Utilitarianism cannot suffice to prevent murder or theft, because some individuals sometimes find these actions quite useful. Yet they are actions universally condemned, by civil law and common morals. Such condemnations are among the moral truths that human beings naturally know. -These norms witness something that philosophers describe as "natural law."

The subjectivist faggots all need to die. I seriously didn't think there was anybody this stupid left.

Did your professor tell you this, son?

As for OP, yeah it sounds like a good idea at first, but think about it. Morality should be taught these things, in this order:

>your fucking family
>your community, friends, and neighbors

Leaders, role models, and even educators SHOULD be great examples of morality and doing the right thing, but it's not their job really. We should expect them to be good people to fill those roles, but when you relegate things outside of family, friends, and close community to teach children morality, you're going to get a fucking disaster. Look at generations of ghetto niglets with no families raised by 2Pac, Biggie, Jay-Z, and Kanye. Look at their priorities and what they aspire to - is that who you want teaching your kids morality?

That's a democrat solution - have gubmint teaching your kids what morality is. We see today what the regressive liberal cancer calls 'morality' including teaching kids about white privilege and how having secure borders is racist and capitalism is evil and ruined the world. There's your 'government-mandated morality re-education' right there.

The only morality you want your educators teaching kids is about having the integrity not to cheat on assignments.

Morals are subjective to the moral relativiist. Moral absolutism also exists and doesn't have to be hinged to religion. The fact that neither one of these subjects is taught in highschool is disturbing. We arm children with knowledge of everything except a moral framework.

>Moral absolutism also exists
Only is an oxymoron. Otherwise there's no evidence of it and no rational argument can be made to support the concept.

So, the things that are moral and ethic are the things people think are. So it might change depending on people's opinion. Therefore, subjective.

Moral teachings haven't been abandoned. It's just the marxists have gotten into power and started teaching their own morals

Machiavellian niggers.

Moral teachings weren't abandoned. They were substituted.

The vilest sins now are racism, sexism, homophobia. The greatest moral good is to "celebrate diversity".

Whoa Alistair. Seriously, though, if you really think all morality is subjective and fucking 8 year old boys in the ass is okay ever, you need to drink bleach.

>teaching morals at school

are you fucking retarded or just pretending to be retarded?
schools are full of fucking lefties

>Look at generations of ghetto niglets with no families raised by 2Pac, Biggie, Jay-Z, and Kanye
Their fathers were likely locked up in prison for crimes a white defendant would never even be convicted of.

>have gubmint teaching your kids what morality is
>the regressive liberal cancer calls 'morality' including teaching kids about white privilege
Where are the government classes being held?

>capitalism is evil and ruined the world
You're in a thread about morality and you're painfully ignorant about the moral hazards of capitalism? Bold, arrogant and comically stupid.

Actually it's a well-developed school of philosophy that a lot of academics follow, just far less than the number of academics who follow moral relativism.

Federal education (((standards)))
Teachers abandoned values to keep their jobs, having to teach towards the federal tests. The tests set the standard for what teachers teach through the whole year. If half the test has WWII content, half the year is dedicated to WWII.

Ge I don't know do morals make entertainment industry money?

>schools are full of fucking lefties
>Yeah, you find any righties anywhere near a school.
>Education is bad
>Reading rots the mind

You make a valid point.

I would love more conversations about this. The American education system is really trying, but at the same time they're eating their own tail with bullshit like Common Core and constantly adjusting standards for 30 different types of student that speak 5 different languages.

Fuck, we homeschooled our kids through Kindergarten because the shit is 8 HOURS now. When I was in K, the shit was like 3 hours and you learned a few things and played with blocks and shit and went home. I'm not having my 5 year old sit in Kindergarten for 8 fucking hours, sorry. It's like they're concentrating so hard on these odd areas like that while the real education later suffers.

>Actually it's a well-developed school of philosophy that a lot of academics follow
I was under the impression Descartes did away with all that.

