"Moral science" in schools... is it still relevant

[Bipolar]

I've just been reading one of the stories in the Stories/KadhaigaL section... "Girls are like roses" by Hummingbird... Just have a few thoughts that I was going to post in that thread, but then I thought it would be better to create a new thread for the topic on its own...

The last comment on that topic was quite a long time ago, so may be none of you guys want to talk about it any longer... But I'd like to say a few things...

"Girls are like roses..." ?!!!!! Really?????? So what are boys like? The writer raised that question herself, but even she doesn't seem to have any answer to it... Yes, that's 'cause it's a load of nonsense... I'm sorry. I'm sure though, that Braandan and Lambretta are right... these days, it's the boys that need protecting from the girls... ;-)

Although we can joke about this, there are people (still, even today) who would actually take it seriously, and are overprotective towards their children... (especially girls, but also boys) And their children then struggle when they have to start living in the real world for themselves...

"Moral Science"... I went to a school where we had "moral science" classes... in hindsight, I don't think I learned anything of any real practical use from those lessons... just a set of rules that were well-intentioned, but not really applicable in the world we live in today... it just made me really naive as a child and even into my teenage years (and I'm a guy, not a girl)...

Really we (especially in India) have an assumption that children are "innocent" and should be "protected"... well, of course children need guidance, and need to be looked after until they can look after themselves... but children shouldn't be too sheltered... most children are capable of understanding what the real world is like (if they are shown what it's like...) I really wish my parents (and the society that I grew up in) had not sheltered me so much when I was a child... I would have grown up and matured (mentally and emotionally) so much faster... But that is the hypocrisy of Indian "culture"... our great "kalaachaaram"...

I sincerely hope that school education in India will change (if it hasn't changed already) to take all of this into account... Children need things like sex education, they need to be taught (the basics) about how the economy works, they need social education that teaches them the realities of the world, not some moralistic ideals that don't really work in today's world... They need to be encouraged to take a genuine interest in science, not just to treat it as an exam that they have to pass to gain entry in engineering/medicine, etc...

I don't know what more to say... I invite your comments...

[pavalamani pragasam]

The title be better reframed:
"Moral science" in schools..is it still important
And my answer is yes! How else can a child know what is good & what is bad? How else can he understand the necessity/social responsibility to follow the right & avoid the wrong. Please do not think you gained nothing from having had that tuition! Unconsciously your thinking pattern would have been moulded.
It is not 'hypocrisy' to teach children morals. Any affectionate parent will warn his child that fire burns. It is foolishness to learn by personal, bitter experiences. A guide, an effective way to imbibe healthy moral qualities will do mighty good to the person & the society he lives in.

[app_engine]

It used to be called "MI" (moral instruction). I don't know where from this "science" thing came up for the person who started this thread:-) May be science supports some of the common moral code for human society, but it has never been a science, IMO. Morals were "given" or "handed over" and not developed.

A lot of it is part of our OS kernel (called manasAtchi) which can be further trained by instructions / education, a lot of which is definitely required in impressionable young age and some part / reminders should continue for life. Without proper moral training, one would become a criminal and we have more than enough criminals in the society today. Do we want more? (If parents / schools don't teach morals, we'll be ever expanding the so-called "correction facilities" spending a lot of tax money. Right now, as I heard on radio news, State of Michigan where I live is strugging to host the ever increasing crowd of incoming criminals, as all the jails are full / over populated. With the state already struggling with a lot of deficit in budget, this is going to be a big crisis for them)

[app_engine]

>>not some moralistic ideals that don't really work in today's world<<

Can you name some of these, that really don't work? We can discuss on those specifics...

[Bipolar]

"the person who started this thread..." You can call me by my user name "Bipolar" :-)

Well thanks a lot for your replies, both Pavalamani Pragasam and app_engine...

"Can you name some of these, that really don't work? We can discuss on those specifics..."

Well, moral science lessons always teach the importance of being unselfish, etc. How many adults do you know who are genuinely unselfish? How far can you get in life by being unselfish? I've tried it, and let me tell you it doesn't really take you very far... Most people I've worked with are selfish. There are very few who are genuinely considerate enough towards others - I've had to learn to put my priorities before others'. I realise this sounds a little silly, but seriously, it took me a while to come to this realisation. I'm not saying that everyone's got to be hugely selfish, but we've got to face the realities of the world we live in. Children should be taught through example, not just through lessons in school.

