While college students struggle with relativism and the usefulness of their liberal arts courses, one group provides a stark contrast: the United States Military. As someone who has taught courses in political science to many active duty students, I have noticed an uneasy tension which exists between American civilians, and those who protect them. On the one hand, society and the academy support and defend the notion of those engaged in military service. On the other, they disdain them as brainwashed puppets who cannot be blamed for their silly patriotism and quaint devotion
MrStakhanovite wrote:Ugh. This dip actually teaches?
On occasion. But what does he teach, if he believes and peddles these kinds of negative stereotypes about the academy? Ignorance? I for one offer nothing but the highest praise and respect for those who serve our country in the military. I have, in fact, in all of my years as a student and teacher in higher education NEVER heard anyone characterize our soldiers in such a derogatory way.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
The Maxwell institute sure ain't going to be happy to give up their core belief in relativism.
"We have to judge Joseph Smith by the standards of his day, not ours!"
"It was OK for Nephi to kill Laban when we understand the "legal perspective" of Lehi's day!"
"We must understand the Book of Mormon from the postmodern stance of intertextuality!"
There is no difference in the amount of relativism at work in the Mopologist rejection of "presentism" and a liberal's rejection of Christian morality, and acknowledging cultural context matters and times change.
Gadianton wrote:The Maxwell institute sure ain't going to be happy to give up their core belief in relativism.
****
There is no difference in the amount of relativism at work in the Mopologist rejection of "presentism" and a liberal's rejection of Christian morality, whatever it is, acknowledging something along the lines of cultural relativism is difficult to avoid.
Well written, Dean Robbers. Where would apologetics be without relativism? Why Joseph Smith, Jr. was a moral relativist:
Joseph Smith wrote:That which is wrong under one circumstance, may be, and often is, right under another. God said, 'Thou shalt not kill'; at another time He said, 'Thou shalt utterly destroy.' This is the principle on which the government of heaven is conducted—by revelation adapted to the circumstances in which the children of the kingdom are placed. Whatever God requires is right, no matter what it is, although we may not see the reason thereof till long after the events transpire.'
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
Drifting wrote:I think I have spotted a bizarre coincidence.
The leadership of The John Adams Center consists of....wait for it....
Twelve White Males
... Ralph Hancock ...
Wow, I totally forgot about Dr. Hancock. I had him for honors American heritage back in the early 90s... I think that was the only "F" I've ever had. Those were strange days.
"And yet another little spot is smoothed out of the echo chamber wall..." Bond
The Dude wrote:Wow, I totally forgot about Dr. Hancock. I had him for honors American heritage back in the early 90s... I think that was the only "F" I've ever had. Those were strange days.
I had him for the same class at roughly the same time. Thought he was a prick then.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
Wow, I am impressed! If you're ever looking to moonlight as a poly sci teacher, let me know, you're pre-qualified.
Reverend,
Please understand I do not mean to judge you without knowing all the facts. I worry though that you set the class curve. We can discuss this during your next review. I will try to be understanding, but I will insist my hands be tied just in case.
moksha wrote:Why is Dr. Peterson allowing himself to get mixed up in something involving politics?
He needs a new drug. Islamic Studies and Arabic Language are no longer challenging for him. He could only take mopologetics so far (creating the thinnest (and getting thinner by the day) sliver of possibility for Mormonism's truth claims against the great weight of data and reason). Politics. It's where he can argue, and find new sycophants to feed his ego. It makes perfect sense.