>manage to contradict yourself several times in your own thesis
Nihilcucks, never once.

user, the American education system is not designed to educate.
wesjones.com/gatto1.htm
Start with this.

Well, I need to distinguish.

There is absolutism as a normative ethics theory, which states that certain actions are universally morally impermissible.

Not many academics accept that.

There is meta-ethical absolutism, which is the belief that there are true or justifiable moral principles that have application to everyone, or at least, all moral agents. This many academics, at least in the field of philosophy, accept.

For some reason value theory, and the discussion of what values are intrinsically superior, isn't talked about as much these days in the field.

Personally I like virtue ethics the most, as I find it to coherently handle a lot of problems consequentialism and deontological ethics can't.

>Their fathers were likely locked up in prison for crimes a white defendant would never even be convicted of.
Holy fuck thanks for the laugh, also very informative as to your mental quality so I can prepare myself for the rest of your shitpost.

>Where are the government classes being held?
Public school is called public school because it's funded by taxpayer dollars, i.e. subsidized. Do you understand the basics of the US education system? Universities, while mostly private, still receive millions in federal money.

>painfully ignorant about the moral hazards of capitalism
Then you call me comically stupid. Listen here you fucking twat commie cunt, Capitalism has brought almost universal prosperity to the world on a level humanity has never seen, and continues to do so every day. Communism has killed millions of people everywhere it's been tried, every time without fail. Every system has problems, but you can't honestly try and save any face from your embarrassingly retarded comment after acknowledging this painfully obvious fact that you've completely omitted in your practice of the Liberals favorite mental problem - cognitive dissonance.

How do you even type with your head up your ass that far? Or has it gone completely through and popped back out?

Where to start with Kant?

Also, slightly related, how do i into Chomsky? I try watching his talks but he sends me to sleep.

We didnt, dumbass. Just because your family sucks at transmitting values doesnt mean everyone is the same. Do you mean why does government run education not teach morals? Do you want the government deciding what is and is not moral? Asking these questions answers them.

the funniest thing is that moral relativists are the FIRST people to impose their ass-pulled morality system on others.

Rejecting the notion of any sort of universal moral compass, they fall back on the "next best thing" -- government and law, assuming that if it's legal, it is moral. If it is illegal, then it must be immoral.

Then they ass-pull (not always from their own ass) some new morality, like "omg if a boy wants to be a girl then he is a girl. Lying is ok if it's done to enhance a psychotic delusion!"

but then are astounded to find that their only moral backbone, the law, doesn't necessarily support their new confounded mockery of morality. So they DEMAND the law be changed -- completely unaware of the irony surrounding the situation -- that their subjective "morality" should be considered the new objective morality.

Do you understand the basics of the US education system?

I was asking about THESE "government classes":
>teaching kids about white privilege and how having secure borders is racist and capitalism is evil and ruined the world

(1) Where is the specific class that teaches "white privilege"? What is the class name? Who teaches it?
(2) Where is the specific class that teaches "having secure borders is racist"? What is the class name? Who teaches it?
(3) Where is the specific class that teaches "capitalism is evil"? Not economics class. Capitalism is neither good nor evil but if it's an economics class, they teach that capitalism certainly IS a moral hazard, but that's why we regulate capitalism.

>Then you call me comically stupid.
Truth hurts.

>Capitalism blah blah blah
Never said it didn't
But it sounds like you're painfully ignorant about the moral hazards of capitalism. Your Googler must be broke too.
adamsmith.org/blog/economics/moral-hazard-and-crony-capitalism

investopedia.com/ask/answers/09/moral-hazard.asp

If you're one of those education-haters, it's not surprising you don't know anything about economics. Maybe you should sit out this discussion to avoid embarrassing yourself further
>Communism blah blah blah
Never said anything about Communism. Are you sure you're mindlessly shrieking at the right poster?

We still have philosophy class in France and it's redpilled af.

Global movement to weeken fabric of strong countries