How tolerant is the average adult of people from different backgrounds? I can tell you (I'm not very proud of this, but it's the way things are) many of my friends and relatives living in India - although not racists or bigots, they are ignorant and prejudiced. I've been lucky, having moved out of India, presently living in the United Kingdom, I came here with lots of prejudices, but I'm growing wiser by the day.

I don't know if you've watched the Tamil film "Vedham Pudhidhu". One of the lead characters in that film is a man known as Balu Thevar. That character claims to hold anti-casteist views. There's a scene in that film where a child asks him his name, and he replies "Balu Thevar". The child then asks him if the "Thevar" bit in his name is some kind of title he obtained through his education. This is what leads him to the realisation that he himself, despite his professed ideology, has been prejudiced. A lot of Indians are like that. There's a bit of hypocrisy. How many of you would accept it if your son/daughter wanted to marry someone of a different background? I mean from a different caste, religion or country? Seriously? Honestly? I'm not against mixed marriages myself, but in reality how many people would actually accept it? I'm curious.

How many of you would genuinely dare to stand up and speak out against criminal elements in society? Like people who sell alcohol illegally? Everyone knows how much damage this causes, but I know of very few people who have that much courage. I certainly don't.

How many of you would genuinely take a stand against practices such as dowry or forced marriages? I mean, for example, if it happened to someone else, would you just look the other way, or would you care enough to try and help victims? Of course we hear about incidents and individuals who do stand up, but they are just exceptions. Not everyone is that courageous.

What about the commercialisation of health and education services? There are some really good hospitals, schools and universities in India, but these are not accessible by everyone, only a section of the population has access to this. How many of you can be bothered enough to work towards a world where everyone - EVERYONE - can get an education? (I have to say the Wikipedia project is really impressive, and the Tamil Wikipedia is not bad either, although certainly it could be even better) Where noone has to suffer illness because of poverty? Where EVERYONE can live safely, peacefully and securely? Most people aren't really strong or courageous enough to genuinely try to change the status quo. That includes me.

I'm not saying children don't need guidance!!! I said in my first post that children do need guidance... they do need to be shown the way... but they also need to be taught about the realities of the world. My point is that in India, certain subjects are just not discussed openly; we like to pretend we don't have problems... The other day for example, there was a guy on TV who said that "ulagame Tamil Naadai kalaachaara kovil-aa madhikidhu" (the whole world respects Tamil Nadu as a temple of culture) I had to laugh at that. I'm Tamil myself, and I know Tamil Nadu is far from being the most cultured place in the world. There aren't many other places in the world where people still worship actors (like "Makkal Thilagam", etc.) or name districts and villages after casteist leaders. Just look at some of the leaders today... I can't name them - that would cause controversy (if I haven't caused controversy already!!!) but we really have a sad bunch of leaders... People idolise Gandhi too much... He was a good guy with good intentions, but he was far from being a genius - he did make mistakes (let me make clear - I'm not anti-Gandhi, I'm just a guy who tries to take a fair view of everyone - whether Gandhi or anyone else - to me, there are no Mahatmas)

My point is that the world is not about good and bad, right and wrong - most of the time, it's somewhere in between - it's shades of grey. We've got to be objective and non-judgemental, and to do this, we have to have open debates - but in India, we still have so many taboos - maybe these taboos are breaking down, and that can only be a good thing. We have to learn from mistakes made in the past, and we begin by admitting that we made mistakes. Unfortunately in India, it's highly politically incorrect to criticise our "heroes" - people want to have their heroes and worship them. Unless we learn to examine ourselves and criticise ourselves objectively and truthfully, we are not going to make any progress. I watched the Tamil film "Vel" the other day. If I'm not mistaken, that film was released this year. But the characters in that film still spout dialogue saying that a woman should marry whoever her parents tell her to, and that her place after marriage is in the home. I know from my personal experiences that views like that can cause a LOT of damage. But these are the sorts of things that Tamil males want to hear. That's our "culture". Male chauvinism is very alive. How many teachers would actually bother to criticise that in schools? How many would actually hold meaningful debates about that? (No, not about the merits of the movie, but the idea(s) expressed therein). Many MGR and Rajni films are chauvinistic - carrying the message that a woman's place is at home, meekly serving her man. And yet, MGR and Rajni are our heroes. This is the kind of culture we celebrate.

