2012 Texas GOP Educational Platform: "oppose critical thinking"

[Dr. Mechano]

As a new teacher myself (Albeit in Louisiana, not Texas), I'm greatly troubled by all of this.

I will also say that while I do believe in God- including the biblical account of creation- I also understand that faith is not a scientific concept (It cannot be proven or disproven with any sort of conclusive evidence, at least not in this lifetime) and- ergo- has no real place in a science class.

Higher order thinking is incredibly important, even at the first-grade level. The purpose of HOT is not to somehow undermine a child's upbringing or parental influence, but merely to encourage thought in greater depth, as the name would suggest.

Multiculturalism is also important; The reality is that there is not one uniform "American culture" in this country, and that understanding one another's differences is not about division or separation, but about acceptance and tolerance. In my mind, it is far more healthy- and far more realistic- to understand, accept, and even celebrate the things that make us culturally different than it is to pretend those differences don't exist at all. This isn't about "political correctness" (which seems to be the far right's new favorite curse word), it's about understanding and living with people with cultural differences from ourselves.

[SenEDDtor Missile]

Higher order thinking is incredibly important, even at the first-grade level. The purpose of HOT is not to somehow undermine a child's upbringing or parental influence, but merely to encourage thought in greater depth, as the name would suggest.

Probably one of the reason why this kind of stuff is being wanted: to PREVENT critical and in depth thinking. After all, the more gullible people are, the easier to manipulate and control. A very short term gain, long term loss; fitting for the people arguing for this stuff.

Conspiracy esque, I know, but they haven't done anything to prove me wrong.

P.S. I hope this makes sense.

Edited August 20, 2012 by Enigmatus

[Shan Zhu]

to PREVENT critical and in depth thinking. After all, the more gullible people are, the easier to manipulate and control.

Yes, Texan Republicans support skills-based education because they want to dominate citizens twenty years from now. They want to do this by manipulating the subtleties of thought development experts have yet to really understand. This from the same Republicans who don't understand what a scientific theory is. Definitely.

Because, as everyone knows, Republicans are evil geniuses.

The reality is that there is not one uniform "American culture" in this country

What evidence do you have to support this or your prior claims about HOTS? I'm not suggesting that there isn't evidence--just that it's controversial evidence. I ask because while I'm willing to argue my own position on controversial/uncertain claims, one of those positions is that local schools have every right to develop their own programs according to their own information when the "right" answer is unclear.

Edited August 20, 2012 by Shan Zhu

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

What evidence do you have to support this or your prior claims about HOTS? I'm not suggesting that there isn't evidence--just that it's controversial evidence. While such evidence remains thus, I'm fairly content to let local schools design their own programs on their own information despite my reservations.

How about the fact that every group has a different cultural attittude all while blending into one nation?

Hispanic Americans have their own, African Americans have their own, Asian Americans have their own, Muslim Americans theres, Italian American...the list goes on. Every American is a descendant of an immigrant, and such immigrants came from different parts of the world, and in doing so they brought part of their culture with them. The United States is a whole melting pot; it's the very reason that you can look at a hispanic, african american, or asian and not see anything unusual in it where as if you went to a monocultural place like Japan or China it would stand out.

Edited August 20, 2012 by ChaosSupremeSonic

[Shan Zhu]

How about the fact that every group has a different cultural attittude all while blending into one nation?

It's true that every culture has a distinctive characteristic(s). Otherwise, we wouldn't be able to determine the individuality of those cultures!

But then again, every person as part of Hispanic culture has a unique personality. Every Hispanic family likewise operates by at least slightly individual norms. Does this plurality mean that Hispanic culture doesn't exist? By no means--as we already established, all these unique contributors to culture are still bound together by distinctive characteristics by which we vaguely define "Hispanic culture."

Likewise, the existence of sub-cultures within the United States does not disprove the thesis that there are certain social and political norms that underline dominant American culture. For example, it would be totally unacceptable within the American social and political system for a sub-culture that valued human sacrifice to arise.

Well of course, you might say, we don't want to accept people who hurt other people. But that's not a universal idea throughout human history. What norms, what modes of socialization, what culture makes that obvious to you?

Edited August 20, 2012 by Shan Zhu

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

Well of course, you might say, we don't want to accept people who hurt other people. But that's not a universal idea throughout human history. What norms, what modes of socialization, what culture makes that obvious to you?

Mainly to treat and understand people the way you would like to be treated and understood. It's not exactly a culture, but it is a kind of norm that goes on in a society that doesn't accept anything like a human sacrifice as a social norm.

Of course, since not everyone accepts that you shouldn't hurt people, they make certain exceptions, some good some ill. For instance, it is more than acceptable to defend yourself by hurting someone who is obviously trying to physically harm you. It's not okay to bully someone who poses no threat and wants to be left alone. But even these notions are not universally agreed upon.

[Shan Zhu]

Mainly to treat and understand people the way you would like to be treated and understood.

Sure, but those ideas didn't just pop into your head. You were exposed to them at some point, like me, even indoctrinate in them to some extent. This was achieved by the family, by the schools, but entertainment and literature. These are all components of culture-making society.

It's not exactly a culture, but it is a kind of norm that goes on in a society that doesn't accept anything like a human sacrifice as a social norm

I think it is a part of culture. It's an idea that you've recieved from the liberal tradition from Immanuel Kant and John Locke and Thomas More and Thomas Jefferson and loads of people neither you nor I have ever heard of. It's an idea that's been engraved as a public moral standard, but that this is so is not necessary, but is a function of that which accidentally happens to define the liberal social identity. Even systemic multiculturalism and tolerance are functions of public culture.

Of course, since not everyone accepts that you shouldn't hurt people, they make certain exceptions, some good some ill. For instance, it is more than acceptable to defend yourself by hurting someone who is obviously trying to physically harm you. It's not okay to bully someone who poses no threat and wants to be left alone. But even these notions are not universally agreed upon.

I agree--cultural norms are deeply complex, and they aren't homogeneous between people who don't have to interact. There are, however, some ideas that are fundamental to the way society tics--the way governments are structured, and what's likely to get you a date or a job. Some ideas don't have contextual survival value: people who commit human sacrifice won't thrive in our society like a person skilled at proclaiming the values of love and tolerance. These are all functions of an effective cultural framework that dictate how society works, whether we like those norms or not.

Of course there's variance, and change, and of course there's conflict, "culture wars" as they're called. Nevertheless, there are winners and losers in culture wars--and whether people in general decide that human sacrifice is acceptable matters.

Edited August 20, 2012 by Shan Zhu

[NoahTH]

I'm christian, but these guys really aren't helping their reputation at all.