A teacher should not apply his or her religious beliefs or personal opinions on his or her lesson.
Debate Rounds (3)
First of all, the teacher is not perfect. He could accidently tell the students something wrong based on his personal opinion. I know plenty of teachers like that.
Also, when a teacher applies his religious belief on his teaching, it could be very offensive to the students. If a person is not a Christian, and the teacher talks about how God is so perfect, the student will feel very mad.
Finally, the student could think (for example) Democrats are bad just because the teacher said that. Some students believe everything the teacher says and they will lack the choice to choose.
I know these are very obvious reasons but they are necessary.
Let me start by agreeing with Pro, that teachers are “not perfect.” However, all teachers do have a “belief” and “personal opinion” on the best way to teach a subject.
On the subject of "religion," I attended a Parochial Catholic School and the nuns were expected to apply their “religious beliefs,” especially on the subjects of religion and bible study. That was the type of education my parents wanted for their children.
On the other hand, my science teacher was a bit of a maverick. The nuns focused on Jesus and the bible, where my science teacher focused on God. My science teacher's “personal opinion” was, since God created everything, therefore, the physical Laws of Nature are the handwriting of God and the scientific method was a way to read God's handwriting. In essence, the Laws of Nature were here before the birth of Jesus.
His “personal opinion” about the handwriting of God being more accurate than man's written scripture about God, was an enlightening moment. Since teachers are "not perfect," those prophets (the ones who write scripture) are also teachers, and therefore, they too are “not perfect.”
In summary, from my science teacher's “personal opinion” was, for those of faith, including preachers and prophets, should be careful when studying man's written scripture about God. We must remember man is fallible, and those who study such scriptures may misinterpret of what God wants; therefore, God gets--and, in some cases, God help us all.
I was very fortunate to have a science teacher who gave his “personal opinion” on the difference between the handwriting of God, relative to man's handwritten scripture about Jesus and God.
I will advise Pro to be aware of institutional biases in “beliefs” and “opinions” that exist throughout all educational systems. The subjects having the least bias in “beliefs” and “opinions” would be mathematics followed by physical science. All other subjects are a function of “beliefs” and “opinions” not only by the “teacher” but by the authors who write the text books you study from.
My advice to Pro, is to understand “beliefs” and “opinions” are an inseparable part of humanity. And in saying that, while doing your homework, use the internet to challenge your teacher. Not to spite your teacher, but to enjoy the zenith in learning the spectrum of “beliefs” and “opinions.” This zenith is the nursery in the genesis of your “love of wisdom,” Greek translation: philosophy.
Your philosophical evolution is a function of a teacher's “beliefs” and “personal opinions.” Where everyone, is a “not perfect” teacher.
You have provived me with a great example but unfortunately not all teachers are like that. The teachers I'm talking about only talks about how God is so great. You have not responded to my final point in the second round. How about politically biased teachers? You have told me your "feelings", not logic or facts. You made a great point but it had some faults. Nice to know someone who debates properly.
Pro stated, “You have provided me with a great example but unfortunately not all teachers are like that.”
No two humans are alike therefore, no two teachers are the same. Con gave “a great example,” according to Pro, which debunks Pro's debating point that “A teacher should not apply his or her religious beliefs or personal opinions on his or her lesson.”
Pro stated, “You have not responded to my final point in the second round. How about politically biased teachers?”
“Politically biased” statements are simply based on one's “beliefs” and “opinions.” Besides, all public schools are controlled by the government. From a government controlled educational system, what does one expect, but political biases, especially in American History!
Pro stated, “You have told me your "feelings", not logic or facts.”
Pro addressed that point. I will state it again, it is logical, and a fact that “beliefs” and “opinions” are found less in mathematics followed by physical science compared to other subjects.
Pro stated, “You made a great point but it had some faults.”
Pro failed to point out those “faults,” therefore, Pro's claim is simply his “beliefs” and “opinions.”
Pro stated, “Nice to know someone who debates properly.”
Thank you for those kind words.
Pro must realize that one's “religious beliefs or personal opinions” are inseparable from a person. Relative to a teacher, the way they act, teach, and interface with a student are all a function of their “religious beliefs or personal opinions,” and they could be so subtle, where the student does not realize it. The fine art in teaching depends on personal “beliefs” and “opinions” relative to their interest and passion on the lesson at hand.
It is not so much about the teacher's “religious beliefs or personal opinions,” as it is about the subtle application of government institutional propaganda controlling teaching methods complemented by text book biases, which are far more concerning in manipulating the direction of society.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by whiteflame 2 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||3|
Reasons for voting decision: I don't think Pro ever presents a case that goes beyond basic assertion, and that gives Con a lot of room to work with. He first proves that at least some teachers can properly utilize religion in their teachings, which might be sufficient as Pro never says anything on burdens. But the more important argument is the one Con gives on how almost all of teaching functions from opinion and bias on some level. I think this could have been taken further, but the point is made well enough - there's no reason given for why religion represents something special that needs to be tamped down. Without that reasoning, Pro's case is effectively lacking in any impact, since bias will exist regardless. Hence, I vote Con.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.