Why don't we encourage our young people to think more openly? To ask more questions? I'm not suggesting we should reject everything that is old. We keep what's good, and reject whatever doesn't work. As app_engine says, "Morals were "given" or "handed over" and not developed." That is exactly the problem. Children (and everyone else, too) are encouraged just to accept what they are told. Moral science/instruction/whatever you want to call it in school has become just another exam for children to do. They don't really learn anything new. It doesn't really teach them anything meaningful. Without critical reasoning, analysis and thinking, we will forever be stuck in the past. It's like saying we should still be using telegraphy - not phones or email, because it's been tried and tested, and it works. We don't want to try anything new. Is that the attitude we want?

These are just a few thoughts. Maybe more to follow later. I realise this post seems very disorganised - I just wrote down the thoughts as they came to me. Sorry.

End rant.

[app_engine]

Bipolar,

Nice long post. Some of your anguish over lip services to morals is definitely commendable. I'm with you - one must practice and be exemplery before preaching / teaching morals.

However, the whole post isn't addressing the "real" morals, at least some of those higher principles that I was taught in school. Let's separate this "Thamizh culture" thing from morals. Morals are applicable to all humans, Thamizh or otherwise. Examples - Positive rules like "love your neighbor as yourself" or its negative expansions such as "you should not murder or steal or lie etc." These are universal and not related to one single set or group of people.

When I posted on moral education, I meant such things and not some localized customs which can be good for a place and time period and cannot be applied everywhere or for ever.

That people don't practice self-sacrifice does not mean that "being selfish" is the best policy. Neither does it mean that nobody should teach such higher principles to young minds, if we want to live as humans. I think our species has the rare quality of altruism (which to my knowledge is not practiced consciously by animals, expect by instinct toward their younger ones in some cases).

Either way, your long post does talk about some social evils but does not say why high morals should not be taught in schools. Agreed, home is the first place to teach them and parental example is the most important requirement . However the community has a respo too and it's necessary to have it in schools (another reason is even the basic family structure is in trouble for quite sometime worldwide and home may not be the best place to learn certain things:-))

[app_engine]

And the other thing that you talked about "being tolerant of other races / castes / creeds etc", to my knowledge my MI teacher taught me to love all humans regardless of their background (to this day, one of my most favourite stories is the "good samaritan" heard in my 4th standard).

My parents practiced it (and they didn't have to go to England to learn this BTW) and we follow too. That majority do not follow this higher principle does not take away the effectiveness of this moral in resolving any conflict:-) On the other hand, failure to follow this simple principle is the reason for all the hatred, conflicts, wars, bloodshed, divisions etc that we see among human society.

I agree that following this principle is more important than teaching, but how will a young person know if not taught?

[app_engine]

And about making "morals" a science, to the extent we "study" how effective the laws / principles that we are handed over work , I can agree to call it a science. (Much like studying the EXISTING physical laws can be called a physical science. However, the physical science itself does not create universal laws but only understand how it works - whether people study it or not the constants such as g (the 9.8 thing) or c in m/s or charge of "e" do not keep changing)

[Anoushka]

app_engine : even in our school, it was called moral science! :)

bipolar: I think ( I could be completely wrong here), you learnt to see the bad things around you quicker than the good things! I am sure there are people around you who would help someone on the street quicker than you can think!

I was in India for three and a half months recently and am just back. I should say, the ironing lady who saw me carrying two bags and my child, rushed to my help to carry the bags upto my house... it was just plain humanity! Someone on the plane offered to hold my crying baby.... again plain humanity.... I can mention loads of incidents like this. None of them expected anything from me, it was just to help me. I might not have taken any of their help but still, the very thought that someone is around to help me made me feel better! :)

[thilak4life]

As I grew up, I realized the curriculum is fundamentally less equiped. For starters, I wish I was taught the scientific aspect of behavioral patterns, and the social constructs.

[app_engine]

thilak4life,

I totally agree with you that all's not perfect with the education - morals or otherwise. We sure need improvements (may be even wholesale revamp). My focus in this thread was only about whether "to have or not have" moral education. I hope I've stated where I stand on that question. Now, how it is to be done and what betterments can be made and such details need attention. There may be people better qualified than me to talk about that:-)

[Wibha]

It's not necessary to have a moral science class. When I used to have it it was more of a stress. To be frank i learnt nothing from the class. Morals should come from within you can't impose it or teach it or order. We had it as a whole period in which we used to learn stories and we were told to do the exercises for an A. all that mattered to us was the A and not what the class really meant. I think it's of no use to have moral science as a class....

