|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Feb 15, 2005 21:30:59 GMT -5
By DAN DUGAS OTTAWA (CP) - Social Development Minister Ken Dryden was assailed as an "old white guy" Tuesday for suggesting feelings of guilt prompted parents to tell pollsters they'd like to stay home with their kids rather than place them in day care. Conservative MP Rona Ambrose, also white but 35 years old compared to Dryden's 57, said she found the hockey-star-turned cabinet minister's assertions in the House insulting to women. "Working women want to make their own choices, we don't need old white guys telling us what to do," she said. Dryden, a legendary goaltender for the Montreal Canadiens in the 1970s, was already making a name for himself in the nets at Cornell University the year before Ambrose was born. - cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2005/02/15/931955-cp.htmlKids. They say the darndest things.  |
|
|
|
Post by Toronthab on Feb 15, 2005 23:44:50 GMT -5
By DAN DUGAS OTTAWA (CP) - Social Development Minister Ken Dryden was assailed as an "old white guy" Tuesday for suggesting feelings of guilt prompted parents to tell pollsters they'd like to stay home with their kids rather than place them in day care. Conservative MP Rona Ambrose, also white but 35 years old compared to Dryden's 57, said she found the hockey-star-turned cabinet minister's assertions in the House insulting to women. "Working women want to make their own choices, we don't need old white guys telling us what to do," she said. Dryden, a legendary goaltender for the Montreal Canadiens in the 1970s, was already making a name for himself in the nets at Cornell University the year before Ambrose was born. - cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2005/02/15/931955-cp.htmlKids. They say the darndest things. How dare he divert from the usual appeasing bullSaperlipopette. Maybe Mz Rona Ambrose was one of those more agressive and selfish kids who grew up in daycare. Next he'll be reminding them of that study. |
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Feb 15, 2005 23:57:03 GMT -5
How dare he divert from the usual appeasing bullSaperlipopette. Maybe Mz Rona Ambrose was one of those more agressive and selfish kids who grew up in daycare. Next he'll be reminding them of that study. The New Illiteracy Dumbing Down Our Kids is a searing indictment of America's secondary schools - one that every parent and teacher should read. It offers a full-scale investigation of the new educational fad, sometimes called "Outcome Based-Education" - the latest in a long series of "reforms" that has eroded our schools. Find out: Why our kids rank near to, or at the bottom of international tests in math and science Why "self-esteem" has supplanted grades and genuine achievements How the educational establishment lowers standards and quality in our schools - while continuing to raise their budgets and our school taxes The dumbing down of the curriculum so everyone can pass - but no one can excel How parents, students, and teachers can evaluate schools and restore quality teaching - www.sntp.net/education/The_Reading_Wars.htm |
|
|
|
Post by roke on Feb 16, 2005 0:13:26 GMT -5
Thanks for the article Mr. B, I shall be reading it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Toronthab on Feb 16, 2005 0:25:01 GMT -5
"Modern education has taken an off-the-wall philosophy of near-Nature worship, mixed with extreme Darwinian genetic evolutionary notions, and is enforcing this on all the school children as a grand experiment in social "growth and evolution". Dewey also talks incessantly about "growth" - which to him is a natural evolutionary process of "life", stimuls-response factors, and genetic mutation, but again, he views this primarily from the viewpoint of the society or the group organism. Get that he truly conceives the social entity to be almost "living", and admires it in the same way a pagan might worship Mother Earth or a Gnostic might contemplate the underlying unity and dynamic integrative process of the Universe."
posted from the Beaux Eaux link above.
A great article.Isn't the above mix really just another instance of the valueless, relativistic darwinian, deistic, agnostic matreialism of our rather pathetic times?
