Well, I college is about what I expected it to be.

[MKJ]

The problem with the sun thing was the discussion after it. He (professor) said it use to be truth that the sun went around the earth. I said that was a false belief and that it didn't change the nature of actual truth. The discussion went on and basically ended with "we can't really know nothing." I can stand moral relativism, but not reality relativism, because almost no one actually believes it. It's just a final point someone raises whenever they've been put down in an argument.

I read a book - a light novel really, where a lecturer said something like this, I think about the rules of physics. The seven year old who happened to be in the audience wondered if he felt that way when he was on the plane that brought him to the lecture.

You are right - almost no one really believes that. He's either a real radical - which would be lucky for you because one doesn't often get to meet/observe someone who lives as though reality is arbitrary and changeable - or he is an idiot which is too bad because the class title sounds very interesting.

 

[Chany]

I am open. He made good points and I accept some of the things he said. But it turns out college is what everyone says it is; another institution meant to force you to believe something. I'm pretty much going for four years for a slip of paper. I love to learn, not waste my time on someone not even teaching half the time but rather prattling off opinions.

 

[athenken]

I am open. He made good points and I accept some of the things he said. But it turns out college is what everyone says it is; another institution meant to force you to believe something. I'm pretty much going for four years for a slip of paper. I love to learn, not waste my time on someone not even teaching half the time but rather prattling off opinions.

That is truly the problem with four-year universities/colleges. They force you take these classes that don't necessarily have anything to do with what you are there to really learn. For these types of classes you just learn how to give the instructor what they want in order to get a good grade and just toss the whole thing away once you have gotten through it.

 

[Chany]

I read a book - a light novel really, where a lecturer said something like this, I think about the rules of physics. The seven year old who happened to be in the audience wondered if he felt that way when he was on the plane that brought him to the lecture.

You are right - almost no one really believes that. He's either a real radical - which would be lucky for you because one doesn't often get to meet/observe someone who lives as though reality is arbitrary and changeable - or he is an idiot which is too bad because the class title sounds very interesting.

I was looking forward to learning about Gandhi. I disagree with his religion and some of his ideas, but I like a lot of what he has to say.

 

[Chany]

Also, thanks everyone for the support.

 

[MKJ]

I am open. He made good points and I accept some of the things he said. But it turns out college is what everyone says it is; another institution meant to force you to believe something. I'm pretty much going for four years for a slip of paper. I love to learn, not waste my time on someone not even teaching half the time but rather prattling off opinions.

You mustn't think this way. Some teachers may want that, but that isn't the purpose at all. You are there to learn mainly how other people think - that is really what undergraduate education is about. As a student coming out of high school, very few people have any ideas that are thought out enough to be very important. It is by learning the thought systems of other people accurately that you get to be in a position to evaluate them. And once you do that you are in a much better position to evaluate new ideas you come across or your own ideas. Being an undergraduate is largely about acquiring the data you need to make good assessments.

I had a professor who told me a story about another teacher in the department. As a young man he had been in a seminar where he was presenting on a the ideas of some thinker - I think it might have been Saint Bonaventure. He asked his prof if he wanted a critical assessment of Bonaventure's ideas. The prof looked at him in a surprised way and said "why, do you think that would be useful?"

The point being, no one cared what some grotty undergrad thought about Bonaventure - he wasn't in a position to have anything very useful to say and that wasn't the point. The point was to learn Bonaventure's system of thought.

If you've had a good Catholic education you are ahead in that you already have some exposure to a coherent system of thought. The more systems you know, the better off you are at dealing with ideas and asking the right questions. But to learn a new system you have to disciple yourself to it. Not believe it, but make an intellectual assumption that it is a coherent system and try to learn how it all fits together. Don't try to pick out bits and pieces that you like or don't like, not for the purposes of learning the system anyway. Treat it as a whole. Even try to love it in the sense of understanding its goals and seeing why people were moved by it.

It would be a lot better to try and learn about Ghandi in that way, but your professors system of thought can be learned as well. (Though you might find ultimately his isn't really coherent, as I think you already suspect.)

 

[Athanasias]

You can't hide from the real world. Best to learn to deal with it now, cuz you're gonna run into this a lot in your life. (Even among so-called Catholics/Christians.)

Hope things work out for you.

Before you run into the "real world"(Catholic school and truth also exist in the real world) you need to be properly formed. Now you already admitted you fall into believing things easily. If you were well formed and not easily swayed by arguments against Catholic truth then it would be different. But alot of Catholic teens who are not really well formed in thier faith and are still impressionable and easily swayable end up going to secular school and dropping out of Catholicism afterward or stop practicing the faith and end up loosing faith. This is something to think about. What you need is a good formation in history, philosophy, and theology and sociology from a solid Catholic source so when you go to the other schools you can easily tell whats crap and what is not because you will know how to answer the professors objections. I was lucky I studied for 8 years on the faith and philosophy through books, tapes, and debates before I went to secular college so I could spot crap in an instant and I was not affected. In fact I argued with the professors. Made one pro choice philosophy professor cry.