[app_engine]

>>that mattered to us was the A <<

I don't think we had exams / assesment for MI during my schooling. Yes, exams / grades could be a stress on any subject and no child likes it.

OTOH, typically children have a preference for junk food and not healthy food. Does it mean allow them to munch on what they want and let them end up sick? I'm sure parental / elderly guidance is needed in early years on any subject let alone morals.

And this "morals coming from within" is not always true as none of us are equipped from birth to answer "every" possible question and education is necessary, IMHO.

[thilak4life]

thilak4life,

I totally agree with you that all's not perfect with the education - morals or otherwise. We sure need improvements (may be even wholesale revamp). My focus in this thread was only about whether "to have or not have" moral education. I hope I've stated where I stand on that question. Now, how it is to be done and what betterments can be made and such details need attention. There may be people better qualified than me to talk about that:-)

Oho, that's without doubt mandatory IMO! So, I concur with your stance as well. :)

[Bipolar]

Thanks, thanks, thanks everyone for your replies!!!

Like Thilak4life, I agree with App_engine that children need guidance, and again, I agree "how it is to be done and what betterments can be made and such details need attention"...

Like Wibha, we too had just a period in which we used to learn stories, and we were told to answer the questions, and then we had an exam at the end of the year on the subject. I really feel that this is where the Indian education system is going badly wrong. Of course, the Indian system is based on the old British system, and noone seems to have any interest in trying to update the system. :-( I think, by the time I was about eleven or twelve years old, the stuff we were being taught in moral science lessons was becoming somewhat patronising.

I came to England when I was fourteen. At school, we had religious education, but this was education about the various religions and cultures of the world, rather than learning religious principles, i.e. they were not encouraging us to be religious. They did encourage us to debate things, ask questions, and critically analyse things. During my first year at university, we were encouraged to consider the relative merits of deontology (I think this can be roughly described as duty-based ethics) versus utilitarianism (the greatest benefit for the greatest number) versus virtue theory. I had considered those concepts even while I was still at school. Most children are quite capable of understanding these ideas, but the school system in India underestimates them. Sometimes it seems that the system in India is trying to give teachers something to teach, rather than giving students something to learn.

You know they say "Actions speak louder than words." So true. It's easy to sit and preach, harder to practise. India needs deep, far-reaching cultural changes from the bottom up to the top. In recent times, there has been much talk about the economic growth in India and China. Of course, both countries have been making progress, but... check this article (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/5181024.stm) out. You might feel a little hurt. I did, but then I realised, it hurts because it's true. This might not seem relevant, but actually the question I raised in this thread is only a very small part of a much bigger picture.

Consider this: a person's character - or maybe we should use the word "behaviour" - is determined by many things, and in fact, think about it carefully, you will see that it's not all under the person's control. Both nature and nurture have effects on the development of an individual's personality traits and behaviour.

Some people may have a natural tendency to be kind and caring, whereas other people may be naturally impatient, competitive and aggressive. They don't choose to be like that, it's just their genes, and they have no control over their genes. (This (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetics_influencing_aggression) is an interesting article - but there is so much scientists still have to learn.) People can't control their genes any more than they can control the colour of their skin or eyes.

Of course, it's not all in the genes, some of it is influenced by a person's experiences. Now this, we can influence. Here, morals taught in school may have a role to play, but much more important, are a child's experiences while growing up - what a child sees around himself/herself - rather than just what their teachers tell them. They learn by observing what adults do, and you know what - a lot of adults are even more selfish than children. Children have an inclination to innocently trust everyone - they assume that everyone is good, that adults know everything, and that everyone wants to help everyone else. As one grows older, that innocence is broken, and you realise what an ugly place the world can be. Maybe if we lived in Utopia... but we don't. But I still wish that we could make efforts to set good examples for our children.

Children can be taught compassion by teaching them to respect others, and in order to do that, they have to learn first to respect themselves. In order to do that, they have to be taught that they have valuable contributions to make to society, and to the world. Each and every one of us is important. A person who doesn't understand that is likely to waste his/her life away. I think such people are more likely to make bad choices in life, because they don't realise how their actions can have far-reaching consequences for themselves, and for the people around them.

Unfortunately, in a country like India, individuality is not encouraged. Everyone is expected to blindly follow the rules laid down by society... even though these rules were laid down so long ago, they probably don't make sense any more. Of course, I accept we need a set of rules, but the rules shouldn't be rigid and unchangeable. That's why I think India needs cultural change alongside economic growth. We need to learn from the mistakes of the past - our own mistakes, and mistakes made by others.

