odd article
Marina DeLuca-Howard
I found this article so strange. Odd that one would conclude that drugs
and not unschooling is the answer to keeping children curious and engaged in
learning! Researchers discover the first-ever link between intelligence and
curiosity May lead to drugs that improve learning
http://www.news.utoronto.ca/lead-stories/researchers-discover-the-firstever-link-between-intelligence-and-curiosity.html
--
Rent our cottage: http://davehoward.ca/cottage/
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
and not unschooling is the answer to keeping children curious and engaged in
learning! Researchers discover the first-ever link between intelligence and
curiosity May lead to drugs that improve learning
http://www.news.utoronto.ca/lead-stories/researchers-discover-the-firstever-link-between-intelligence-and-curiosity.html
--
Rent our cottage: http://davehoward.ca/cottage/
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Bob Collier
--- In [email protected], Marina DeLuca-Howard <delucahoward@...> wrote:
Bob
>This appears to be part of the grand plan to map every human activity to a specific location in the brain, the idea being to "eventually" be able to tweak the brain's performance by the application of the 'right' drug in the right place (that's where the money is). If my experience of this kind of article is anything to go by, nothing will come of it. Research scientists in this particular area are apparently expected to declare from time to time that they've made some kind of "breakthrough" in order to maintain their funding, even if they're only waffling on about nothing much, which is usually the case and usually evidenced by numerous qualifiers - "may lead to", "Roder and Saab believe", "potential benefit for the future" are totally par for the course.
> I found this article so strange. Odd that one would conclude that drugs
> and not unschooling is the answer to keeping children curious and engaged in
> learning! Researchers discover the first-ever link between intelligence and
> curiosity May lead to drugs that improve learning
> http://www.news.utoronto.ca/lead-stories/researchers-discover-the-firstever-link-between-intelligence-and-curiosity.html
>
> --
> Rent our cottage: http://davehoward.ca/cottage/
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
Bob
Mel
>The thing that really stuck out for me in the article is that worms have memories. I never knew that! ;)
> This appears to be part of the grand plan to map every human activity to a specific location in the brain, the idea being to "eventually" be able to tweak the brain's performance by the application of the 'right' drug in the right place (that's where the money is). If my experience of this kind of article is anything to go by, nothing will come of it. Research scientists in this particular area are apparently expected to declare from time to time that they've made some kind of "breakthrough" in order to maintain their funding, even if they're only waffling on about nothing much, which is usually the case and usually evidenced by numerous qualifiers - "may lead to", "Roder and Saab believe", "potential benefit for the future" are totally par for the course.
>
> Bob
>
Mel
in Canada
Marina DeLuca-Howard
"Immediately, however, we can put into use the knowledge that fostering
curiosity should also foster intelligence and vice versa."
This conclusion struck me, since I doubt that pouring knowledge into a
child's head leads to curiosity. The big thing for unschoolers I thought
was that allowing our kids to retain their natural curiosity would allow
them to meet their intellectual potential.
My kids constantly ask questions and talk to me. A phenomenon that school
kids cannot replicate. They are sitting quietly doing work, so the don't
get to explore ideas, which I think depends on children having access to an
adult. My kids constantly ask questions. Other adults ask if they are
"geniuses" when they are within earshot of some complex question, but really
they are just curious and have learned to ask questions that lead to answers
or at least more questions LOL
Just curious about how you all see this idea ;)
Marina
2009/9/18 Mel <beensclan@...>
Rent our cottage: http://davehoward.ca/cottage/
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
curiosity should also foster intelligence and vice versa."
This conclusion struck me, since I doubt that pouring knowledge into a
child's head leads to curiosity. The big thing for unschoolers I thought
was that allowing our kids to retain their natural curiosity would allow
them to meet their intellectual potential.
My kids constantly ask questions and talk to me. A phenomenon that school
kids cannot replicate. They are sitting quietly doing work, so the don't
get to explore ideas, which I think depends on children having access to an
adult. My kids constantly ask questions. Other adults ask if they are
"geniuses" when they are within earshot of some complex question, but really
they are just curious and have learned to ask questions that lead to answers
or at least more questions LOL
Just curious about how you all see this idea ;)
Marina
2009/9/18 Mel <beensclan@...>
>--
>
> >
> > This appears to be part of the grand plan to map every human activity to
> a specific location in the brain, the idea being to "eventually" be able to
> tweak the brain's performance by the application of the 'right' drug in the
> right place (that's where the money is). If my experience of this kind of
> article is anything to go by, nothing will come of it. Research scientists
> in this particular area are apparently expected to declare from time to time
> that they've made some kind of "breakthrough" in order to maintain their
> funding, even if they're only waffling on about nothing much, which is
> usually the case and usually evidenced by numerous qualifiers - "may lead
> to", "Roder and Saab believe", "potential benefit for the future" are
> totally par for the course.
> >
> > Bob
> >
>
> The thing that really stuck out for me in the article is that worms have
> memories. I never knew that! ;)
>
> Mel
> in Canada
>
>
>
Rent our cottage: http://davehoward.ca/cottage/
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Bob Collier
--- In [email protected], "Mel" <beensclan@...> wrote:
Bob
>Oh yes, worms have memories. How fascinating is that? I had no idea either. I guess we're always learning. :-)
> >
> > This appears to be part of the grand plan to map every human activity to a specific location in the brain, the idea being to "eventually" be able to tweak the brain's performance by the application of the 'right' drug in the right place (that's where the money is). If my experience of this kind of article is anything to go by, nothing will come of it. Research scientists in this particular area are apparently expected to declare from time to time that they've made some kind of "breakthrough" in order to maintain their funding, even if they're only waffling on about nothing much, which is usually the case and usually evidenced by numerous qualifiers - "may lead to", "Roder and Saab believe", "potential benefit for the future" are totally par for the course.
> >
> > Bob
> >
>
>
> The thing that really stuck out for me in the article is that worms have memories. I never knew that! ;)
>
> Mel
> in Canada
>
Bob
Jenny Cyphers
>>>"Immediately, however, we can put into use the knowledge that fosteringcuriosity should also foster intelligence and vice versa."
This conclusion struck me, since I doubt that pouring knowledge into a
child's head leads to curiosity.>>>
If pouring knowledge into another person worked then we'd all know everything! Chamille's boyfriend's dad told me that I'm not allowed to share knowledge with his son without his permission. That's become a bit of a joke at our house. His son gets the absurdity of it, but sadly the dad doesn't! Chamille's boyfriend and I were singing the song from School House Rock... "it's great to learn, cause knowledge is power."
It's interesting to me that people still think that curiosity needs to be fostered. Really, what it needs is to not be squashed with boredom and tedium and the whole host of other things that cause kids to close up and stop being curious.
>>>The big thing for unschoolers I thoughtwas that allowing our kids to retain their natural curiosity would allow
them to meet their intellectual potential.>>>
See now, I really don't like the term "intellectual potential". To me, it implies an end result of a person. As long as someone is alive, they should still be learning, barring brain injury and living solely on life support, but even then our brains may still be learning, we just don't know. Nobody really has unlocked the mystery of the human brain!
If kids retain their natural curiosity, then they won't stop learning. Since learning is huge and expansive and never ending, then kids will naturally know more.
>>>My kids constantly ask questions and talk to me. A phenomenon that schoolkids cannot replicate. They are sitting quietly doing work, so the don't
get to explore ideas, which I think depends on children having access to an
adult. My kids constantly ask questions. >>>
I suppose part of the equation is having access to an adult, but it's also about the ability to really ask questions. John Holt delves into this quite a bit. Kids in classrooms are afraid to ask questions for many reasons. Sometimes they are outrightly discouraged, sometimes the fear of appearing stupid is too big, or the fear of asking the wrong question or getting the wrong answer, all contribute to a child's inability to ask questions and explore ideas in the classroom setting.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
-="Immediately, however, we can put into use the knowledge that
fostering
curiosity should also foster intelligence and vice versa."-=-
I don't think intelligence is "fostered." I think intelligence is
inborn/native. It can be damaged, just as a healthy baby can have
his growth stunted from stress or fear or malnutrition, or could be
lame from diseases or something. So intelligence needs to remain
intact.
Curiosity is natural human instinct that Christianity considers
sinful, and so that has been crushed in much of western culture for a
thousand years or more. Shut up, don't ask questions, it's none of
your business, who do you think you are, that's not for children to
know, you don't need to know.
I agree with "fostering curiosity," but I don't think it's created, I
think it can be recognized, appreciated, honored, fed. In adults in
whom it has been extinguished, it can be rekindled.
-=-This conclusion struck me, since I doubt that pouring knowledge
into a
child's head leads to curiosity. -=-
No one can pour knowledge into anyone anyway. They can make noise and
maybe some will be of interest to the audience.
-=-The big thing for unschoolers I thought was that allowing our kids
to retain their natural curiosity would allow
them to meet their intellectual potential.-=-
I vaguely agree. <g> I see two problems with the last phrase. At
what point in life does a person meet her potential? Then what? And
"intellectual potential" sounds kind of creepy and ominous, in light
of my own years as a school kid and teacher.
Helping our kids retain their natural curiosity allows them to live a
life full of learning.
It seems people would only meet their potential once, if they were
lucky, but they can keep learning for as long as they keep breathing.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
fostering
curiosity should also foster intelligence and vice versa."-=-
I don't think intelligence is "fostered." I think intelligence is
inborn/native. It can be damaged, just as a healthy baby can have
his growth stunted from stress or fear or malnutrition, or could be
lame from diseases or something. So intelligence needs to remain
intact.
Curiosity is natural human instinct that Christianity considers
sinful, and so that has been crushed in much of western culture for a
thousand years or more. Shut up, don't ask questions, it's none of
your business, who do you think you are, that's not for children to
know, you don't need to know.
I agree with "fostering curiosity," but I don't think it's created, I
think it can be recognized, appreciated, honored, fed. In adults in
whom it has been extinguished, it can be rekindled.
-=-This conclusion struck me, since I doubt that pouring knowledge
into a
child's head leads to curiosity. -=-
No one can pour knowledge into anyone anyway. They can make noise and
maybe some will be of interest to the audience.
-=-The big thing for unschoolers I thought was that allowing our kids
to retain their natural curiosity would allow
them to meet their intellectual potential.-=-
I vaguely agree. <g> I see two problems with the last phrase. At
what point in life does a person meet her potential? Then what? And
"intellectual potential" sounds kind of creepy and ominous, in light
of my own years as a school kid and teacher.
Helping our kids retain their natural curiosity allows them to live a
life full of learning.
It seems people would only meet their potential once, if they were
lucky, but they can keep learning for as long as they keep breathing.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
-=-Chamille's boyfriend's dad told me that I'm not allowed to share
knowledge with his son without his permission.-=-
I hooted out loud! OH MY GOD.
Maybe you could ask him for a list of the things you're not to share.
That would be awesome to have.
-=-"it's great to learn, cause knowledge is power."-=-
Heaven forbid the kid know something the dad doesn't! Or that the
kid's got counter arguments to "truths" the dad has proclaimed.
But if the family's Baptist, I know the phrase for what the dad
doesn't want. Baptists don't want outside information to shake a
young person's faith. When I was 15, turning 16, I was deciding
which university to attend. My three serious thoughts were Hardin
Simmons, because my favorite uncle went there and it was near my
relatives in Texas and was a Baptist college and I was still
considering missionary work; St. John's College in Santa Fe (not a
university); the University of New Mexico. A very nice lady at
church said she hoped I would go to Hardin Simmons, because the other
places would shake my faith.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
knowledge with his son without his permission.-=-
I hooted out loud! OH MY GOD.
Maybe you could ask him for a list of the things you're not to share.
That would be awesome to have.
-=-"it's great to learn, cause knowledge is power."-=-
Heaven forbid the kid know something the dad doesn't! Or that the
kid's got counter arguments to "truths" the dad has proclaimed.
But if the family's Baptist, I know the phrase for what the dad
doesn't want. Baptists don't want outside information to shake a
young person's faith. When I was 15, turning 16, I was deciding
which university to attend. My three serious thoughts were Hardin
Simmons, because my favorite uncle went there and it was near my
relatives in Texas and was a Baptist college and I was still
considering missionary work; St. John's College in Santa Fe (not a
university); the University of New Mexico. A very nice lady at
church said she hoped I would go to Hardin Simmons, because the other
places would shake my faith.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Pam Sorooshian
On 9/19/2009 10:12 AM, Jenny Cyphers wrote:
live in a society in which curiosity is really much valued. Kids'
questions are seen as impertinent or a waste of time, or, at best, kind
of cute, by most adults, I think. And kids' interests are not seen as at
all important - they are completely ignored in schools and at least
somewhat ignored by most parents. Even if parents don't mean to ignore
their kids' interests, they don't have much time (between school and
daycare and scheduled activities that may or may not reflect kids'
interests) to follow up on momentary interests that come up in
day-to-day living, which is, I think, where curiosity is most often
expressed.
-pam
> It's interesting to me that people still think that curiosity needs to be fostered. Really, what it needs is to not be squashed with boredom and tedium and the whole host of other things that cause kids to close up and stop being curious.True true true! Curiosity does need to be "protected," though. We don't
>
live in a society in which curiosity is really much valued. Kids'
questions are seen as impertinent or a waste of time, or, at best, kind
of cute, by most adults, I think. And kids' interests are not seen as at
all important - they are completely ignored in schools and at least
somewhat ignored by most parents. Even if parents don't mean to ignore
their kids' interests, they don't have much time (between school and
daycare and scheduled activities that may or may not reflect kids'
interests) to follow up on momentary interests that come up in
day-to-day living, which is, I think, where curiosity is most often
expressed.
-pam
quaussiebob
--- In [email protected], Jenny Cyphers <jenstarc4@...> wrote:
I remember well when my daughter was in the school system the alertness and mental effort required to ensure that ideas from the school classroom I didn't agree with were made subservient to the "educational culture" (sorry about that one) in our home. Much more relaxing with my son I find to not have to concern myself with any of that at all.
Bob
>Like in the opening titles to Rocko's Modern Life! I think it's a persistent fantasy of many a teacher, parent and, these days, neuroscientist that it's the ultimate solution to "educating our children". And I think not realising that it is a fantasy has caused many children immeasurable harm.
