But often enough we do not know what to do because the situation is complicated and one cannot look into the future and predict what the result of a line of conduct might be.
So we try one thing and get feedback. And then another and then another. And we cannot delete what has happened so far and make a fresh start.
Improving a relationship may have the undesired result of raising wrong expectations.
Every step we make is a gamble.
WAYS TO BE WRONG and how to be RIGHT
Re: WAYS TO BE WRONG and how to be RIGHT
Is it possible you worry too much?.....
One tip I might suggest is this: If the other party is extremely upset or is having a fit of anger or extreme displeasure, leave the scene; go outside and sit on the steps to permit a cool-down period. Use that opportunity for reflection and meditation, asking yourself: How can I make it better? What is the loving thing to say or to do? Then silently come back in and go about your business as if nothing happened. When there is calm and you encounter that person, express warmth and conciliation. Showing quiet affection may be appropriate by then.
It is best not to live in the future, nor in the past. Be here now! Live in the present.
Okay?
There is no need to be obstacle-minded. Have a 'problem-solving' attitude.
Have you tried being mindful of The Central Question of Life in social situations? Or at crisis situations?
Tell us how it worked out.
One tip I might suggest is this: If the other party is extremely upset or is having a fit of anger or extreme displeasure, leave the scene; go outside and sit on the steps to permit a cool-down period. Use that opportunity for reflection and meditation, asking yourself: How can I make it better? What is the loving thing to say or to do? Then silently come back in and go about your business as if nothing happened. When there is calm and you encounter that person, express warmth and conciliation. Showing quiet affection may be appropriate by then.
It is best not to live in the future, nor in the past. Be here now! Live in the present.
Okay?
There is no need to be obstacle-minded. Have a 'problem-solving' attitude.
Have you tried being mindful of The Central Question of Life in social situations? Or at crisis situations?Tell us how it worked out.
-
EagerForTruth
- Posts: 62
- Joined: Thu Jan 30, 2014 2:05 pm
Re: WAYS TO BE WRONG and how to be RIGHT
Ok Prof -I'd copy paste the parts i'm talking about but on my first day here I can't figure it out at the moment. Taken together all the discussion above of the different concepts and question developed point to a question that would I admit move it to a different forum, then again, most philosophy does tie together across sub-topics.
The main idea I extract from all your contributions to the discussion is that "Ethics" is the system we develop, both as individuals and societies, to try and "be right" - although I might rather like to use the more debatable term "be good" Other than the slight semantics, sounds spot on to me (which with your academic treatment of it, I'd hope so, although for a amateur "philosopher" like myself does take a little to digest
Next thing I thought of is from your next post about your students comment. The vessel for improvement of our ethics - which should always be necessary for both the individual and society at large - is I think, communication and slow sociological evolution of our species. Of course our particular branch of the animal tree in biology is inherently geared to be selfish to varying degrees, this is certainly not true of all animals or living beings. So while we do have some selfish "programming" that is inherent to us, to think that it cannot change, both through biological evolution we have no direct control over, and societal evolution which I think has valid potential to accelerate that same process, I wouldn't agree with and indeed think is a defeatist attitude that may in fact retard the process of ethical development.
Going to your last large post your large and bolded statement, "What choice can I make or action can I take, in this moment, to create the greatest net value?" is rather at the heart of much of this discussion of ethical theory. For my own tangential contribution to this discussion I'll largely bypass the side-bar on the educational system specifically, although the amount of discussion on it in this threat is way to short to address the complexities of an education system you both say should be based on educating all facets of a child and with the base concept as ethics (and for my own part I largely agree), it doesn't begin to address how to extract the education you're talking about from what our societies education systems are really designed to do, which is produce enough individuals ready to contribute to society to keep it going. The problem here is with a divided, specialized system of labor in our species, it's quite a dilemma to do both effectively.
My last observation I all but throw to the wind is this:
However incredibly long it will take, is ethical development that balances the individual with the society at large, the nourishment of the full being with the production of individuals and systems that can sustain us, not all point to the distant eventual development of a collectivist species?