Culturally, the affluent classes in India seem to be heading towards Westernisation or maybe it's Americanisation. There is certainly plenty that India can learn from the West. The West got many things right. That's why they are economically and technologically way ahead of India. But they also made some mistakes. Don't judge them moralistically, but be objective and rational - examine the choices that were made, and the consequences that followed, and then decide what you want to do - but don't EVER be moralistic!!!

One good way to encourage solid character building is through sports. Sports can teach discipline, perseverence, and fairness. However, sadly in India, sport is given very little importance (aside from those playing in the Indian Cricket Team - and even they are only given attention because they can be used to advertise stuff - soft drinks, watches, motorbikes, cars, clothes, shoes, credit cards, the list is almost endless). India seems sadly unique in this respect. Almost every other country in the world - large or small, rich or poor, actually makes an effort with sports. How many medals did India win at the last Olympics? Why, how many medals has India won over the last 25 Olympic meets? Probably less than twenty in all (I could be totally wrong - please correct me if I am). This is disgraceful - utterly disgraceful for a country of over 1 billion people, don't you think? When was the last time that India even qualified for the football World Cup? Don't tell me it's because you don't have the money to spend on developing sport. You seem to have crores of rupees to spend on making and remaking utterly pointless movies. You seem to have crores to spend on cricketers. You do well at cricket because not many countries play it seriously. What about the real games? Soccer, tennis (okay, Sania Mirza, Mahesh Bhupathi, Leander Paes, but only three people out of a billion?) rugby, motorsport, basketball, etc.? You've had some success at hockey, but it's still not very impressive. Though it may seem irrelevant to the topic being discussed, India's dismal performance on the sporting scene shows the problem that you have - not that you lack the means, or the ability - you lack the will. Corruption is endemic within the system. Corruption is like a disease. In most countries, corruption is like an infection - it causes problems from time to time, it is troublesome, but it can be dealt with. In India, corruption is like cancer - it is slowly killing the system, and it is really difficult to deal with. The Chinese are making serious efforts to crackdown on corruption. In India, though, it seems to be culturally tolerated!!! People just seem to accept (or they have been worn down into accepting) that everything has a price - in money. Such attitudes have to be changed - that will go a long way towards making the country a better place to live in, and people will become better people.

I'm assuming that the vast majority of ForumHubbers are middle class NRIs from Tamil Nadu. Well, we live in a world of our own. We can often conveniently ignore the harsh difficulties faced by the lower socio-economic classes. We like to debate things (like this topic, for example) but we are not very good when it comes to actually taking action. You like to sit back and look at the bigger picture, but you don't want to pay much attention to the details - because, why does it really matter to you any more? You've made it, your children are making it... Why is it your problem any more? It's just too much trouble. Well, ask yourself why you left India in the first place. You left in search of something that India couldn't give you, and yet you claim that you are Indian. You know India has its faults and weaknesses. You've always known. What did you do about it? You packed up and left. You went somewhere else. But then you refuse to accept that when in Rome, you should do as the Romans do. You won't let your children do as the Romans do either. You are Indian, so your children should be too... right? Your children are so confused... where do they belong? Here? There? Hell, maybe they belong everywhere? But as far as you're concerned, your children belong where you want them to belong. But you're children find certain things in India to be totally alien to them. You know that, but you want them to accept things just the way they are. You've given up hope of making positive changes in India. You don't think there's anything you can do. You don't realise that actually, there are things that can be done. Maybe just little things, but there is something you can do.

We're moving inexorably towards becoming a part of the global village. But are you going to be dragged into it, like sheep being herded in by a sheepdog? Or will you make a careful, considered choice about where you want to be? It's up to the youth of the country to decide. That's why you have to sharpen their minds.

Again, I realise this post seems disorganised, jumping around, and digressing wildly from the topic under discussion... but I started this thread, and as I said, the topic itself is only a small part of a big picture, and I just couldn't resist pouring out my thoughts here. As always, I invite your comments, whether you agree with me or strongly disagree. (Probably my longest post so far!!!) Thank you.

[Braandan]

Subjects you learnt in school and college become irrelevant once you start living of your own.. just like that is Moral Science also..I spent more time 'unlearning' what I learned from my parents/teachers and from school/college before I really started proper 'learning'..

