Morals vs Facts

[CarbonCopy]

In education, should we give more importance to learning the facts or teaching morals such as how to behave with others, how to control anger, how find a purpose in life, etc.

 

I feel we should teach morals more, because that gives the child a base to do good to the society.

[Ringer]

I don't think either is the most important, but I would consider teaching facts more important than teaching morals. To have an education system attempt to teach morals one would need a standard set of agreed upon morality, which there is not. Also, children's moral development has little to do with what they are taught and more to do with what people do that are around them.

[CarbonCopy]

I don't think either is the most important, but I would consider teaching facts more important than teaching morals. To have an education system attempt to teach morals one would need a standard set of agreed upon morality, which there is not. Also, children's moral development has little to do with what they are taught and more to do with what people do that are around them.

 

Yes, morals depend on the people around children. That would mean the teachers mainly. So, that is why the teachers should impart more morals in school to children. Because, unlike facts, morals cannot be learned from books but, rather by face-to-face interactions.

Then again, as you said, we do not have an 'agreed' set of rules for moral education, so that is a stumbling block.

Ideally, we should be teaching both in unison.

[PeterJ]

This assumes that there are no facts about morality. Not everyone would agree that there are none.

[CarbonCopy]

This assumes that there are no facts about morality. Not everyone would agree that there are none.

 

Can you expand on what you mean by 'facts on morality'.

[Bignose]

Because, unlike facts, morals cannot be learned from books...

The authors of Ethics for Dummies (completely subjectively, one of whom is a good friend of mine) and many, many other books on morals and ethics would probably significantly disagree with this.

[Ringer]

Yes, morals depend on the people around children. That would mean the teachers mainly. So, that is why the teachers should impart more morals in school to children. Because, unlike facts, morals cannot be learned from books but, rather by face-to-face interactions.

No, that would mean the students peers mainly. Look at the sort of programs that have attempted to impart morality and see how they have worked. DARE, abstinence programs, 'scared straight', etc. These things teach that these things are bad and you shouldn't do them. That is education on morality and it usually doesn't work out very well. One reason is that educating on morality like that attempts to simplify things verging on, or flat out, lying. But if you educate on these things factually (pros/cons of drug use, safe sex, etc) there tends to be a higher rate of positive outcomes.

Then again, as you said, we do not have an 'agreed' set of rules for moral education, so that is a stumbling block.

Ideally, we should be teaching both in unison.

It's not a stumbling block, it's a very large wall. As an example, if someone in a position of authority taught my child it is morally unacceptable to have sex before marriage I would be pretty angry. Then again, if my wife, who is an educator, taught that it is morally acceptable to have an abortion we would probably be driven out of town.

 

 

This assumes that there are no facts about morality. Not everyone would agree that there are none.

Where was that said?

[PeterJ]

Can you expand on what you mean by 'facts on morality'.

I mean things we can say about morality that are not contingent on culture, geography or particular circumstances. Doesn't matter what they are, I was just suggesting that we should not simply assume there are none. ,