Remember your soul comes first.

If you do not do this at least read a ton of Catholic books such as "Catholic handbook of apologetics" and "socrates meets Jesus" by Dr. Peter Kreeft, Any book called Socrates meets "" by Dr Kreeft as he goes through all the false philosophies of Popular philosophers and athiest that most universities teach and he uses Socratic method and logic showing why there are false in doing so. "One Holy Catholic and Apostolic" by Kenneth Whitehead is a good history book for basics, and I would get "Radio Replies" 3 volumes by Fr. Rumble and Carty. Also any books by Dr Scott Hahn and socialogically you may want to read "How the Catholic Church built western civilization" by Historian Thomas Woods. How The Catholic Church Built Western Civilization: Thomas E. Woods Jr: 9780895260383: Amazon.com: Books

 

[ebia]

I read a book - a light novel really, where a lecturer said something like this, I think about the rules of physics. The seven year old who happened to be in the audience wondered if he felt that way when he was on the plane that brought him to the lecture.

You are right - almost no one really believes that. He's either a real radical - which would be lucky for you because one doesn't often get to meet/observe someone who lives as though reality is arbitrary and changeable - or he is an idiot which is too bad because the class title sounds very interesting.

Or he's being provocative.

 

[ebia]

I am open. He made good points and I accept some of the things he said. But it turns out college is what everyone says it is; another institution meant to force you to believe something. I'm pretty much going for four years for a slip of paper. I love to learn, not waste my time on someone not even teaching half the time but rather prattling off opinions.

Are you there to acquire information or are you there to learn how to think?

 

[Chany]

Are you there to acquire information or are you there to learn how to think?

Define "how to think".

 

[Winter]

I once took a horrifying "womens studies class" for a social science credit. We constantly spoke about abortion and it was clearly a pro-choice focus. Heaven forbid someone stated they were against abortion every class member (all females) and the instructor (who used to be a former nun for heaven's sakes), ganged up on them.

I was a raging liberal back then and pro-choice. And even I was clearly uncomfortable about the direction the class was taking. One female student admitted to 3 abortions. Someone asked her, "how on earth could you bring yourself into that situation again?" And the instructor (again, who was once a nun), yelled: IT DOESN'T MATTER HOW MANY ABORTIONS SOMEONE HAS.

I think it was the first time in my liberal life that I began to see something wrong about the attitude of a pro-choice mentality.

Anyway, we had some young girls still "undecided" and even though I was pro-choice back then, I was actually disappointed to see their position change and support a pro-choice view at the end of the semester.

The class should have been balanced - an examination of both perspectives. This of course infrequently happens in colleges.

My point is this though. Even with my liberal mindset, deep inside I knew something wasn't right with the attitude of the class and point of view. You will know this too. Maybe its the Holy Spirit.

I still continued having a pro-choice mindset though. It wasn't until God slapped me across the face while driving on the highway that He gave me a sign that abortion was wrong. Another story though. I digress, sorry.

You will know. The Holy Spirit will be your anchor. When viewpoints get persecuted (even if you disagree with them) that's your chance to take an independent step back and say, "well, wait a minute." Then you'll see with clarity and balance - and often that is when the Holy Spirit steps in.

 

[Chrystal-J]

I once took a horrifying "womens studies class" for a social science credit. We constantly spoke about abortion and it was clearly a pro-choice focus. Heaven forbid someone stated they were against abortion every class member (all females) and the instructor (who used to be a former nun for heaven's sakes), ganged up on them.

I was a raging liberal back then and pro-choice. And even I was clearly uncomfortable about the direction the class was taking. One female student admitted to 3 abortions. Someone asked her, "how on earth could you bring yourself into that situation again?" And the instructor (again, who was once a nun), yelled: IT DOESN'T MATTER HOW MANY ABORTIONS SOMEONE HAS.

I think it was the first time in my liberal life that I began to see something wrong about the attitude of a pro-choice mentality.

Anyway, we had some young girls still "undecided" and even though I was pro-choice back then, I was actually disappointed to see their position change and support a pro-choice view at the end of the semester.

The class should have been balanced - an examination of both perspectives. This of course infrequently happens in colleges.

How awful. I've had some shady professors who spoke about some pretty nasty thing (in my opinion because they enjoyed it). And the fact that she was an ex-nun makes it even worse. She was taught the Truth and turned away from it.

