Why won't most people think enough?

[Amittai]

... self esteem movement, which taught children that no one matters but themselves?

That's where my "secret ingredient" comes in, I took it as meaning everyone else matters as well.

I've been meditating about the corroding effect of shame everywhere; the cynical ploy as reported by Ricky really just reinforces it.

I was ten (and my usual emaciated, uncoordinated self) being punched and pummelled. I suddenly thought to myself: "I'm stopping a fight!"

Mum & Dad brought me up to have an interesting head space.

 

[Ricky M]

.

 

[Amittai]

Are you speaking of the level of intelligence, or fashion sense?

"Cloak" is not fashion sense. "Hijack" is craftiness rather than intelligence.

 

[SkyWriting]

Weren't they behind, say, phonics, that taught children there is no difference between there, their, and they're? Or the self esteem movement, which taught children that no one matters but themselves?

I don't equate either of those ideas with low intelligence. Whether right or wrong. I don't know if anybody has a good grasp on how to teach self-esteem with a good outcome.

 

[Ricky M]

I've been meditating about the corroding effect of shame everywhere;

Do tell...

 

[Ricky M]

I don't equate either of those ideas with low intelligence. Whether right or wrong.

Well, the lack of intelligence is more upon those who thought these were good things to teach

 

[SkyWriting]

Well, the lack of intelligence is more upon those who thought these were good things to teach

Kids are hard wired to learn in a variety of ways. You need to use a spread of methods because even the kids change over time from year to year.
What school grades did you teach?

 

[Ricky M]

Kids are hard wired to learn in a variety of ways. You need to use a spread of methods because even the kids change over time from year to year.
What school grades did you teach?

They wouldn't let me teach, because I refused to dumb down the curriculum

 

[Hans Blaster]

Do you have something specific in mind?

Does anybody know what this thread is about?

Does anybody even care?

 

[Jay Sea]

It is getting more and more difficult to make ethical decisions as the options on both sides are often, particularly in politics, corrupt. I think that church home groups perhaps should discuss, avoiding political party views, political solutions to social problems in light of God's Kingdom of compassion.

in love
Jay

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Does anybody know what this thread is about?

Does anybody even care?

I'm confused. (And unwatching.)

 

[Amittai]

Does anybody know what this thread is about?

Does anybody even care?

All-or-nothing thinking and how more influential people sap the innate intelligent quality of ordinary people. Everyone has contributed huge light. Thank you !!!

 

[solid_core]

When I was scarcely more than an infant I knew that my parents and teachers knew that there is cheating, that the worst morals produce victims, that there is a huge continuum of viewpoints on all issue and every issue.

Much of the time teachers etc would be consistent (though quite individual and varied) and so I felt largely safe with what was around me (there were a handful of bullies, scarcely any in authority though).

I was looking for a sociology section but then again this is about the ethics of taking responsibility for one's own thinking and of indirectly influencing others' thinking through implied structures.

I probably, was just plain relatively lucky.

As everything around everybody younger (and now us too) is in more & more freefall, why have a large chunk of people become more gullible and find it more shocking that there is sleight of hand, illogic by those in a position to know better, etc.

Having written that I admit I am 1,000 % more scandalised to the core than I was this time yesterday.

But, what about those who didn't grow up or learn in a rational atmosphere (from what I read of other countries' schools in recent years). They must be at more of a disadvantage than me. I read about a lot of "black & white" - "all or nothing". I've always been about 57 shades of grey. But that was just me.

As I believe to embrace logic (in the big sense) is ethical, please can we confine ourselves as much as possible to the rational and not gravitate especially towards "complaining about morals" per se.

To critique public affairs we need to keep our minds sharp.

We are living in the culture of "feelings".

The proper reasoning or clear logical thinking is seen as something useful only for some theoretical scholarly discussions.

Emotional or/and lazy people think that reason is not good for their decision making and they simply do what they like in the moment.

 

[variant]

When I was scarcely more than an infant I knew that my parents and teachers knew that there is cheating, that the worst morals produce victims, that there is a huge continuum of viewpoints on all issue and every issue.

Much of the time teachers etc would be consistent (though quite individual and varied) and so I felt largely safe with what was around me (there were a handful of bullies, scarcely any in authority though).

I was looking for a sociology section but then again this is about the ethics of taking responsibility for one's own thinking and of indirectly influencing others' thinking through implied structures.

I probably, was just plain relatively lucky.

As everything around everybody younger (and now us too) is in more & more freefall, why have a large chunk of people become more gullible and find it more shocking that there is sleight of hand, illogic by those in a position to know better, etc.

Having written that I admit I am 1,000 % more scandalised to the core than I was this time yesterday.

But, what about those who didn't grow up or learn in a rational atmosphere (from what I read of other countries' schools in recent years). They must be at more of a disadvantage than me. I read about a lot of "black & white" - "all or nothing". I've always been about 57 shades of grey. But that was just me.

As I believe to embrace logic (in the big sense) is ethical, please can we confine ourselves as much as possible to the rational and not gravitate especially towards "complaining about morals" per se.

To critique public affairs we need to keep our minds sharp.

The conclusion is simply this: People aren't, on average, aren't all that good at thinking well. Your average person is a cluttered, sloppy, biased, emotional thinker who lacks the time or effort for getting the most out of their brain and doesn't have the self awareness to notice.

When people lapse into longer periods of self reflection and thought it is often, still, cluttered with artifacts from their lives, and ultimately very hard to sort out, and not necessarily helpful.

Paralysis by analysis, is the opposed problem to thoughtlessness, where we overthink everything and lose sight of the best actions to take.

So, those people who sit back and judge society at large with disgust, are usually on average, simply contributing to the problem (and the negativity) rather than being actually helpful.

 

[variant]

You can thank:

The liberal dumbing down of the populace
The self esteem movement
The loss of attention span
The embracing of sound bites and memes

We probably should consider the effect of breaking down people into abstract groups and then being dismissive of those groups because we don't want to have to think too hard about what any given person is actually saying.

 

[Amittai]

We probably should consider the effect of breaking down people into abstract groups and then being dismissive of those groups because we don't want to have to think too hard about what any given person is actually saying.

So true, I've always refused to categorise myself, But sometimes have borne the brunt of others' doing so, almost always with often lasting very false effect

 

[mama2one]

.

 

[mama2one]

.