[thilak4life]

Subjects you learnt in school and college become irrelevant once you start living of your own.. just like that is Moral Science also..I spent more time 'unlearning' what I learned from my parents/teachers and from school/college before I really started proper 'learning'..

That's true. But I don't see any harm with this line of subject (the way I see it, it's mandatory), only the betterment is recommended.

[suba]

:)

bipolar,

so, you suggest learning morality is a waste of time but learning science and logic would build a successful person. is that? fine. but i believe learning itself needs some morality. you have to be attendive to learn anything and being attendive falls within morality.

:)

[pavalamani pragasam]

:clap:

[wrap07]

Education/Advancement without charecter will only lead to chaos. Mere advancement in any field without morality and discpline has never succeeded and if it has been tried out, it has shaken our civilisation seriously.

In this we can take cue from our Country's ethos where the individual's morality and upbringing is most imporant when educating the children. This may be a thing of the past but the value of this system will be understood long before

[pavalamani pragasam]

:clap:

[Lambretta]

In this we can take cue from our Country's ethos where the individual's morality and upbringing is most imporant when educating the children. This may be a thing of the past but the value of this system will be understood long before
:exactly: :(

Most 'morality' in edu. institutions is now limited to mere following of discipline within the school premises! Most school authorities seem satisifed as long as this is maintained among students!

[Shekhar]

How have we learnt what ever we have learnt.?? How have we decided our value system, our ideals, our philosophy?? I think much of childhood learning is by seeing ... seeing what parents do (definitely not what parents preach) .. seeing what teachers do.. seeing what neigbours do... Whether such actions are condoned by parents or not.
But a lot of learning and imbibing of values is also through what we are taught through books. It remains atleast as a conception to be validated or rejected at a later stage when we become adults.
We see the power of indoctrination at young age. (Look at the children in the terrorists training camps)
But, I don't believe in "telling" our children what is right and what is wrong. We need to develop the minds of our children to be able to decide what is right and what is wrong, based on the basic tenets of right and wrong. In that sense "teaching" moral science in schools, is non productive. It doesn't serve any purpose.
I think, the drastic change of value system today is more because of the TV and Movie media (being more impressionable to the children) than due to what is taught or not taught in schools.

[suba]

How have we learnt what ever we have learnt.?? How have we decided our value system, our ideals, our philosophy?? I think much of childhood learning is by seeing ... seeing what parents do (definitely not what parents preach) .. seeing what teachers do.. seeing what neigbours do... Whether such actions are condoned by parents or not.
But a lot of learning and imbibing of values is also through what we are taught through books. It remains atleast as a conception to be validated or rejected at a later stage when we become adults.
We see the power of indoctrination at young age. (Look at the children in the terrorists training camps)
But, I don't believe in "telling" our children what is right and what is wrong. We need to develop the minds of our children to be able to decide what is right and what is wrong, based on the basic tenets of right and wrong. In that sense "teaching" moral science in schools, is non productive. It doesn't serve any purpose.
I think, the drastic change of value system today is more because of the TV and Movie media (being more impressionable to the children) than due to what is taught or not taught in schools.

:)

hi shekhar,

how r u? :)

i very much agree with u that children are influenced by tv and media but if you say that children listen only to the media and not moral science class, it goes same with any other classes. so why should we have schools at all?

we can just leave them to learn EVERYTHING from the parents, neighbours media etc.

:)

[pavalamani pragasam]

:lol:

[Lambretta]

i very much agree with u that children are influenced by tv and media but if you say that children listen only to the media and not moral science class, it goes same with any other classes. so why should we have schools at all?

we can just leave them to learn EVERYTHING from the parents, neighbours media etc.

:)
:exactly: :)

[app_engine]

>>we can just leave them to learn EVERYTHING from the parents, neighbours media etc. <<

Not that way. Moral instruction is definitely different from arts / science and math. Please don't confuse. Definitely specialists are needed to teach math / lang / art /science while one cannot dispute that there's no need for "highly educated teacher" to give moral training, as some of the well-known role models in morality were not university educated.