One cannot do anything or saying anything without explicitly or implicily advancing a philosophy. It's not entirely germain, but I am again reminded of Socrates statement that there are only two types of people, dogmatic people who know they are dogmatic, and dogmatic people who don't know they are dogmatic. It's so funny to hear people say "Don't be dogmatic", like it's a bad thing and who on earth is more dogmatic than a relativist. He insists that a shared insight into the nature of reality is impossible, except of course for the "insights" supporting relativism. The cult of sincerity.
|
|
|
|
Post by blaise on Feb 16, 2005 0:56:32 GMT -5
"Modern education has taken an off-the-wall philosophy of near-Nature worship, mixed with extreme Darwinian genetic evolutionary notions, and is enforcing this on all the school children as a grand experiment in social "growth and evolution". Dewey also talks incessantly about "growth" - which to him is a natural evolutionary process of "life", stimuls-response factors, and genetic mutation, but again, he views this primarily from the viewpoint of the society or the group organism. Get that he truly conceives the social entity to be almost "living", and admires it in the same way a pagan might worship Mother Earth or a Gnostic might contemplate the underlying unity and dynamic integrative process of the Universe." posted from the Beaux Eaux link above. A great article.Isn't the above mix really just another instance of the valueless, relativistic darwinian, deistic, agnostic matreialism of our rather pathetic times? One cannot do anything or saying anything without explicitly or implicily advancing a philosophy. It's not entirely germain, but I am again reminded of Socrates statement that there are only two types of people, dogmatic people who know they are dogmatic, and dogmatic people who don't know they are dogmatic. It's so funny to hear people say "Don't be dogmatic", like it's a bad thing and who on earth is more dogmatic than a relativist. He insists that a shared insight into the nature of reality is impossible, except of course for the "insights" supporting relativism. The cult of sincerity. Humbug. Evolution and natural selection are the antithesis of relativism. They don't favor the survival of coddled mediocrities. As for dogmatism, fundamentalist belief that everything on Earth was "created" in one fell swoop is absurd and indefensible. It implies that Adam and Eve coexisted with T. Rex and other predators that would have consumed the fauna of the Garden of Eden. No relativism there. |
|
|
|
Post by franko on Feb 16, 2005 7:15:09 GMT -5
As for dogmatism, fundamentalist belief that everything on Earth was "created" in one fell swoop is absurd and indefensible. It implies that Adam and Eve coexisted with T. Rex and other predators that would have consumed the fauna of the Garden of Eden. No relativism there. Back to this again, are we? I thought we were working it out on another thread (no which one was it? The Bush thread, or the other Bush thread, or the other Bush thread ;D ) As Bill Cosby would say, Read your Bible. The belief isn't that the earth was "created" in one fell swoop, but gradually, over time (though some do read six days to equal 144 hours). Some see Biblical days to refer to the different eras. Does it really matter how God worked? To me . . . not really. And back to our thread about Dryden: What do parents know, anyway? It is the government's responsibility to make decisions proper for the unlearned masses. Oh, ya, and to create yet another bureaucracy to pour money into like a black hole. Someone I know must need a job . . . |
|
|
|
Post by Toronthab on Feb 16, 2005 9:15:09 GMT -5
Humbug. Evolution and natural selection are the antithesis of relativism. They don't favor the survival of coddled mediocrities. As for dogmatism, fundamentalist belief that everything on Earth was "created" in one fell swoop is absurd and indefensible. It implies that Adam and Eve coexisted with T. Rex and other predators that would have consumed the fauna of the Garden of Eden. No relativism there. Shirley you're jesting again. You seem to be caught up once again between a naive naturalism and some variation of biblical fundamentalism. Mind porn. The field is speculative philosophy. There is nothing inheritently atheistic about evolution unless one is a dogmatic atheistic materialist. Fine if defensible, but is it? The field of discourse is philosophy, your missing link is metaphysics. In logic, your error is that of "false alternatives". You don't have to accept naive atheistic materialism and the idiocies of social darwinism. Neither does one have to throw out human intelligence with religious fundamentalism which may instantiate faith but is anti-rational in many respects. Faith may well be suprarational, but should never be anti-raional. It's interesting how Bush appeals to both of the above camps and fits so perfectly into what Olivia Ward calls the cult of sincerity. Rizzi's "The Science before Science ...a guide to thinking in the 21st century" PP 144-145 divides knowledge into the three classical areas, metaphysica, physica and mathematica. It is in the fundamental metaphysica, where common sense is found that modern man is since Descartes and Kant isprofoundly confused. This makes your false alternatives more attractive though for different motives. |
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Feb 16, 2005 14:30:15 GMT -5
This is just another example of the lack of civility in public discourse although Canada has not sunk to the level of the U.S. in this area.
I fail to see how being a middle aged caucasian male has to to with this issue. Some 57 year old men will see the need for this iniative, others will not.
This was just a chance for a MP to grab some headlines with a attention grabbing remark.
|
|