The main idea I extract from all your contributions to the discussion is that "Ethics" is the system we develop, both as individuals and societies, to try and "be right" - although I might rather like to use the more debatable term "be good" Other than the slight semantics, sounds spot on to me (which with your academic treatment of it, I'd hope so, although for a amateur "philosopher" like myself does take a little to digest
Next thing I thought of is from your next post about your students comment. The vessel for improvement of our ethics - which should always be necessary for both the individual and society at large - is I think, communication and slow sociological evolution of our species. Of course our particular branch of the animal tree in biology is inherently geared to be selfish to varying degrees, this is certainly not true of all animals or living beings. So while we do have some selfish "programming" that is inherent to us, to think that it cannot change, both through biological evolution we have no direct control over, and societal evolution which I think has valid potential to accelerate that same process, I wouldn't agree with and indeed think is a defeatist attitude that may in fact retard the process of ethical development.
Going to your last large post your large and bolded statement, "What choice can I make or action can I take, in this moment, to create the greatest net value?" is rather at the heart of much of this discussion of ethical theory. For my own tangential contribution to this discussion I'll largely bypass the side-bar on the educational system specifically, although the amount of discussion on it in this threat is way to short to address the complexities of an education system you both say should be based on educating all facets of a child and with the base concept as ethics (and for my own part I largely agree), it doesn't begin to address how to extract the education you're talking about from what our societies education systems are really designed to do, which is produce enough individuals ready to contribute to society to keep it going. The problem here is with a divided, specialized system of labor in our species, it's quite a dilemma to do both effectively.
My last observation I all but throw to the wind is this:
However incredibly long it will take, is ethical development that balances the individual with the society at large, the nourishment of the full being with the production of individuals and systems that can sustain us, not all point to the distant eventual development of a collectivist species?
Re: WAYS TO BE WRONG and how to be RIGHT
Sheesh, speaking about dodgeing questions, let me pose my questions for the 4th time, please don't dodge this time!
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=12343#p158226
viewtopic.php?f=7&t=12019&start=105#p157817
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=12343#p158226
I would like to see a link to these Wiki sites, please.prof wrote:Thank you for your helpful suggestion about posting on Wiki. I already, for over 8 years, have two topics on Wiki that I initiated.
viewtopic.php?f=7&t=12019&start=105#p157817
So, which university are you connected to?prof wrote:Even I, a professor Moral Philosophy
Re: WAYS TO BE WRONG and how to be RIGHT
Hi, Hex-Hammer
I already answered these questions. You just did not read carefully. One of the wiki sites is the biography of a philosopher - who I knew personally. I gave the link to that in one of my recent posts.
The University was just given in a reply to your earlier request.
Read !
p.s. Why do you want to know where I worked before I retired? What differendce does it make?
What are your credentials?
Answer my questions.
I already answered these questions. You just did not read carefully. One of the wiki sites is the biography of a philosopher - who I knew personally. I gave the link to that in one of my recent posts.
The University was just given in a reply to your earlier request.
Read !
p.s. Why do you want to know where I worked before I retired? What differendce does it make?
What are your credentials?
Answer my questions.
Re: WAYS TO BE WRONG and how to be RIGHT
Could you then please repeat and provide the link to the Wiki site?prof wrote:Hi, Hex-Hammer
I already answered these questions. You just did not read carefully. One of the wiki sites is the biography of a philosopher - who I knew personally. I gave the link to that in one of my recent posts.
The University was just given in a reply to your earlier request.
Read !
p.s. Why do you want to know where I worked before I retired? What differendce does it make?
What are your credentials?
Answer my questions.
If one promotes oneself as a professor, it's ofc naturally one will answer where one is having ones profession, simple logic.
Re: WAYS TO BE WRONG and how to be RIGHT
Northeastern Illinois University in Chicago (posted 30 Jan., 2014). Took me more time to type this than to find it. Do your homework.prof wrote:Hi, Hex-Hammer
I already answered these questions. You just did not read carefully. One of the wiki sites is the biography of a philosopher - who I knew personally. I gave the link to that in one of my recent posts.