However, there has to be some kind of structured training to young ones in moral aspects, from the "society" apart from parental guidance. There'll be always counsels, opinions etc from relatives / media etc. However, a formal study of the exisitng (sometimes even contradictory) morals, benefits and otherwise of following any values is beneficial. School is an easy place to have this structured study as all children are expected to spend some time there under a studious setting and hence advantageous. Who should be the teacher then?...That's an interesting question and so are other details. As I said earlier, it's to be more seriously analyzed and I'm not an expert in that area:-)

[pavalamani pragasam]

Having had the luck to get schooling in a convent we had foreign nuns in charge of the moral science class. Like for other subjects we had prescribed books in the syllabus. I even remember the wall-like, brick-design on the book cover, only the colour changed as the numbers increased from 1 to 2 to 3 ...In our final year in school we had very memorable from our teacher on the dignity of women, teenage girls in particular & how we shall nurture it. In the personality development of a pupil, the moral instruction classes have a place by making him think, choose, believe & assess. Grandmas have been replaced by CD's of Panchathantra stories & Aesop tales. The human touch is missing.

[Shekhar]

i very much agree with u that children are influenced by tv and media but if you say that children listen only to the media and not moral science class, it goes same with any other classes. so why should we have schools at all?

we can just leave them to learn EVERYTHING from the parents, neighbours media etc.
No, No.. You misunderstood me. We learn a lot from school definitely. I said as for values are concerned (I don't like the word 'morality', it has a religious connotation to it, and it varies from culture to culture) they can hardly be taught.
They are imbibed mostly by observation and experience, and very less by being taught through books.
I think you are mixing up knowledge and values. Surely schools teach us knowledge, there is no substitute for that.
Also, I only said influece of media is more, not total.

[nirosha sen]

Absolutely Shekhar!! Morality should be caught not taught!!

Examples are all the uniformed bodies that students participate in schools. No other lessons are more profound in nurturing the humanity in us, than all these guilds and societies. Children should be taught to be givers and not mere takers from society. I personally think rote-learning alone, of morality is sheer waste of time!

:wink:

[Bipolar]

Having had the luck to get schooling in a convent we had foreign nuns in charge of the moral science class. Like for other subjects we had prescribed books in the syllabus. I even remember the wall-like, brick-design on the book cover, only the colour changed as the numbers increased from 1 to 2 to 3 ...In our final year in school we had very memorable from our teacher on the dignity of women, teenage girls in particular & how we shall nurture it. In the personality development of a pupil, the moral instruction classes have a place by making him think, choose, believe & assess. Grandmas have been replaced by CD's of Panchathantra stories & Aesop tales. The human touch is missing.

I went to Catholic schools too, and I think we probably used the same books for moral science as you did. Most Catholic schools in India are attended by children from higher socio-economic classes - in that respect, there's a bit of elitism, and I feel that children are shielded from the real world (at least the school were I studied, many of my classmates were children of topflight businessmen, lawyers, doctors, etc. and there were a few kids who were there probably simply because they were Catholics themselves, although they weren't rich) Especially in a country like India, most children don't have the luxury of studying in such good schools. Many children don't even have the luxury of going to any school, sadly. In my final year of school ("Tenth standard" as it is called) I studied in a relatively "poor" school. Most of the children there were from an economically poor background, and I'll tell you, that was an eye-opening experience for me. That was my first taste of the real world. That was when I genuinely took my first steps out of the pretty painted world of the Catholic school that I previously attended and learned about real life. It's experiences like that which really prepare you to face life. While I certainly agree that the various orders of Catholic monks and nuns around the world deserve praise for their genuine efforts in spreading education, there is also the fact that in India at least, many such schools are a bit elitist, and the same thing can be said about the value systems they teach.

In India, there are still several subjects that are taboo - for example the issue of sex is still something that seems unmentionable to most parents. Why is sex regarded as something so dirty? It's a normal part of human life. We have a population of over one billion (and rising fast). I wonder how. I'm sorry, but I think the whole idea of "dignity/modesty/honour" of women is an artificial concept, invented by males to serve themselves. From an evolutionary point of view, a male can be sure that his genes are passed on to the next generation only if he totally prevents any contact between his partner and another male. If a female is pregnant, she can be sure that her child will carry her genes. But unless she is totally faithful to one male and him only, her partner cannot be sure that her child is also carrying his genes. That is why men are so possessive of their wives/girlfriends. To encourage women to stick to their partners, the concept of "modesty/honour" was invented. Of course, I am not suggesting that women should not be faithful to their partners. But let's accept the real reasons for it, instead of inventing false glorifications. If children aren't taught about sex in an open, sensitive, mature way, they will learn about it from films - where it is often presented in a vulgar fashion, or worse still, they will experiment. The consequences of this will be far worse than dealing with any embarrassment that an open discussion may bring. That's why I feel that the present way of teaching children "morals" in school is patronising and ineffective.

