[lit-ideas] Re: Here's a useful word for the list....
- From: "William Ball" <ballnw@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 10:10:13 -0500
John,
Try to see if they can tell the difference between the numeral 2 and the
number two.
Most students I 've found have a difficult time going from phenomena to
monument.
In fact, some operate only in the physical realm.
Regards,
Bill Ball
-----Original Message-----
From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John Wager
Sent: Sunday, January 08, 2006 4:30 PM
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Here's a useful word for the list....
I was taught that philosophy classes were supposed to examine and
evaluate philosophical arguments. All my classes as an undergrad and in
graduate school did that.
But when I got to my first year of teaching, many many years ago, I
found that students could not grasp the "argument" because they didn't
understand or appreciate the statements that made up the argument, and
further that they didn't have any appreciation or interest in the
concepts that made up the statements.
I decided the first thing I should do is try to teach the value of
philosophical CONCEPTS, before puting them into an argument. "Arete"
("virtue") is something that one should understand even before
evaluating how successful Aristotle is in making an argument about this
concept.
Ever since, I'd say that over half of my efforts in teaching have been
to address the concepts philosophers use, exploring and meditating on
them, rather than evaluating arguments containing them. Of course that
means my students do not get to "truth" because they don't get to
evaluate arguments. I'm a bit uncomfortable because philosophy should
be about the "truth" in some sense, and I agree that concepts by
themselves cannot be true or false.
Am I doing the right thing or not?
(This isn't a rhetorical question; I would like to know what you think.)
wokshevs@xxxxxx wrote:
A concept can't be true. Only statements, judgments have a truth value.
Concepts
can be useful, coherent, possessing wider extension than another
concept,
lesser intension than another, inspiring, noble, sublime, motivationally
ert/inert. They can't be physically extended or coloured, are odourless,
are
not possessed in coherent form by any member of the American Reublican
or
Canadian Conservative party, and they don't taste good with leg of lamb
with
rosemary and sage (isn't there a song like that?) So I go "We should,
like
y'know, care for language and thought as we do for the planet and our
own
souls, or sumptin like that." And then she goes: "Yeah, whatever." Like,
you
know what I mean? Like, get a life.
Realizing that most of the students who will appear in my undergrad
classes
tomorrow were born when or after I turned thirty (and still trustable).
Your friendly neighbourhood baby boomer, Walter
No, I sat out Woodstock. Not the camping type.
Quoting JimKandJulieB@xxxxxxx:
<><< A panel of linguists has decided the word that best reflects 2005
is
"truthiness," defined as the quality of stating concepts one wishes or
believes
to be true, rather than the facts. >>
</>
--
-------------------------------------------------
"Never attribute to malice that which can be
explained by incompetence and ignorance."
-------------------------------------------------
John Wager johnwager@xxxxxxxxxxx
Forest Park, IL, USA
Other related posts:
