I have drifted in and out of this forum and arguments primarily because of one poster who is unwavering in his application of logic. As I was reading a past of his I finally see what the problem is.

It is easy to lay out your case and feel no responsibility to help others understand. As frustrated as it can be when others misunderstand (or completely do not understand) I believe that at least some responsibility lies with the person making the argument. TX - you have said previously that you have done some teaching. If the above is how you truly feel, I cannot believe you ever had significant success.

The real question here (and one I think relevant for all atheists to consider) is to what extent do people believe the quote above?

It is your fault if you are confused, and do nothing about it.
If you ask for it to be rephrased or to be put in different terms, and it is not, then it is the others fault, as you have made an attempt to understand, and have been prevented from doing so.

However by the same token, do not expect to understand an argument regarding string theory and advanced quantum mechanics if you have no grounding in either.

Jim,

Notice how you slip in the notion of refusing to help anyone in an effort to cast blame back on others rather than upon the one who fails to understand? Nothing that was said necessitates any refusal to help or offer further explanation, and to make matters worse, you must assume that your own conclusion is true PRIOR to introducing this notion in order to get it to move forward at all, meaning that the entire position is merely a circular argument (therefore the conclusion remains unsupported).

If I fail to understand Russian, is that the fault of the russian speaker? If so, what caused the russian speaker to be responsible for my choices to not fully learn russian? How can the russian speaker have such control over my life, as would be necessary for the responsibility you claim must exist on his/her part concerning my own personal choices?

Is it any different with any other language or situation? Why would it be?

Remember that responsibility can ONLY come from the ability to control. This is why the person who controls the choices bears the responsibility. I can choose to remain ignorant about very simple issues such as soundness or validity, but I cannot blame others when I fail to understand sound arguments when they are offered.

A very brief aside at the snide backhand comment you offered, I had great success as a teacher. I was quite strict but did spend whatever time the student wanted to help. I simply did not blow sunshine up their tail ends to make them "feel good" rather I allowed them the opportunity to gain REAL knowledge and REAL self-respect by actually learning. I had a number of students who would sit in on my classes even though they were not in my class but that of another. To this day I still get calls from students concerning a variety of topics, including but not limited to logic and responsibility. Some of my students are part of very well respected think tanks in no small part because of their willingness to learn and in all humility, because of my willingness to allow them and to offer what knowledge I have. So before you assume, as you have here, that your own methods must necessarily be the only method, and that anyone for whom you harbor negative emotions cannot have succeeded in any endeavor, perhaps a bit of restraint is called for. Ad hominems serve only to reflect on you..

This post was last modified: 02-11-2007 12:11 AM by TXStorm.

It was not a snide comment or backhanded. I meant what I said, and I think you contradict yourself. If you had the success you claim (and I have no evidence to the contrary) then I contend that you did make an effort to help them understand. You did not merely leave throw the material at your students and leave the learning of it all to them. However, and I believe this may be key, you probably did your teaching in person, did you not? I truly have tried to understand some of your arguments, but the responses I get are cold. Not in terms of emotion (goddess forbid we let that in!), but in terms of the directness you use.

When you taught, did you use exactly the same method for every student, or did you converse with them long enough to sense where they were confused and tailor your response to them? It is difficult to have the same type of give and take on here that one can have in a face-to-face conversation. That is what I mean by cold, your responses, as technically and logically correct as they may be (and I think I have proven to you that I am no judge of that), tend to be very consistent in their application. While logically I am sure you will say this only reinforces your argument, it ignores the human side of the equation. Each person is different, bringing different experiences to the table. The exact same presentation will not work for every one... regardless of how rigidly logical it is.

And by the way... even the worst teachers I have seen (judged by any reasonable standard you wish to apply) have had students that learned from them and appreciated what they had to offer...

Oh... and toss the ad hominem thing around all you want. Another casualty of an online forum is that I apparently find it difficult to ask the questions I need answering, if I am truly to understand, without you deciding I am purposefully attacking you.

I have not been. If and/or when I do choose to make my attack purposeful there will be no mistaking it, and I am sure that Pedro will ban me.

Peace.

Jim,

Do you realize that you are merely stipulating that you must be right? That the students largely understood what was being offered is not evidence that I somehow forced them to understand, as you insist that it must be, but rather it reveals that given a straight forward honest approach, which takes into account the fact that the listener is responsible for understanding that which is offered in a straight forward manner, overwhelmingly communication and understanding results.

You completely dismiss responsibility, at least personal responsibility, as part of the "human side of the equation." Why is this? Is personal responsibility and individual effort not also human?

I take these fully into account and by recognizing and respecting the inherent value of the students, and NOT treating them as if they are incapable of understanding, they simply stepped up to the plate and proved themselves more than capable. To an enormous extent people will rise or fall to the level expected of them. If we treat them as incapable of understanding, then they will respond likewise (most of the time, obviously this is not an universal), and similarly if we expect the most basic level of understanding, they will rise to at least that level, in my own experience this new positive expectation and respect for them as worthwhile individuals actually encourages them to rise significantly further and excell far beyond what those who are so dismissive of the individuals say that they can do.

Is there a reason why you avoided the questions asked? Would it not help understanding if you had considered them?

There was no mistake about the objective nature of your backhanded comments.

Which is a nice transition to the comment which is dismissive of the effect I have had as a teacher. Let me just leave it at pointing out that I consistently had the highest evaluations by students (and faculty) without a single negative response. This is true for one reason: I respected the students enough to treat them as worthwhile individuals who were capable of learning the material, rather than treating them as mindless "children" incapable of learning without everything being grossly dumbed down. I recognized that they choose to be where they were, and if there were to excell I made it clear that the responsibility lay squarely upon their shoulders alone. Give respect and you get respect, and in the case of teaching you also get incredible results.