> >>>"Immediately, however, we can put into use the knowledge that fostering
> curiosity should also foster intelligence and vice versa."
> This conclusion struck me, since I doubt that pouring knowledge into a
> child's head leads to curiosity.>>>
>
> If pouring knowledge into another person worked then we'd all know everything!
I remember well when my daughter was in the school system the alertness and mental effort required to ensure that ideas from the school classroom I didn't agree with were made subservient to the "educational culture" (sorry about that one) in our home. Much more relaxing with my son I find to not have to concern myself with any of that at all.
Bob
[email protected]
"Curiosity is natural human instinct that Christianity considers
sinful, and so that has been crushed in much of western culture for a
thousand years or more. Shut up, don't ask questions, it's none of
your business, who do you think you are, that's not for children to
know, you don't need to know." Sandra
While it may be true that much of the "Christian" religious leaders past and present believed/believe that curiosity is sinful, that is not what the Bible teaches. Those supposed Christians were in error, totally misrepresenting God's heart on the subject. In my opinion, true Christians don't believe that at all. The Bible shows how the Creator God made us in His image, to create as He did (obviously on a smaller scale). We are truly fulfilled when we create out of what God has placed on our hearts to do - calling, giftedness, conscience, etc. I believe (from what the Bible teaches) He made the world to be explored and enjoyed. I believe God is the author of unschooling. We are told in His Word to "train our children as we walk along the road" - daily living kind of personal contact and nuturing.
I just had to put in my own perspective as a Christian, so that you didn't think that all Christians believe that curiosity is sinful. God is the one who created our human nature. How could He turn around and judge it? People confuse the good and the bad in our human nature and want to call all things from our human nature sinful. It just isn't true. There is so much misinformation out there.
Thanks Sandra,
Diana
I
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
sinful, and so that has been crushed in much of western culture for a
thousand years or more. Shut up, don't ask questions, it's none of
your business, who do you think you are, that's not for children to
know, you don't need to know." Sandra
While it may be true that much of the "Christian" religious leaders past and present believed/believe that curiosity is sinful, that is not what the Bible teaches. Those supposed Christians were in error, totally misrepresenting God's heart on the subject. In my opinion, true Christians don't believe that at all. The Bible shows how the Creator God made us in His image, to create as He did (obviously on a smaller scale). We are truly fulfilled when we create out of what God has placed on our hearts to do - calling, giftedness, conscience, etc. I believe (from what the Bible teaches) He made the world to be explored and enjoyed. I believe God is the author of unschooling. We are told in His Word to "train our children as we walk along the road" - daily living kind of personal contact and nuturing.
I just had to put in my own perspective as a Christian, so that you didn't think that all Christians believe that curiosity is sinful. God is the one who created our human nature. How could He turn around and judge it? People confuse the good and the bad in our human nature and want to call all things from our human nature sinful. It just isn't true. There is so much misinformation out there.
Thanks Sandra,
Diana
I
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
-=-In my opinion, true Christians don't believe that at all. -=-
Your opinion doesn't change the facts of history and geography, of
what parents have done and still do because they're told to do so by
people at their churches. There's no sense in arguing "true
Christians."
-=-I just had to put in my own perspective as a Christian, so that you
didn't think that all Christians believe that curiosity is sinful. -=-
You didn't have to, but I let it through anyway.
I don't think "all Christians" believe any one thing, nor did I ever
say that. I *know* (and if you don't know you should do more
reading) that Christianity has damaged the rights, happiness and
choices of children (and women, and minorities) in thousands of ways
for over a thousand years. It's not something a million words could
undo. It's something each mother or father can avoid with his or own
children today, and tomorrow.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Your opinion doesn't change the facts of history and geography, of
what parents have done and still do because they're told to do so by
people at their churches. There's no sense in arguing "true
Christians."
-=-I just had to put in my own perspective as a Christian, so that you
didn't think that all Christians believe that curiosity is sinful. -=-
You didn't have to, but I let it through anyway.
I don't think "all Christians" believe any one thing, nor did I ever
say that. I *know* (and if you don't know you should do more
reading) that Christianity has damaged the rights, happiness and
choices of children (and women, and minorities) in thousands of ways
for over a thousand years. It's not something a million words could
undo. It's something each mother or father can avoid with his or own
children today, and tomorrow.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[email protected]
Wow Sandra, I guess I haven't had the same experiences that you have OR read the same materials you have. I'm very saddened to see that so much wrong has been done in the name of Christ. It's very twisted. However, I think you should also look into the good that has been done in the name of Christ. There is much to be said there as well. And, I think there is much to be said in arguing what a "true" Christian is, just as there is in any truth gathering about anything. We all need to examine our biases, including myself.
Diana
Diana
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sandra Dodd" <Sandra@...>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 9:01:59 PM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific
Subject: Re: [AlwaysLearning] Re: odd article
-=-In my opinion, true Christians don't believe that at all. -=-
Your opinion doesn't change the facts of history and geography, of
what parents have done and still do because they're told to do so by
people at their churches. There's no sense in arguing "true
Christians."
-=-I just had to put in my own perspective as a Christian, so that you
didn't think that all Christians believe that curiosity is sinful. -=-
You didn't have to, but I let it through anyway.
I don't think "all Christians" believe any one thing, nor did I ever
say that. I *know* (and if you don't know you should do more
reading) that Christianity has damaged the rights, happiness and
choices of children (and women, and minorities) in thousands of ways
for over a thousand years. It's not something a million words could
undo. It's something each mother or father can avoid with his or own
children today, and tomorrow.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Jenny Cyphers
>>>While it may be true that much of the "Christian" religious leaders past and present believed/believe that curiosity is sinful, that is not what the Bible teaches. Those supposed Christians were in error, totally misrepresenting God's heart on the subject. In my opinion, true Christians don't believe that at all.>>>
What makes a true christian? It's a rhetorical question... because any person that says they are a christian will have a different answer to that question. It doesn't change the fact that many children have been harmed in the name of christianity. Kids get spanked because parents are sure that the translated english version of the bible tells them to spank. People interpret and misinterpret the bible in all kinds of ways to continue to justify a culutural norm of living and behaving. It's been happening for many many years.
>>>I believe God is the author of unschooling.>>>
The author of unschooling would be John Holt. Most people who go to christian churches put their kids in school.
>>>I believe (from what the Bible teaches) He made the world to be explored and enjoyed.>>>
I suppose it depends on which part of the bible you read. There is a lot of death and destruction in the bible too.
>>>God is the one who created our human nature. How could He turn around and judge it?>>>
That would be called "judgement day". It's a cornerstone of many christian church teachings, to instill the fear of judgement day, so that people will live "right", and not be judged unfit for heaven. Fear isn't good for unschooling. I've been to a lot of christian churches and while many of them focus on living and being good and honest and happy, every one of them had a fair share of doom and gloom preachings mixed in here and there. Perhaps there is a formula in seminary school that is taught to up and coming religious leaders... for every 3 or 4 upbeat messages, you need to throw in the fear to keep people in line, coming to church and filling the tithing boxes.
But none of that really matters. People can unschool and go to any church they want to or not, .and have any personal beliefs they want. Some of that may get in the way of parent/child relationships and some parents find ways to not let it.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
-=-Wow Sandra, I guess I haven't had the same experiences that you
have OR read the same materials you have. I'm very saddened to see
that so much wrong has been done in the name of Christ. -=-
If you're very saddened, that seems to suggest that it's news to
you. Unschooling will be easier if you're willing to look at all
kinds of information, not just that prepared by your church. I do
hide out from the nightly news because it's too many dead babies and
drunk drivers, but I don't hide out from history. I love history--the
costumes, the furniture, carriages, boats, paintings, music... but
social history is crucial to understanding where we are now. Without
some idea of how marriages were in the 1930's, 40's and 50's, there
can't be any real understanding of the changes the women's movement
made in the U.S.
Lately the feminism is big in Australia. When it was already simmered
down and understood here, an Australian driver's license was a
printout on paper and only had the married name of the woman. Had I
been Australian, my driver's license would have said "Mrs. Keith
Dodd," in 1980. It's not important for everyone in the world to know
that, but it's important for those who have no idea whatsoever not to
assume or assert that feminism swirled its way around the entire
English speaking world in the early 1970's.
-=-However, I think you should also look into the good that has been
done in the name of Christ. There is much to be said there as well. -
=-
Rather than telling me that, perhaps you should look into my biography
to see if you think I might already know that. When you've read a
while, you'll know that the way to be a respected voice on this list
is to write clearly about things one actually knows. I wouldn't say a
word about the mistreatment of children in this culture over the past
many centuries if I didn't know anything about it.
http://sandradodd.com/bio (if you're interested)
http://sandradodd.com/theology (just because it's funny doesn't mean
it's not true)
Years ago a very Christian homeschooling mom asked me online, on
*Prodigy (what there was before AOL and its spiff message boards) how,
without religion, my kids could be moral. Religion doesn't teach
morality. Religion teaches rules. Someone who learns to live within
a particular religion will be lost without a compass if they leave
that church. My kids' morals were based on principles and would work
inside any church, and also outside all churches. It's hard for
"churched" people to even think about, I know. I think what that mom
actually asked was more along the lines of "without the fear of
hell..." and that's a serious problem, when people are only being nice
because they fear a pit of eternal fire.
In installing the fear of a pit of fire cruel in any way? Jehovah's
Witnesses don't believe in hell. All religions/denominations/sects/
churches pick and choose their favorite parts. None of them follow
every bit of the Bible, though many of them claim to (hoping the
congregants will not actually read the Bible with any critical or
analytical thought, if they read it at all).
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
have OR read the same materials you have. I'm very saddened to see
that so much wrong has been done in the name of Christ. -=-
If you're very saddened, that seems to suggest that it's news to
you. Unschooling will be easier if you're willing to look at all
kinds of information, not just that prepared by your church. I do
hide out from the nightly news because it's too many dead babies and
drunk drivers, but I don't hide out from history. I love history--the
costumes, the furniture, carriages, boats, paintings, music... but
social history is crucial to understanding where we are now. Without
some idea of how marriages were in the 1930's, 40's and 50's, there
can't be any real understanding of the changes the women's movement
made in the U.S.
Lately the feminism is big in Australia. When it was already simmered
down and understood here, an Australian driver's license was a
printout on paper and only had the married name of the woman. Had I
been Australian, my driver's license would have said "Mrs. Keith
Dodd," in 1980. It's not important for everyone in the world to know
that, but it's important for those who have no idea whatsoever not to
assume or assert that feminism swirled its way around the entire
English speaking world in the early 1970's.
-=-However, I think you should also look into the good that has been
done in the name of Christ. There is much to be said there as well. -
=-
Rather than telling me that, perhaps you should look into my biography
to see if you think I might already know that. When you've read a
while, you'll know that the way to be a respected voice on this list
is to write clearly about things one actually knows. I wouldn't say a
word about the mistreatment of children in this culture over the past
many centuries if I didn't know anything about it.
http://sandradodd.com/bio (if you're interested)
http://sandradodd.com/theology (just because it's funny doesn't mean
it's not true)
Years ago a very Christian homeschooling mom asked me online, on
*Prodigy (what there was before AOL and its spiff message boards) how,
without religion, my kids could be moral. Religion doesn't teach
morality. Religion teaches rules. Someone who learns to live within
a particular religion will be lost without a compass if they leave
that church. My kids' morals were based on principles and would work
inside any church, and also outside all churches. It's hard for
"churched" people to even think about, I know. I think what that mom
actually asked was more along the lines of "without the fear of
hell..." and that's a serious problem, when people are only being nice
because they fear a pit of eternal fire.
In installing the fear of a pit of fire cruel in any way? Jehovah's
Witnesses don't believe in hell. All religions/denominations/sects/
churches pick and choose their favorite parts. None of them follow
every bit of the Bible, though many of them claim to (hoping the
congregants will not actually read the Bible with any critical or
analytical thought, if they read it at all).
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[email protected]
It appears I am not going to be respected in this forum, so I will leave the group. I never in my life have received such treatment. I still believe in unschooling - just not the harsh opinions. I wish you all well.
Respectfully,
Diana
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
-----Original Message-----
From: Sandra Dodd <Sandra@...>
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 09:37:51
To: <[email protected]>
Subject: [AlwaysLearning] history, religion (was Re: odd article
-=-Wow Sandra, I guess I haven't had the same experiences that you
have OR read the same materials you have. I'm very saddened to see
that so much wrong has been done in the name of Christ. -=-
If you're very saddened, that seems to suggest that it's news to
you. Unschooling will be easier if you're willing to look at all
kinds of information, not just that prepared by your church. I do
hide out from the nightly news because it's too many dead babies and
drunk drivers, but I don't hide out from history. I love history--the
costumes, the furniture, carriages, boats, paintings, music... but
social history is crucial to understanding where we are now. Without
some idea of how marriages were in the 1930's, 40's and 50's, there
can't be any real understanding of the changes the women's movement
made in the U.S.
Lately the feminism is big in Australia. When it was already simmered
down and understood here, an Australian driver's license was a
printout on paper and only had the married name of the woman. Had I
been Australian, my driver's license would have said "Mrs. Keith
Dodd," in 1980. It's not important for everyone in the world to know
that, but it's important for those who have no idea whatsoever not to
assume or assert that feminism swirled its way around the entire
English speaking world in the early 1970's.
-=-However, I think you should also look into the good that has been
done in the name of Christ. There is much to be said there as well. -
=-
Rather than telling me that, perhaps you should look into my biography
to see if you think I might already know that. When you've read a
while, you'll know that the way to be a respected voice on this list
is to write clearly about things one actually knows. I wouldn't say a
word about the mistreatment of children in this culture over the past
many centuries if I didn't know anything about it.
http://sandradodd.com/bio (if you're interested)
http://sandradodd.com/theology (just because it's funny doesn't mean
it's not true)
Years ago a very Christian homeschooling mom asked me online, on
*Prodigy (what there was before AOL and its spiff message boards) how,
without religion, my kids could be moral. Religion doesn't teach
morality. Religion teaches rules. Someone who learns to live within
a particular religion will be lost without a compass if they leave
that church. My kids' morals were based on principles and would work
inside any church, and also outside all churches. It's hard for
"churched" people to even think about, I know. I think what that mom
actually asked was more along the lines of "without the fear of
hell..." and that's a serious problem, when people are only being nice
because they fear a pit of eternal fire.
In installing the fear of a pit of fire cruel in any way? Jehovah's
Witnesses don't believe in hell. All religions/denominations/sects/
churches pick and choose their favorite parts. None of them follow
every bit of the Bible, though many of them claim to (hoping the
congregants will not actually read the Bible with any critical or
analytical thought, if they read it at all).
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Respectfully,
Diana
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
-----Original Message-----
From: Sandra Dodd <Sandra@...>
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 09:37:51
To: <[email protected]>
Subject: [AlwaysLearning] history, religion (was Re: odd article
-=-Wow Sandra, I guess I haven't had the same experiences that you
have OR read the same materials you have. I'm very saddened to see
that so much wrong has been done in the name of Christ. -=-
If you're very saddened, that seems to suggest that it's news to
you. Unschooling will be easier if you're willing to look at all
kinds of information, not just that prepared by your church. I do
hide out from the nightly news because it's too many dead babies and
drunk drivers, but I don't hide out from history. I love history--the
costumes, the furniture, carriages, boats, paintings, music... but
social history is crucial to understanding where we are now. Without
some idea of how marriages were in the 1930's, 40's and 50's, there
can't be any real understanding of the changes the women's movement
made in the U.S.
Lately the feminism is big in Australia. When it was already simmered
down and understood here, an Australian driver's license was a
printout on paper and only had the married name of the woman. Had I
been Australian, my driver's license would have said "Mrs. Keith
Dodd," in 1980. It's not important for everyone in the world to know
that, but it's important for those who have no idea whatsoever not to
assume or assert that feminism swirled its way around the entire
English speaking world in the early 1970's.
-=-However, I think you should also look into the good that has been
done in the name of Christ. There is much to be said there as well. -
=-
Rather than telling me that, perhaps you should look into my biography
to see if you think I might already know that. When you've read a
while, you'll know that the way to be a respected voice on this list
is to write clearly about things one actually knows. I wouldn't say a
word about the mistreatment of children in this culture over the past
many centuries if I didn't know anything about it.
http://sandradodd.com/bio (if you're interested)
http://sandradodd.com/theology (just because it's funny doesn't mean
it's not true)
Years ago a very Christian homeschooling mom asked me online, on
*Prodigy (what there was before AOL and its spiff message boards) how,
without religion, my kids could be moral. Religion doesn't teach
morality. Religion teaches rules. Someone who learns to live within
a particular religion will be lost without a compass if they leave
that church. My kids' morals were based on principles and would work
inside any church, and also outside all churches. It's hard for
"churched" people to even think about, I know. I think what that mom
actually asked was more along the lines of "without the fear of
hell..." and that's a serious problem, when people are only being nice
because they fear a pit of eternal fire.
In installing the fear of a pit of fire cruel in any way? Jehovah's
Witnesses don't believe in hell. All religions/denominations/sects/
churches pick and choose their favorite parts. None of them follow
every bit of the Bible, though many of them claim to (hoping the
congregants will not actually read the Bible with any critical or
analytical thought, if they read it at all).
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Jenny Cyphers
>>>Wow Sandra, I guess I haven't had the same experiences that you have OR read the same materials you have. I'm very saddened to see that so much wrong has been done in the name of Christ. It's very twisted.>>>If you live in the United States, you have had the same experiences. Just looking into the history of slavery, and the kkk, you can't help but read about how it was completely connected to the church, all done in the name of christ. It has everything to do with the civil rights movement which has had enormous impact on everything today.
>>> And, I think there is much to be said in arguing what a "true" Christian is, just as there is in any truth gathering about anything. >>>Why? Really? There are millions of different truths stated by millions of different opinions by millions of different people. The only reason someone would want everyone to know what "true" christianity is, is to try to get everyone else to agree. Why not just live your truth?
If what you do, helps you have a better life with your kids, then great! If it doesn't, THAT is worth examining. Living a religious life can be done simultaneously with unschooling. Mary Lewis has been doing it for years and she's amazing and so are her kids! (and she's been updating he blog!)
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
bhmjones
--- In [email protected], di2live@... wrote:
Brad Jones
>Why??? Does being "respected" mean that people can't tell you the truth about religion?
> It appears I am not going to be respected in this forum, so I will leave the group. I never in my life have received such treatment. I still believe in unschooling - just not the harsh opinions. I wish you all well.
>
> Respectfully,
> Diana
> Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
Brad Jones
Sandra Dodd
-=It appears I am not going to be respected in this forum, so I will
leave the group. I never in my life have received such treatment. I
still believe in unschooling - just not the harsh opinions. I wish you
all well. -=-
Pointing out that children have been frightened with hellfire is harsh?
There was a mom once who was defending spanking. I wrote something
that she claimed had made her cry. Huh. More than spanking makes
kids cry?
If a mother can't even look clearly, straight-on, at things in her own
life, how can she help her children do so?
How is it disrespectful of someone born in the 20th century to say
that in the 1200's kids were treated badly in Europe? And in the
1600's, and 1900's (WELL documented, that century.) And in the 20th
century, in the U.S.? And yesterday at my neighbor's house? How is
that about one mom in this forum, unless she wants her "true
Christianity" to cancel out history?
People who can't discuss ideas without taking it personally should
leave the group. People who have never in their lives been expected
to defend their points or to look at history should get out more.
Seriously. An overly-sheltered life where all is agreement,
philosophically, can't be a great unschooling environment, can it?
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
leave the group. I never in my life have received such treatment. I
still believe in unschooling - just not the harsh opinions. I wish you
all well. -=-
Pointing out that children have been frightened with hellfire is harsh?
There was a mom once who was defending spanking. I wrote something
that she claimed had made her cry. Huh. More than spanking makes
kids cry?
If a mother can't even look clearly, straight-on, at things in her own
life, how can she help her children do so?
How is it disrespectful of someone born in the 20th century to say
that in the 1200's kids were treated badly in Europe? And in the
1600's, and 1900's (WELL documented, that century.) And in the 20th
century, in the U.S.? And yesterday at my neighbor's house? How is
that about one mom in this forum, unless she wants her "true
Christianity" to cancel out history?
People who can't discuss ideas without taking it personally should
leave the group. People who have never in their lives been expected
to defend their points or to look at history should get out more.
Seriously. An overly-sheltered life where all is agreement,
philosophically, can't be a great unschooling environment, can it?
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Jenny Cyphers
>>>How is it disrespectful of someone born in the 20th century to saythat in the 1200's kids were treated badly in Europe? And in the
1600's, and 1900's (WELL documented, that century.) And in the 20th
century, in the U.S.? And yesterday at my neighbor's house? How is
that about one mom in this forum, unless she wants her "true
Christianity" to cancel out history?>>>
Or even people right here on this forum who have been hurt by it, even by really kind and caring parents. I love my parents, I really do, but my religious upbringing did a lot of harm, one I intentionally chose not to repeat.
I have one child who absolutely does not believe in God, at all! I have another child who goes back and forth on that. What isn't different, is that they are both respected for who they are and what they believe.
We have friends that truly believe in alien existence. They could be right. I care less about that than I do about how they treat their kids. So, when mom felt that the alien presence out in the universe was calling her to move away with her boyfriend, she dumped her son at his dad's house to live.
Chamille has a friend, who's parents are very religious and force it on him. He's rejected it outright and worked very hard to get himself kicked out of church.
She has another friend that is gay and mistreated because of his sexual identity, which is considered immoral by most religions.
I had a friend in college who's father was a minister. He was highly regarded by everyone but his family, who viewed him as somewhat of an uptight tyrant, who even controlled how much butter each person could put on their plates during dinner, including guests. It was generally accepted that it was his right to do so because he was the MAN of the house, the leader by his God given right, because the bible said so.
That's all right here, right now, in the present time. You don't have to go to far in the past to see wrongs that happen in the name of religion. I say religion, because it's not just christianity that does it!
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
-=You don't have to go to far in the past to see wrongs that happen in
the name of religion. I say religion, because it's not just
christianity that does it!-=-
True, but as to the effects we keep needing to sweep up after and
clarify about in unschooling discussions in English, it's Christianity.
Richard Prystowsky and I did a talk once called To Question or Not to
Question-- and it was about how Jewish families (especially reform or
liberal Jews) are supportive of kids' curiosity, while Christians
(especially fundamentalist Christians in the southern U.S.) are
telling kids to Shut UP. Richard didn't know that. He thought each
case of a family telling a kid not to ask question, not to question
adults, not to talk back, was a singular fluke. He didn't realize it
was institutionalized.
I guess some people on this list didn't know either.
It's worth knowing. It's not worth going on and on about, but to deny
it ever existed is as big as denying the holocaust. In fundamentalist
Christian unschooling families somewhere today, kids are being
punished (physically; emotionally) for not "doing their schoolwork."
They don't even get to go home from school and cry to their moms about
the unfairness of life.
If there's anyone here who has never ever heard "Shut up or I'll give
you something to cry about," I salute you with a little envy. You're
lucky. But if there are a million people who never heard that, it
doesn't cancel out or begin to balance the 20 million who have heard
it in the past year or so.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
the name of religion. I say religion, because it's not just
christianity that does it!-=-
True, but as to the effects we keep needing to sweep up after and
clarify about in unschooling discussions in English, it's Christianity.
Richard Prystowsky and I did a talk once called To Question or Not to
Question-- and it was about how Jewish families (especially reform or
liberal Jews) are supportive of kids' curiosity, while Christians
(especially fundamentalist Christians in the southern U.S.) are
telling kids to Shut UP. Richard didn't know that. He thought each
case of a family telling a kid not to ask question, not to question
adults, not to talk back, was a singular fluke. He didn't realize it
was institutionalized.
I guess some people on this list didn't know either.
It's worth knowing. It's not worth going on and on about, but to deny
it ever existed is as big as denying the holocaust. In fundamentalist
Christian unschooling families somewhere today, kids are being
punished (physically; emotionally) for not "doing their schoolwork."
They don't even get to go home from school and cry to their moms about
the unfairness of life.
If there's anyone here who has never ever heard "Shut up or I'll give
you something to cry about," I salute you with a little envy. You're
lucky. But if there are a million people who never heard that, it
doesn't cancel out or begin to balance the 20 million who have heard
it in the past year or so.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
jfetteroll
> that is not what the Bible teaches.The Bible doesn't teach anything. The Bible sits there. People read it and tell others what they think it means. Some people decide they know for sure what it means and try to get others to believe their interpretation is right. That's true whether someone is totally off base or whether there's actually someone who is spot on in having deciphered the mind of God (if He exists and if the Bible is His instruction book.)
That got me thinking whether a book can teach. I'm thinking teachers only teach if the knowledge they're trying to impart actually gets learned by someone. If they're up there blathering away and no one takes in what they intended for them to take in, they haven't taught. Any knowledge picked up without the intent to impart it, a teacher can't take credit for having taught. A book can't have intent. The author or a teacher can have intent and use a book as the medium to impart knowledge, though.
So God can use his textbook to try to teach but we don't know if anyone has ever actually learned what God intended anyone to learn. Far as I know God doesn't hand out report cards. Though many people claim he does. It's a pass/fail or Heaven/Oblivion (or Heaven/Hell. Some say they're the same.)
And lots of interpreters of God's textbook try to teach and lots of people learn what the interpreters intend to impart but whether the interpreters interpreted properly, we can't know.
> Those supposed Christians were in error, totally misrepresenting God's heart on the subject.I'm getting flashbacks to the homeschooling forums on AOL!
"They're wrong! They're not real Christians! Real Christians believe _____." The blank may be filled in as one chooses to believe it should be.
If only it were so simple to read the heart and mind of God. One only has to look at all the different breeds there are of Christianity (probably a new one being created every week! ;-) to give one pause in believing they've got some kind of special insight into what His words really mean. They *all* think they've cracked the code!
Is the saying "God didn't create us in his image. We created God in our image."? (Sounds Calvin and Hobbesish.) At one time a fire and brimstone God fit with people's experience with the world. When the plague can wipe out your family or locusts your food supply (and no Krogers to get more) or minions of warring kings can waste through your valley it sure seems like God is out to get those who aren't following His rules. It's easy to find Bible passages to support that view of the world.
Now many people want a kinder, gentler God. And there's lots of Bible passages to support that too.
But either way -- or some other interpretation -- lots needs ignored.
Anyone who hasn't seen the Skeptic's Annotated Bible, it's very cool:
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/
Everything is annotated and cross referenced and provides lots of fodder for thought.
(Skeptics get a bad rap. Skeptics get lumped in with disbelievers and those who scoff without thought. Skeptics say we don't know enough to say yes or no. Skeptics are cool.)
> In my opinionThere can't be anything else about God's ideas since He's not here to correct anyone.
We can't know the mind of John Holt either since he's just as absent! All we have are opinions of what he meant. But at least he's a contemporary of some of us so we know the culture and mindset he was talking about. But his contemporary status is slowly fading. He didn't live in a world of 1000 TV channels and unlimited internet access. Sometimes it strikes me that a hundred years from now (I hope it's less but suspect it will be more) that people won't be able to grasp the mental and emotional stranglehold the idea that expert strangers could raise children better than parents had on our society. They won't understand the sacrifices parents were willing to make -- especially in their relationships with their children, in order to get for their children what the stranger experts offered. They'll think those parents were idiots.
And fortunately it isn't necessary to understand John Holt's mind in order to unschool. He just described what existed naturally and gave it a name. We can make the same observations he did and see the same things. We don't need his writings to see how kids naturally learn.
That's not so easy to say about the Bible written to be understood by subsistence farmers and herders in the Middle East thousands of years ago. Misunderstanding should be accepted as a given.
> I believe (from what the Bible teaches) He made the world to be explored and enjoyed."Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.--Psalms 137:9"
> I believe God is the author of unschooling.
> We are told in His Word to "train our children as we walk along the road" - daily living kind of personal contact and nuturing.
Here's a good page of quotes from the Skeptics Annotated Bible:
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/says_about/children.html
(Admittedly that's a load of bad stuff. I assume there's good stuff too. Which doesn't make it any less contradictory.)