[pavalamani pragasam]

"the whole idea of "dignity/modesty/honour" of women is an artificial concept, invented by males to serve themselves." How exactly 'artificial' is it? Our ancient culture speak about 4 essential feminine traits; there is sense in it! The concept does not serve the males alone but the whole society, creates a discipline of senses, sensuality, ensuring peace, health & progress. Hence it is only partial truth: ' To encourage women to stick to their partners, the concept of "modesty/honour" was invented.'

"Why is sex regarded as something so dirty?" Who said so? Neither is it embarrassing. Just unnecessary topic of discussion with children at tender age intruding upon their natural blossoming, a gradual process of slow recognition of curiosities, surprises observing inside & outside developments, Nature's wonders. No need at all to kindle their curiosities prematurely in the name 'educating' them. The result could be adverse to the one aimed at!
I beg to differ with this: 'That's why I feel that the present way of teaching children "morals" in school is patronising and ineffective.'
We had an ample chance of knowing about petty vices & big carnal vices, warned against yielding to them. Even if it is theory class, such lessons can only be theoretical. No need to get one's fingers burned to know that fire burns.

[Shekhar]

Hi Nirosha, nice to know you are still around ! (to render advises to troubled souls !!! :D :D :wink: Or have you stopped it?? ) :wave:

Sex education for children "Unnecessary topic of discussion" ??!! :o
"intruding upon natural blossoming"?! - sexual awareness, unnatural?!!
When does it become necessary - after two abortions?!! :o :wink:

[pavalamani pragasam]

Abortions might have increased in proportion to population increase. But is abortion a regular occurrence in the lives of our womenfolk? Not yet! God forbid!
Children are smart enough to see 2+2 makes four! Dangerous to try to make them oversmart! 8-)

[sarna_blr]

Are discussions still relevent to the topic? i dont think so.. :confused2:

[suba]

:)

hi shekar / app_engine

i am sure i understood the difference between knowledge and values. :)

the point is what we pick up from our studies. like any other subject, moral is also taught as a subject in schools. we all study on many subjects but master one or two.

though we master one particular subject but practise another one. though we practise another particular subject, we preach some other.

so we learn everything but we do what we want to. why blame the subjects taught?

:)

[wrap07]

Every age in the course of a human goes through several process. Education/knowledge of matters keep on improving by age. Any man or woman should know what he or she needs to know at the age where there is semblance of maturity and understanding of things. For the sake of opening out things which are kept barred for not only the welfare of children but also the society in general or in the name of open society, we can make children laboratories and waylid them.

From our culture, We can see family break ups are rare in the past and subsequent to western influence, it is order of the day today though not everywhere. But, in the so called advanced societies, there is no family structure except in some traditional households.

[Shekhar]

:?: :huh: :confused2: :roll:

[wrap07]

Mr Shekar. Have I not made things clear. My position is it is better to follow our own culture and ethics rather than changing for the sake of it. Children should be made aware of certain things only when they are ready for it.

[nirosha sen]

Hm..interesting diversion, but yes, sex education was quite simply called reproductive science in my days. That way, our teachers and the syllabus very adroitly taught us about the meosis and mitosis process of reproduction. I doubt if any of us was too shy to question it! In fact we were all agog with curiosity to understand the process of pollination in plant science and the whole reproductive process involving animals before we were introduced to the human anatomy. By which time of course, we were well and ready for it!

So, it was hardly treated as a moral question but just part and parcel of science lessons. 8-)

Hi Shekhar, I occasionally foray here but it's nice to see ole souls like you still around. Something about the Familiars warms the heart. Particularly the likes of Pava, who's bravely held the fort for so long!! :D

[pavalamani pragasam]

Thanx, dear! If your experience of introduction to 'knowledge' was quite ok then why not now?

[Shekhar]

sex education was quite simply called "reproductive science" in my days. :D

Hi,
what we are talking about introducing in schools is not "reproductive science" but "reproductive ART". :D
Ofcourse, the real art is to keep the 'reproductive' of the process out of it!! :lol: :lol:

[thilak4life]

sex education was quite simply called "reproductive science" in my days. :D

Hi,
what we are talking about introducing in schools is not "reproductive science" but "reproductive ART". :D
Ofcourse, the real art is to keep the 'reproductive' of the process out of it!! :lol: :lol:

:lol:

Expect some strong objections for this. :lol2: