PonyFans.com

Today's DMN says professor passing a letter around campus that expresses concern about Bush library being a platform for right-wing causes.

Yeah, I guess it would sort of clash with the faculty's left-wing platform.

mr. pony wrote:Today's DMN says professor passing a letter around campus that expresses concern about Bush library being a platform for right-wing causes.

Yeah, I guess it would sort of clash with the faculty's left-wing platform.

I'm sure it would be the standard fallback arguments, ''Bush lied.'' "He's greasing Haliburton's pocket.'' "They want to help Big Oil.''

I don't care if this thread gets pulled. This is exactly why politics is a complete waste of time.

But here's a note to all the Ward Churchills running around the campus. Do something constructive with your position. Instead bludgeoning your point of view on the students, why don't you, oh I don't know, TEACH YOUR DAMN CLASSES AND KEEP YOUR OPINIONS TO YOURSELVES!!

TEACH YOUR DAMN CLASSES AND KEEP YOUR OPINIONS TO YOURSELVES!!

You're damn right

Sweet-let's turn this into Baylor for Little Hitler youth. Nothing worse than free expression of opinion on a College campus.

Actually, a good college is one where the professers encourage debate over controversial subject matter in my opinion. Carry on, profs!

I am predicting as of today that SMU does not get the library bid. If I am wrong, you will see me admit as much on this thread. But a lot of people think SMU has really lost its ties with the Methodist church and its methodism is in name only, and I think the library will go to a true church school, given Dubya's affinity for mixing morals with politics. Both Baylor and UD fit that bill better than SMU.

Stallion wrote:Sweet-let's turn this into Baylor for Little Hitler youth. Nothing worse than free expression of opinion on a College campus.

The most frightening thing about this entire thread (including the deleted stuff) is that I agree with Stallion. I mean pretty much every word. Very very scary.

jtstang wrote:Actually, a good college is one where the professers encourage debate over controversial subject matter in my opinion. Carry on, profs!

I think you know what I mean. You and I were in enough classes to know that "encouraging debate" would be for them to frame the argument to their point of view and put those on the opposite side on the defensive. That's a fact.

When I was here, there was a professor Niewyk (sp?) who called the late UN ambassador Jean Kirkpatrick, "a shrill biotch" And when I was addressed in Political Science classes, my conservative viewpoints were attacked by the profs with complete disdain. I know that because I was there.

Or how about Macalester College in Minneapolis which sponsored a trip to Cuba a couple of years. Using tuition payments and other monies garnered to visit a country the United States has no relations with. Think some of the folks who paid that tuition were fired up about where their $$ was going?

Now, if anyone wants to call that a subject to debate, then I guess our points of view differ. I for one, am sick of these professor who use their classrooms as their platforms to marshall their agenda. Rarely do they foster debate. The frame the argument the way they want to and put the opponents in a corner.

THAT'S A FACT. And if some of us don't believe that, then we're living in a fantasy world.

DiamondM wrote:

Stallion wrote:Sweet-let's turn this into Baylor for Little Hitler youth. Nothing worse than free expression of opinion on a College campus.

The most frightening thing about this entire thread (including the deleted stuff) is that I agree with Stallion. I mean pretty much every word. Very very scary.

Be careful or you might become a Little Stallion youth..................Not that there is anything wrong with that..............

I'm really glad to see that you have all come up with something other than SMU athletics about which to beat each other over the head.

Poor little Baby-had his thoughts and ideas challenged by mean ole Professors.

Socratic method
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Platonism
Platonic idealism
Platonic realism
Middle Platonism
Neoplatonism
Articles on Neoplatonism
Platonic epistemology
Socratic method
Socratic dialogues
Theory of forms
Platonic doctrine of recollection
Individuals
Plato
Socrates
Discussions of Plato's works
Dialogues of Plato
Plato's metaphor of the sun
Analogy of the divided line
Allegory of the cave
Socratic Method (or method of elenchos or Socratic debate) is a dialectic method of inquiry, largely applied to the examination of key moral concepts and first described by Plato in the Socratic Dialogues. For this, Socrates is customarily regarded as the father and fountainhead for western ethics or moral philosophy.

It is a form of philosophical inquiry. It typically involves two speakers at any one time, with one leading the discussion and the other agreeing to certain assumptions put forward for her or his acceptance or rejection. The method is credited to Socrates, who began to engage in such discussion with his fellow Athenians after a visit to the Oracle of Delphi.

"A Socratic Dialogue can happen at any time between [two people] when they seek to answer a question [about something] answerable by their own effort of reflection and thinking [starting] from the concrete [asking] all sorts of questions [until] the details of the example are fleshed out [as] a kind of platform for reaching more general judgments" [1].

The practice involves asking a series of questions surrounding a central issue, and answering questions of the others involved. Generally this involves the defense of one point of view against another and is oppositional. The best way to 'win' is to make the opponent contradict themselves in some way that proves the inquirer's own point.

Plato famously formalised the Socratic Elenctic style in prose — presenting Socrates as the curious questioner of some prominent Athenian interlocutor — in some of his early dialogues, such as Euthyphro or Ion, and the method is most commonly found within the so-called "Socratic dialogues", which generally portray Socrates engaging in the method and questioning his fellow citizens about moral and epistemological issues.

The term Socratic Questioning is used to describe the kind of questioning, with which an original question was responded to as though it were an answer. This in turn forces the first questioner to reformulate a new question in the light of the progress of the discourse.

Maybe you weren't as good as you thought you were in defending your positions in your discussions with your mean 'ol communist professors.

Man up and don't get your feelings hurt.

PonySoprano wrote:Maybe you weren't as good as you thought you were in defending your positions in your discussions with your mean 'ol communist professors.

Man up and don't get your feelings hurt.

Believe me, I thought I combatted them very well. It's going to take a lot to hurt my feelings. In fact, I had one professor who asked for my name, where I was from and then said something to the fact that he would look forward to my points of view. So that had nothing to do with it.

It's their classroom. I understand that. But these guys need to be challenged on their opinions. And there isn't enough of that going on.

I loved being called a racist by my professor when I disagreed with her position that a certain phone book cover was racist. It was a great example of civil debate and discussion.

couch 'em wrote:I loved being called a racist by my professor when I disagreed with her position that a certain phone book cover was racist. It was a great example of civil debate and discussion.

Satz?