Jan 28 2013: Who cares whether or not it is inate if you can teach it. Here's how. 1) Tell your pupil how important it is that there is altruism in the world, talking about ghandi or however you want to inspire this do-good feeling. 2) Drop a bit of money (enough to be meaningful) in a place where you know where your pupil will find it. 3) If the pupil finds it and gives it to you, give them some and emphasize how good of a person they are for giving the money back. Even give them some of it and also donate some of the money on their behalf to some cause to which they might be sympathetic. Let them see how it helps them and others. If they keep the money, catch them and make them feel extremely guilty (don't wuss out) verbally. Regardless, you are trading incentives/reinforcers for a learning opportunity. I would say that often people are verbally reminded of morals, but don't get many chances to practice. I say give them a few practice opportunities and show them how good it feels to help people and do good. No disrespect to those that want to talk about the philosophy of this, but regardless, if you can teach it, teach it. If you want more, talk to a behavior analyst (yes, they exist, are good, and are expensive).
Jan 28 2013: To add a little to your argument Jarek, I ask that people take a look at the bottom graph on page 45 of this (http://www.columbia.edu/~xs23/papers/pdfs/World_Income_Distribution_QJE.pdf). You will see the world distribution of income (WDI) per captia and also the same distribution for many countries in year 2000. Put shortly, the results indicate a fairly normal distribution of income and importantly, the income scale drops off to almost 0% at $100,000 USD. Based on these numbers, I have two points. First, it seems there are people still pissed at the 1% in this world. I've been there, but looking at some of these graphs, something hit me. MANY OF US ARE THE 1%. Yes there are some Billionaires out there that may not worry about money, but it seems that if we include countries outside the U.S., we need to make less than $100K a year to be in the top 1%. Correct me if I'm wrong of course. This leads me to our second point, something I want to call Greg's law of jealousy. It doesn't matter where we are at on the income scale, we often view those richer than us as rich and those poorer than us as poor (or maybe it's just me). That said, I think it's a slap in the face for many U.S. people to be pissed about their financial situation. We still have it better than many, and we will never all be the richest. I wrote in another post and I'll write it again; we simply need to work on caring less about things and more about people and we'll be happier. Simple as that. I'll start working on myself.
Jan 28 2013: If you were quoting the bible, then it is THE LOVE of money is the root of all evil and I believe this. I don't think money is inherently bad, just when one chooses money over more important things. Simplified, I think something is wrong when people choose things over people (to a degree of course). Interestingly, it seems we hear a common argument that to me seems flawed. That is that we feel the homeless/welfare recipients should get jobs and contribute, but then we look at people with a lot of money as some evil curse on the world. I think often deep down it is jealousy and unhappines that one looks down on someone that doesn't have to do as much as they. The truth is that you don't have to work so hard either, but you then have to forgo your ipad/tv/internet/car/home-ownership. I think when we can master the skill of not being jealous, we will be much more happy. I really think the world would work out just fine if we all decided to work part-time and just buy/have less.
You can say that my experience has been that I've made very good money for a time, lived a good couple of years, but then went jobless,broke, and homeless. The contrast was a really good learning experience and really taught me a lot about people and about my desire for things. For the rest of my life, I really don't want to make a lot of money and won't envy those that do because they often trade a good portion of their time for the flashy things.
BTW, there is a new prediction/forecast by 'scientists' that the rate of population growth is declining. Important, the RATE of population growth. Feel free to do the research, but I recall that we are expected to top out at 9 billion people and then decline/maintain.
Jan 25 2013: Yes I agree about needing good teachers that have a good understanding of subjects. My experience is that teachers fulfill two roles: First, a teacher should be providing correct content and the progression of learning of a subject (e.g., algebra comes before trigonometry, and then precalculus, then calculus). Second, a teacher should also be turning the subject that might ordinarily seem mundane to a student into a fun and artistic activity. If you only do the first, students will not care or try. If you only do the second, there can be a lot of frustrating extra work simply to find what content a student needs to learn before understanding a topic.
This appears what the green school is working on, maybe with some additional environmental/social responsibility.
So to maybe refine my answer to your original question. I think a classroom should be a philosophical change in perspective. That is, the world should be the classroom and everything in it can be something interesting to learn about. One could merely have a concrete room, barren of any books, computers, etc., but you then talk about the structural integrity of the room, surface area, volume, why this room was built using concrete and if that would happen if it was built today...etc...
Jan 23 2013: Recognize what people want, then trade them for what you really want. Keep calm and they will feel foolish for escalating; stick to facts, and they will do the same. Care about the person and it will be hard for them to not care about you. I know this all sounds hippie, but you are talking about altruism which is the philosophy; hippie is its practice.
Jan 23 2013: It's never been the classroom. It's the culture of the people and resources for me to learn. In other words, I can learn just about anything, but applying complex math to real problems, doing metal fabrication, or designing/modeling takes resources. So I would say that I just need a good community with a few resources.
Jan 23 2013: I have some counter research with opposite results (guns kill the most people). Not that I think anything need discussing, I think the point should be made that research results are variable. And since we now have two conflicting data, we can't say anything intelligent about it yet. To be forward, I am against additional gun control, but really don't care either way because I already own the guns I want to own.