> so that you didn't think that all Christians believe that curiosity is sinful.Is there one thing that all Christians believe? Maybe that Jesus was the son of God and he died for our sins. But I wouldn't bet the house on that. And I bet there are sects willing to argue every other point of what God supposedly really wants. Anyone who believes blanket statements about what all Christians believe hasn't been out in the world much ;-)
> People confuse the good and the bad in our human nature and want to call all things*I* believe, *my* opinion, *I* think, that what is thought of as sin or our struggle between good and evil is because we didn't throw away the brains our ancient ancestors began with. We didn't start from scratch. We still have fishy lizard brains that *know* that unless you're selfish and grab the best for yourself you're not going to survive. That is Truth to our fishy ancestors. Tigers still know that's Truth. (Unless they're mom Tigers with babies, then grab the best for yourself and your babies overrides it temporarily.) But as we evolved, we overlaid that brain with other brains with conflicting ideas, like cooperate with someone and one plus one adds up to more than two and you're both more likely to survive. But the old ideas are still there. And still valid in some contexts. We just have to struggle at figuring out which is optimal and when. It's not sinful or evil to be a lizard, but it doesn't help us grow relationships.
> from our human nature sinful. It just isn't true. There is so much misinformation out there.
But that's got ideas from Darwin in there and could just be more misinformation.
Joyce
Sandra Dodd
-=->>>I believe (from what the Bible teaches) He made the world to be
explored and enjoyed.>>>
-=-I suppose it depends on which part of the bible you read. -=-
Yeah, and the Garden of Eden is hard to interpret in an unschooling-
friendly way. <g>
You wanted to explore and enjoy? You wanted to make a choice? You
wanted to understand good and evil? You wanted knowledge? WRONG FOR
ALL ETERNITY!
Some Christians believe every word of the Bible is literally true.
Not all Christians, and not most Christians. Maybe it's just a
story. Some Christians would say "not necessarily true." Some other
Christians would say "blasphemous not-real-Christian!"
Sometimes it's worth looking at things again, after a family has
unschooled for a year or two. And then again after another year or
two. People's perspective changes with age and angle and experience.
I used to see the story of the Garden of Eden differently. And
depending on the slant the minister or priest wants to put on it, it
can be told as an anti-female story or as a man-is-weak story or as a
devil-is-tricky story, or a snakes-can-talk-to-people story (like
Harry Potter), but never is it going to turn into a "choice is good
and God is a sweetie-pie" story.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
explored and enjoyed.>>>
-=-I suppose it depends on which part of the bible you read. -=-
Yeah, and the Garden of Eden is hard to interpret in an unschooling-
friendly way. <g>
You wanted to explore and enjoy? You wanted to make a choice? You
wanted to understand good and evil? You wanted knowledge? WRONG FOR
ALL ETERNITY!
Some Christians believe every word of the Bible is literally true.
Not all Christians, and not most Christians. Maybe it's just a
story. Some Christians would say "not necessarily true." Some other
Christians would say "blasphemous not-real-Christian!"
Sometimes it's worth looking at things again, after a family has
unschooled for a year or two. And then again after another year or
two. People's perspective changes with age and angle and experience.
I used to see the story of the Garden of Eden differently. And
depending on the slant the minister or priest wants to put on it, it
can be told as an anti-female story or as a man-is-weak story or as a
devil-is-tricky story, or a snakes-can-talk-to-people story (like
Harry Potter), but never is it going to turn into a "choice is good
and God is a sweetie-pie" story.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Mel
--- In [email protected], Jenny Cyphers <jenstarc4@...> wrote:
http://www.toosmalltoignore.com/ The great thing about this author is that he's an unschooler in certain ways. Throughout the book he admonishes the modern church for keeping children out of the worship service and for diminishing their value. He also has a lot to say against many of the mainstream parenting practises. He is appalled that so many children in North America and Europe are completely disconnected from their parents' livlihoods. He feels that many children and youths today feel no sense of purpose.
I recommend checking out his book for anyone willing to admit that Christians do not have a squeaky clean story and are willing to move forward and learn from the past.
Mel
>Recently for work, I attended a leadership conference called Summit. ( I work based out of a church with inner-city youth with substance abuse issues). While there, Dr. Wes Stafford spoke about the sexual, mental and physical abuse he endured in Africa at the hands of his Christian Missionary teachers. He was told that if he spoke of the abuse, he would be responsible for thousands of African children going to hell. This abuse would have taken place in the 1950s I think. Dr Stafford had a lot to say about the abuse of power in the name of Christianity. He has a book out called Too Small to Ignore. His pain and conviction to prevent child suffering prompted him to start up Compassion International.
>
> >>>How is it disrespectful of someone born in the 20th century to say
> that in the 1200's kids were treated badly in Europe? And in the
> 1600's, and 1900's (WELL documented, that century.) And in the 20th
> century, in the U.S.? And yesterday at my neighbor's house? How is
> that about one mom in this forum, unless she wants her "true
> Christianity" to cancel out history?>>>
>
> Or even people right here on this forum who have been hurt by it, even by really kind and caring parents. I love my parents, I really do, but my religious upbringing did a lot of harm, one I intentionally chose not to repeat.
>
http://www.toosmalltoignore.com/ The great thing about this author is that he's an unschooler in certain ways. Throughout the book he admonishes the modern church for keeping children out of the worship service and for diminishing their value. He also has a lot to say against many of the mainstream parenting practises. He is appalled that so many children in North America and Europe are completely disconnected from their parents' livlihoods. He feels that many children and youths today feel no sense of purpose.
I recommend checking out his book for anyone willing to admit that Christians do not have a squeaky clean story and are willing to move forward and learn from the past.
Mel
Marina DeLuca-Howard
Maybe as an atheist I shouldn't weigh in but heck its religion
and...everyone has an opinion;)
When I was a young woman(low those twenty years ago) I did read an
old gnostic version that made Sohpia(knowledge) the heroine of the story,
and that she(god's mother) sent the snake to offer redemption and choice
because god was a little out of control in the garden. Can't remember
where, but it wasn't too obscure. Apparently there is even a Book of Mary
Magdalene that dates back to the same date as the four that made the canon,
as well as several interpretations that in the middle ages would have
resulted in a BBQ, with the heretic set ablaze.
There were many sects that lived differently, practised equality or
vegetarianism, why even St Francis wrote about God as God the mother...But
as far as I can tell religion has been used both as an instrument of
oppression and of liberation. So, as an unschooling tool it might have some
drawbacks. However, I could see unschoolers feeling a void in their lives
re-creating a liberating religion along the lines of neo-pagan or Buddist
beliefs. If one wants stories or myths with which to celebrate seasonal
changes and misses the pagentry it might be cool to create family myths to
celebrate.
Marina
Rent our cottage: http://davehoward.ca/cottage/
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
and...everyone has an opinion;)
When I was a young woman(low those twenty years ago) I did read an
old gnostic version that made Sohpia(knowledge) the heroine of the story,
and that she(god's mother) sent the snake to offer redemption and choice
because god was a little out of control in the garden. Can't remember
where, but it wasn't too obscure. Apparently there is even a Book of Mary
Magdalene that dates back to the same date as the four that made the canon,
as well as several interpretations that in the middle ages would have
resulted in a BBQ, with the heretic set ablaze.
There were many sects that lived differently, practised equality or
vegetarianism, why even St Francis wrote about God as God the mother...But
as far as I can tell religion has been used both as an instrument of
oppression and of liberation. So, as an unschooling tool it might have some
drawbacks. However, I could see unschoolers feeling a void in their lives
re-creating a liberating religion along the lines of neo-pagan or Buddist
beliefs. If one wants stories or myths with which to celebrate seasonal
changes and misses the pagentry it might be cool to create family myths to
celebrate.
Marina
>--
Rent our cottage: http://davehoward.ca/cottage/
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
jfetteroll
--- In [email protected], "bhmjones" <bhmjones@...> wrote:
A truth, maybe. Their own truth, maybe.
I'm pretty darn certain my atheistic beliefs are right and The Truth <g>
But I also know the universe is pretty weird and I could be totally wrong. Maybe there is a God and He/She/It is enjoying the cosmic joke played on the doubters. (Maybe God planted the dinosaur bones just like some fundamentalist say.) Maybe God is a really powerful alien. Maybe He's Q! (Star Trek reference.)
My personal version of God would be someone who admires those who follow the principles of being kind to people, animals and the earth rather than those who follow rules in a book. My God would be an unschooler! :-)
But even that nice God doesn't make sense. It assumes we're all equal when it comes time for someone to choose what to do. It assumes people just decide to make good or bad choices. And the bad choice choosers are bad people. I think all people are making what feel like right choices to them. But some people are so damaged by what has happened to them growing up that what feels right to them is hurtful to others.
I think lots of people can find a way to make better choices. But some people have way bigger obstacles to get over. Some people have personalities that make those obstacles even bigger. I don't fault people for not being able to function, but I don't want them near me. The really damaged ones I want locked up.
What I *really* want is for families to stop hurting their kids and creating damaged people.
If there's any Truth to putting relationships first I think it's that it'll produce way fewer mass murders. Not sure that should go on the ad campaign, though.
Joyce
>*The* truth? About religion??
> Why??? Does being "respected" mean that people can't tell you the truth about religion?
A truth, maybe. Their own truth, maybe.
I'm pretty darn certain my atheistic beliefs are right and The Truth <g>
But I also know the universe is pretty weird and I could be totally wrong. Maybe there is a God and He/She/It is enjoying the cosmic joke played on the doubters. (Maybe God planted the dinosaur bones just like some fundamentalist say.) Maybe God is a really powerful alien. Maybe He's Q! (Star Trek reference.)
My personal version of God would be someone who admires those who follow the principles of being kind to people, animals and the earth rather than those who follow rules in a book. My God would be an unschooler! :-)
But even that nice God doesn't make sense. It assumes we're all equal when it comes time for someone to choose what to do. It assumes people just decide to make good or bad choices. And the bad choice choosers are bad people. I think all people are making what feel like right choices to them. But some people are so damaged by what has happened to them growing up that what feels right to them is hurtful to others.
I think lots of people can find a way to make better choices. But some people have way bigger obstacles to get over. Some people have personalities that make those obstacles even bigger. I don't fault people for not being able to function, but I don't want them near me. The really damaged ones I want locked up.
What I *really* want is for families to stop hurting their kids and creating damaged people.
If there's any Truth to putting relationships first I think it's that it'll produce way fewer mass murders. Not sure that should go on the ad campaign, though.
Joyce
Susan Fuerst
Sandra wrote:
I used to see the story of the Garden of Eden differently. And
depending on the slant the minister or priest wants to put on it, it
can be told as an anti-female story or as a man-is-weak story or as a
devil-is-tricky story, or a snakes-can-talk-to-people story (like
Harry Potter), but never is it going to turn into a "choice is good
and God is a sweetie-pie" story.
never say never. Sandra's 'never' scenario her is actually a quite apt
synopsis of one rabbi's interpretation of the Fall Story.
A couple years ago, I read a Jewish rabbi's take on it. I am thinking it
was Harold Kushner(?), Overcoming Life's Disappointments, but when I read
the online description, it seemed to be later in Genesis, around Moses time.
Anyway, if I can find the source, I;ll pass it on. Basically, though, the
author saw the Fall in the garden Story in Genesis as being a figurative
description of growing up. That as young children, we have an innocence,
and at some point, we choose knowledge of good and evil. This
interpretation noted that God didn't run Adam and Eve off in anger, but sent
them out with some basic supplies and clothing to get them started in their
adult life. So the 'knowledge' isn't a*bad* choice, especially when the
benefits of mortality for human beings are considered.
I have found in recent years that many Jewish rabbis who study the Torah in
it's original language seem to provide a depth of interpretation and
knowledge that I have not seen in most Christian circles.
Susan
I
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
I used to see the story of the Garden of Eden differently. And
depending on the slant the minister or priest wants to put on it, it
can be told as an anti-female story or as a man-is-weak story or as a
devil-is-tricky story, or a snakes-can-talk-to-people story (like
Harry Potter), but never is it going to turn into a "choice is good
and God is a sweetie-pie" story.
never say never. Sandra's 'never' scenario her is actually a quite apt
synopsis of one rabbi's interpretation of the Fall Story.
A couple years ago, I read a Jewish rabbi's take on it. I am thinking it
was Harold Kushner(?), Overcoming Life's Disappointments, but when I read
the online description, it seemed to be later in Genesis, around Moses time.
Anyway, if I can find the source, I;ll pass it on. Basically, though, the
author saw the Fall in the garden Story in Genesis as being a figurative
description of growing up. That as young children, we have an innocence,
and at some point, we choose knowledge of good and evil. This
interpretation noted that God didn't run Adam and Eve off in anger, but sent
them out with some basic supplies and clothing to get them started in their
adult life. So the 'knowledge' isn't a*bad* choice, especially when the
benefits of mortality for human beings are considered.
I have found in recent years that many Jewish rabbis who study the Torah in
it's original language seem to provide a depth of interpretation and
knowledge that I have not seen in most Christian circles.
Susan
I
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
-=-If there's any Truth to putting relationships first I think it's
that it'll produce way fewer mass murders. Not sure that should go on
the ad campaign, though.=-
In the breathing workshop I did at Good Vibrations, I did tell them
that learning to breathe and calm oneself down would keep them out of
prison and help keep them from losing custody of their kids.
If it's True, it's TRUE!
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
that it'll produce way fewer mass murders. Not sure that should go on
the ad campaign, though.=-
In the breathing workshop I did at Good Vibrations, I did tell them
that learning to breathe and calm oneself down would keep them out of
prison and help keep them from losing custody of their kids.
If it's True, it's TRUE!
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Pam Sorooshian
So - the role of the snake/serpent in this version is?
-pam
-pam
On 9/22/2009 11:46 AM, Susan Fuerst wrote:
> Basically, though, the
> author saw the Fall in the garden Story in Genesis as being a figurative
> description of growing up. That as young children, we have an innocence,
> and at some point, we choose knowledge of good and evil. This
> interpretation noted that God didn't run Adam and Eve off in anger, but sent
> them out with some basic supplies and clothing to get them started in their
> adult life. So the 'knowledge' isn't a*bad* choice, especially when the
> benefits of mortality for human beings are considered.
>
Mel
--- In [email protected], Pam Sorooshian <pamsoroosh@...> wrote:
Mel
>Sex Hormones?
> So - the role of the snake/serpent in this version is?
>
Mel