The University was just given in a reply to your earlier request.
Read !
p.s. Why do you want to know where I worked before I retired? What differendce does it make?
What are your credentials?
Answer my questions.
Re: WAYS TO BE WRONG and how to be RIGHT
Ah thanks!
Now we only lack the Wiki link.
Now we only lack the Wiki link.
Re: WAYS TO BE WRONG and how to be RIGHT
What kind of tone is that?prof wrote:What are your credentials?
Answer my questions.
-
mattsidedish
- Posts: 27
- Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2014 5:01 am
- Location: Eastern NC, United States
Re: WAYS TO BE WRONG and how to be RIGHT
Going back to the issue of students and their need by their respective professors to be individualized in relation to study and academics, I would assert a caveat.
Students are individuals. That being said, their program of study is also an individual aspect. Students all must learn the same set of information in order to receive the same credit for completion of the course. Teaching different students different aspect of a study would be not only unethical, but criminal. If I want to be a paramedic, the last thing I would want my instructor to teach me is how to operate a lathe. Instruction techniques being individualized is a building block of functional applied academics. Individualizing what is instructed based on the preferences and interests of the student solves nothing.
Students are individuals. That being said, their program of study is also an individual aspect. Students all must learn the same set of information in order to receive the same credit for completion of the course. Teaching different students different aspect of a study would be not only unethical, but criminal. If I want to be a paramedic, the last thing I would want my instructor to teach me is how to operate a lathe. Instruction techniques being individualized is a building block of functional applied academics. Individualizing what is instructed based on the preferences and interests of the student solves nothing.
Re: WAYS TO BE WRONG and how to be RIGHT
Hi, mattsidedish
What you are referring to sounds more like training or instruction than education.
Everyone in lockstep, in a factory-like classroom, is an Industrial-age arrangement. We are in transition now to the Information-age. Now a student can go over to a (wireless) computer [ and if the weather is good it can be outdoors - say, in a booth on a grassy hilltop], and ask about anything of which s/he may be curious - whether it be Zulu anthropology, Galois groups, or the history of ideas in ethics - and then engage in self-study, going at his/her own pace. Hopefully, the computer will have the power of Watson (which beat human TV contestants on Jeopardy.) Unfortunately, not every course in every topic is well-programmed nor freely available. In many nations of the world, including the USA, money gets in the way of educating its children. Also children who were abused - psychologically or physically - often lack the curiosity that normal, healthy children have (before they enter the 3rd grade - as the evidence shows.)
In rational countries nothing gets in the way of getting students educated ...or at least schooled.
I initiated a thread here once on what it means to be educated. Perhaps you may want to look it up. viewtopic.php?f=8&t=10230&hilit
What you are referring to sounds more like training or instruction than education.
Everyone in lockstep, in a factory-like classroom, is an Industrial-age arrangement. We are in transition now to the Information-age. Now a student can go over to a (wireless) computer [ and if the weather is good it can be outdoors - say, in a booth on a grassy hilltop], and ask about anything of which s/he may be curious - whether it be Zulu anthropology, Galois groups, or the history of ideas in ethics - and then engage in self-study, going at his/her own pace. Hopefully, the computer will have the power of Watson (which beat human TV contestants on Jeopardy.) Unfortunately, not every course in every topic is well-programmed nor freely available. In many nations of the world, including the USA, money gets in the way of educating its children. Also children who were abused - psychologically or physically - often lack the curiosity that normal, healthy children have (before they enter the 3rd grade - as the evidence shows.)
In rational countries nothing gets in the way of getting students educated ...or at least schooled.
I initiated a thread here once on what it means to be educated. Perhaps you may want to look it up. viewtopic.php?f=8&t=10230&hilit
-
mattsidedish
- Posts: 27
- Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2014 5:01 am
- Location: Eastern NC, United States
Re: WAYS TO BE WRONG and how to be RIGHT
No, what I was discussing was the specific reference to school based learning and the students in it. It was earlier in the topic, but still the issue remains.