Jan 23 2013: the problem is that we are more afraid of dying as a result of a gun than in other ways. In other words, if we look at the number of gun related deaths to many other kinds of death (cancer, car accidents, stroke, heart attack), you'll find it has a relatively benign impact on the population. Regarding the effect on family, I don't disagree that it is traumatic. The problem is though that we feel like we can prevent gun deaths and we leave all of the illness-type deaths to the scientists and researchers. In reality though, driving habits, smoking/drinking, exercise and food intake quantity are probably much easier to die from. We're just used desensitized to these deaths so they don't scare us enough (at least to do much about them).
That said, I think the result of talking about this issue is merely just a waste of our time. We could be flying into space, curing cancer, or partying. Instead we're contemplating the technicalities of the constitution and it's application to something outside its scope (by how many hundred years?).
Jan 23 2013: In CA, there are approximately 180 school days. Divide your $8,000/year by 180 and you have $44/day or about $889/month for 9 months. This includes food, transportation, sports, extracurricular activities, etc.
Now i'm going to exaggerate for simplicity sake, but hear me out. What if I get a gym membership for my kid which would cost $50/month, but since I want to make sure he shows up and at least is present, I pay for an additional attendance service of $10/month. I want my kid to emphasize math and since I am a math whiz, I take on the task of teaching my kid math in the evenings. For geography, social studies, chemistry, biology, etc; I sign my kid up to take proctored tests that might cost $100/month and I give him internet access (he's going to be better doing the research anyways) and he'll find the lessons himself. Since I believe that he should have a good quality social life, I help organize LAN parties for him and friends, talk with other parents and have our kids develop extracurricular activites. As far as text books go, most subjects that are below the graduate school level, have good and FREE pdfs available online since the basics of the sciences don't change, and the social sciences and arts are very much free online anyways. Finally, for those parents that feel their children are going to surpass them in education, there will be a default curriculum that outlines what is suggested for someone to be financially successful.
Again, this is extremely simplified, but I think a voucher system would work well as long as it was in dollars and/or there was a loosely defined way of allowing the kids and parents to have educational options.
TEDCred score: +0.90 TEDCred reflects your contribution to the TED community.
A comment on Conversation: Can one teach young people to be moral? Is morality something that must be taught in the home? Is it innate?
A comment on Conversation: You cannot eat money, or make clothes, or build a house out of it.
Sorry for the rant, it's late.
A reply on Conversation: You cannot eat money, or make clothes, or build a house out of it.
You can say that my experience has been that I've made very good money for a time, lived a good couple of years, but then went jobless,broke, and homeless. The contrast was a really good learning experience and really taught me a lot about people and about my desire for things. For the rest of my life, I really don't want to make a lot of money and won't envy those that do because they often trade a good portion of their time for the flashy things.
BTW, there is a new prediction/forecast by 'scientists' that the rate of population growth is declining. Important, the RATE of population growth. Feel free to do the research, but I recall that we are expected to top out at 9 billion people and then decline/maintain.
A comment on Conversation: How about a VIRTUAL classroom?
This appears what the green school is working on, maybe with some additional environmental/social responsibility.
So to maybe refine my answer to your original question. I think a classroom should be a philosophical change in perspective. That is, the world should be the classroom and everything in it can be something interesting to learn about. One could merely have a concrete room, barren of any books, computers, etc., but you then talk about the structural integrity of the room, surface area, volume, why this room was built using concrete and if that would happen if it was built today...etc...
A reply on Conversation: Solving gun violence in the US in today's insane political climate requires a solution that makes it painless for everyone.
A comment on Conversation: How is it possible to turn an argument into a mutually beneficial outcome?
A comment on Conversation: How about a VIRTUAL classroom?
A reply on Conversation: Solving gun violence in the US in today's insane political climate requires a solution that makes it painless for everyone.
source = http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0004888.html
A comment on Conversation: Solving gun violence in the US in today's insane political climate requires a solution that makes it painless for everyone.
That said, I think the result of talking about this issue is merely just a waste of our time. We could be flying into space, curing cancer, or partying. Instead we're contemplating the technicalities of the constitution and it's application to something outside its scope (by how many hundred years?).
A comment on Conversation: Education "vouchers" solve the fiscal crisis, and also lead to economic recovery?
Now i'm going to exaggerate for simplicity sake, but hear me out. What if I get a gym membership for my kid which would cost $50/month, but since I want to make sure he shows up and at least is present, I pay for an additional attendance service of $10/month. I want my kid to emphasize math and since I am a math whiz, I take on the task of teaching my kid math in the evenings. For geography, social studies, chemistry, biology, etc; I sign my kid up to take proctored tests that might cost $100/month and I give him internet access (he's going to be better doing the research anyways) and he'll find the lessons himself. Since I believe that he should have a good quality social life, I help organize LAN parties for him and friends, talk with other parents and have our kids develop extracurricular activites. As far as text books go, most subjects that are below the graduate school level, have good and FREE pdfs available online since the basics of the sciences don't change, and the social sciences and arts are very much free online anyways. Finally, for those parents that feel their children are going to surpass them in education, there will be a default curriculum that outlines what is suggested for someone to be financially successful.
Again, this is extremely simplified, but I think a voucher system would work well as long as it was in dollars and/or there was a loosely defined way of allowing the kids and parents to have educational options.
source - http://californiawatch.org/k-12/majority-states-largest-districts-shrink-school-calendar-amid-budget-crisis