 

[Wolseley]

The problem with the sun thing was the discussion after it. He (professor) said it use to be truth that the sun went around the earth. I said that was a false belief and that it didn't change the nature of actual truth. The discussion went on and basically ended with "we can't really know nothing." I can stand moral relativism, but not reality relativism, because almost no one actually believes it. It's just a final point someone raises whenever they've been put down in an argument.

Ah, yes...in the back of my mind, I can hear Steve Taylor singing....

Sally's into knowledge;
Spent her years in college
Just to find out nothing is true.
She can hardly speak now
Words are not unique now,
'Cause they can't say anything new.
You say humanist philosophy
Is what it's all about---
You're so open-minded
That your brain leaked out!

Steve Taylor - 6 - Whatcha Gonna Do When Your Number's Up - I Want To Be A Clone (1983) - YouTube

I had professors like that as well; in my case, however, I went to college after eight years of military service, so I had quite a little bit of "real life" experience (really real life---and death, too, experience... ) when I went in, and I could distinguish between actuality and the professor's ivory tower academic hogwash.

But if you think college is an eye-opening experience, you should try basic training.

That is truly the problem with four-year universities/colleges. They force you take these classes that don't necessarily have anything to do with what you are there to really learn. For these types of classes you just learn how to give the instructor what they want in order to get a good grade and just toss the whole thing away once you have gotten through it.

I had to keep two totally seperate sets of notes in my mind: the ways things actually are; and what the professor wanted to hear in order to get a passing grade. Come exam time, I would dutifully vomit forth all the nonsense he wanted to hear---but I always knew that most it it was complete balderdash.

 

[Athanasias]

"The discussion went on and basically ended with "we can't really know nothing."

Does anyone see the illogical nature in that argument? The relativist professor easily discredits himself by making a non-relative absolutist statement and saying "We can't really know anything". The fact that your professor says you can't really know anything if he truly beleives this actually means you cannot know his statement is true or not and therefore do not have to accept it. LOL I love it how relativist think everything is all relative except their own opinion which is to be taken as absolute truth!

 

[athenken]

"The discussion went on and basically ended with "we can't really know nothing."

Does anyone see the illogical nature in that argument? The relativist professor easily discredits himself by making a non-relative absolutist statement and saying "We can't really know anything". The fact that your professor says you can't really know anything if he truly beleives this actually means you cannot know his statement is true or not and therefore do not have to accept it. LOL I love it how relativist think everything is all relative except their own opinion which is to be taken as absolute truth!

Hey, not every professor is guilty of being completely qualified for their positions. At some colleges/universities you merely need a masters degree and know someone at the school.

I am sure there are plenty of people on this forum who have had professors who they wondered how they could possibly have landed a teaching position.

 

[Athanasias]

Hey, not every professor is guilty of being completely qualified for their positions. At some colleges/universities you merely need a masters degree and know someone at the school.

I am sure there are plenty of people on this forum who have had professors who they wondered how they could possibly have landed a teaching position.

Yes! You nailed it! I have been there myself!

 

[TheOtherHockeyMom]

I was looking forward to learning about Gandhi. I disagree with his religion and some of his ideas, but I like a lot of what he has to say.

What ideas of Gandhi's do you disagree with?

 

[Athanasias]

One of the great things Ghandi said about Catholics is that he doesn't understand our actions in regards to the blessed Sacrament. To paraphrase him he said something like:

"If I beleived that were God I would be on my face" Speaking of the lack of adoration from Catholics when receiving Christ real presence in communion. Makes you think when you go to communion doesn't it!

 

[keith99]

One of the great things Ghandi said about Catholics is that he doesn't understand our actions in regards to the blessed Sacrament. To paraphrase him he said something like:

"If I beleived that were God I would be on my face" Speaking of the lack of adoration from Catholics when receiving Christ real presence in communion. Makes you think when you go to communion doesn't it!

I'd never thought of that until now. When viewed that way it does seem strange that mere representations of Christ of Saints get adoration (sometimes to the point where calling it worship is not out of line) yet what is supposed to be the real body of Christ is taken with far less reverence.

 

[Athanasias]

I'd never thought of that until now. When viewed that way it does seem strange that mere representations of Christ of Saints get adoration (sometimes to the point where calling it worship is not out of line) yet what is supposed to be the real body of Christ is taken with far less reverence.

It does seem backward in practice. Although what your seeing is a hyper devotion to the saints known as veneration or high veneration hyperdulia (which is not the same as worship but can easily be mistaken). It is interesting to see that most people who claim they beleive that Jesus is truly present in the Eucharist do not even show him this mere veneration much less adoration(Worship). Gandhi realized this. Wake up Catholics your Lord is here in the Eucharist now worship and recieve.