Some people believe that teaching morality should be the foundation of education. Others believe that teaching a foundation of logical reasoning would do more to produce a moral society
While educators can have a very hard time figuring out what kind of education builds the most ideal of members in a society, I believe the concept is largely flawed. Every individual is unique; every society is unique. One curricular focus seen as an algebraic formula cannot solve the puzzles in each case.
Yet, to dissect the issue proposed here, let's begin with morality lessons in school. Teaching philosophies of morality in school essentially tells our future generation what we or our ancestors think are right and wrong. The foundation can be extremely engraving, provided it is taught right. While there may be some ethics not universal, most of the preaching are accurate and up-to-date. Definitely, stealing and bullying are frowned upon in all societies, regardless of geographical locations and history. Education, in any structured level, needs to accommodate such lessons, since there aren't many places where children could learn them from.
There are, of course, various problems associated with such a teaching method. What this method essentially assumes is that everything written in the "local book of morals" (if it exists!) is right while everything else is wrong. In certain societies, not allowing women to work outside is considered to be morally right, which is a blatant lie. The students taught morals in such schools will learn only that, and after a certain age, they would loose the autonomy to think by themselves that this may not be the case. Secondly, the fact that these theoretical knowledge can, in most cases, not work. This method has been used in schools since the beginning of formal education and the societies still lack empathetic citizens. This ineffective mechanism can largely be because the morals are taught as part of what you have to do as opposed to what you should be doing.
On the other hand, teaching students how to think can solve the aforementioned problem. The teaching system is not as rigid as the former one, and has more flexibility in terms of teaching methods and syllabus. Effectively growing the inherent sense of right and wrong in future educators, if possible, can create an entire generation of empaths and logic driven rebels. A child can essentially understand why it is wrong to steal and how it damages the victim. In addition, they may also be empathetic to the broke father who steals a bottle of milk to feed his hungry infant.
Although this seems like a concrete plan, there are still certain loopholes. Not every human being has the inherent capability to think like they are trained/told to. Every individual is unique and has aptitude in different areas. As opposed to conventional teaching, logical reasoning would fail to appeal to a major portion, who might end up misunderstanding all morals in a society. Furthermore, extremely logical brains, who would definitely be a bi-product of this education, will focus largely or their own understanding than the ones provided by renowned philosophers in the past. Shining debaters have shown this disorder in the past, and this may cause more chaos than solve problems.
In summary, both the approaches have their perks and drawbacks. However, a combination of the two can, and possibly will, solve the moral crisis in future scholars.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-12-14 | srujanakeerthi | 50 | view |
| 2019-12-14 | srujanakeerthi | 50 | view |
| 2019-12-14 | srujanakeerthi | 50 | view |
| 2019-12-03 | Opak Pulu | 50 | view |
| 2019-11-30 | abhbat | 50 | view |
- Some people believe that teaching morality should be the foundation of education. Others believe that teaching a foundation of logical reasoning would do more to produce a moral society 66
- All too often, companies hire outside consultants to suggest ways for the company to operate more efficiently. If companies spend more time listening to their own employees, such consultants would be unnecessary. 66
- People who make decisions based on emotion and justify those decisions with logic afterwards are poor decision makers. 50
- Mass media and the internet have caused people’s attention spans to get shorter. However, the overall effect has been positive: while people are less able to focus on one thing, they more than make up for it with an enhanced ability to sort through lar 83
- Pirouettes Ballet School is the clear choice for any child. Of all the dance schools in Elmtown, Pirouettes has the most intensive program, and our teachers have danced in the most prestigious ballet companies all over the world. Many of our students have 69
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 593, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: aren't
...o accommodate such lessons, since there arent many places where children could learn ...
^^^^^
Line 9, column 198, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Is
...ocal book of morals' if it exists! is right while everything else is wrong. I...
^^
Line 9, column 456, Rule ID: LOOSE_LOSE[4]
Message: Did you mean 'lose' (= miss, waste, suffer the loss etc.)?
Suggestion: lose
...at, and after a certain age, they would loose the autonomy to think by themselves tha...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, furthermore, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, still, while, in addition, in summary, kind of, of course, in most cases, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 29.0 19.5258426966 149% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 22.0 12.4196629213 177% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 14.8657303371 114% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.3162921348 80% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 31.0 33.0505617978 94% => OK
Preposition: 70.0 58.6224719101 119% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 12.9106741573 70% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2765.0 2235.4752809 124% => OK
No of words: 538.0 442.535393258 122% => OK
Chars per words: 5.13940520446 5.05705443957 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.81610080973 4.55969084622 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.77443053519 2.79657885939 99% => OK
Unique words: 296.0 215.323595506 137% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.550185873606 0.4932671777 112% => OK
syllable_count: 863.1 704.065955056 123% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 6.24550561798 80% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.99550561798 120% => OK
Subordination: 8.0 3.10617977528 258% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 4.0 1.77640449438 225% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 9.0 4.38483146067 205% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 29.0 20.2370786517 143% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 23.0359550562 78% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 37.1100173649 60.3974514979 61% => OK
Chars per sentence: 95.3448275862 118.986275619 80% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.5517241379 23.4991977007 79% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.1724137931 5.21951772744 99% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.97078651685 121% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 10.2758426966 88% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 12.0 5.13820224719 234% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.83258426966 166% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.246118618748 0.243740707755 101% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.050877802288 0.0831039109588 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0441032359047 0.0758088955206 58% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.103258852237 0.150359130593 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0435994276462 0.0667264976115 65% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.1 14.1392134831 86% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 48.8420337079 109% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.1743820225 85% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.53 12.1639044944 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.7 8.38706741573 104% => OK
difficult_words: 142.0 100.480337079 141% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 11.8971910112 76% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.2143820225 82% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.