Job Discussion Forums

[Teacher in Rome]

[Trinley]

I don't agree that by personally declining to teach a terrorist, I am restricting access to education.

[Teacher in Rome]

[Trinley]

It's okay -- I don't feel attacked.

I can't say where exactly it ends because morality is subjective and its lines are rarely clear-cut. There are no exact lines that I decree that I will not cross. It would depend on what immoral thing that person was doing. Like I said, there's a middle ground, which is also subject to the individual viewpoint.

But what I do find interesting is that those who advocate taking a moral stand are scrutinized and questioned, while those who are apathetic to morality are dismissed from the interrogation room. Why should people be so keenly interested that I choose to uphold what I find moral? Why are we not more interested in those who declare that they take no moral stance at all? I would be more curious to ask that person "Where does it end?" It makes me conclude that people are actually more disturbed by morality than they are immorality!

[Teacher in Rome]

[johnslat]

Dear Teacher in Rome,

"First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out--
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the communists
and I did not speak out--
because I was not a communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out--
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me--
and there was no one left to speak out for me."

Pastor Martin Niemoller - was a German pastor and theologian born in Lippstadt, Germany, in 1892. Niem�ller was an anti-Communist and supported Hitler's rise to power at first. But when Hitler insisted on the supremacy of the state over religion, Niem�ller became disillusioned. He became the leader of a group of German clergymen opposed to Hitler. Unlike Niem�ller, they gave in to the Nazis' threats. In 1937 he was arrested and eventually confined in the Sachsenhausen and Dachau concentration camps. His crime was "not being enthusiastic enough about the Nazi movement." Niem�ller was released in 1945 by the Allies. He continued his career in Germany as a clergyman and as a leading voice of penance and reconciliation for the German people after World War II. His statement, sometimes presented as a poem, is well-known, frequently quoted, and is a popular model for describing the dangers of political apathy, as it often begins with specific and targeted fear and hatred which soon escalates out of control."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came�

One of my favorites,

Regards,
John

[santi84]

I guess one teacher's idea of terrorist is another teacher's idea of a freedom fighter. The actions of the Tibetan Security Forces don't seem to evoke the same passion as other oppressive forces, I suppose.

I wonder if the Taliban is currently hiring language instructors? Somehow I doubt that... but at least we know there may be an EFL teacher out there - somewhere - who might be willing to help them out, so that they too can experience an equal opportunity to education Or is that too close to home?

After all, where does it end?

[Trinley]

Yes!! I feel it would be a way of speaking up for the Tibetans. There is not a whole heck of a lot I can do for them, but I can withhold my services from those who are blatantly and inarguably terrorizing others (okay, some might argue that the Chinese are not terrorizing the Tibetans, but I would disagree).

[Trinley]

[HLJHLJ]

It's really not clear to me what you are advocating. That we should all take a ethical stance on who we choose to teach? That any moral opinion is better than none? Is every moral/ethical decision equally valid and acceptable?

[Trinley]

I advocate that each person should make a conscious effort to cause less harm.

As I said morality is subjective to the individual, but I believe that as society's level of consciousness evolves, viewpoints on morality converge.

[johnslat]

I don't see any problem here - personal integrity is just that: personal. Everyone has to decide for him/herself just what's moral and what's not (though some take their definition straight from a religion.) There are sure to be different lines drawn by many.

Regards,
John

[dean_a_jones]

I am not sure I agree with the moral bubble being created around education by some.

Teaching is not medicine. I can understand perfectly well why a doctor should be aiming to treat people without first asking them to show their credentials etc. That makes perfect sense, is a long-standing tradition, and is worthy of upholding.

Some people here want to put education into the 'access for all' category, and teachers in the place of doctors. The problem with this is that education is rarely as straightforward (so to speak) as stitching a wound etc. It is inherently connected to power, culture and in most cases, the state.

Now as an ESL teacher that may not be the case in the classroom, and quite often we are not really given a 'propaganda' curriculum, or asked to teach political concepts or ideas (though we can be asked not to teach/discuss certain ideas). I for one would baulk at the idea of going somewhere like Africa and teaching a health course (for example) based around ideas of Christianity and abstinence. Others might not, but that really doesn't matter, as it is a matter of individual choice in terms of teaching said curriculum. I don't see why the Tibet example is any different.

[HLJHLJ]

[dean_a_jones]