Job Discussion Forums

[Cool Teacher]

[jdl]

Well a few mid winter days in the Arctic or Sub Arctic would certainly put some fur on them! Even our hypocrisy is shallow. Well back to my free range eggs and tofu bacon for breakfast, all washed down with fair trade coffee and unpasturized milk, sweetened with the honey I stole from the bear out my back door. Then off to work in my hum vee. Damn, I wish parking weren't so expensive down town. Think I will boycott all public transit until the city council creates 'free parking' zones close to my office building. At least the ride to work gives me a chance to think of my 'causes' as I sit all alone in traffic. Thank goodness for the self help/inspirational material I loaded onto my Ipod.

Just wish all those other activists were not so self serving!

[johnslat]

Everyone has - or, in my opinion, should have - his/her own concept of integrity and of what would violate his/her sense of integrity.
I may not agree with the concepts of others, but I certainly respect their right to determine their own parameters.
Such parameters may not even seem to me to be logical; however, logic is not, I think, the only factor that's can or needs to be used when establishing those parameters.
Regards,
John

[gaijinalways]

Everyone has to decide what will make them comfortable. If in the long run teaching people whose morals or values you disagree with will make you ill (physically/mentally or both) then of course you're probably better off not doing it.

This goes for most jobs; I recall one famous businessman commenting, " Of course you can do business with anyone, but do you want to? In the long run, doing business with people who make you uncomfortable because they are not nice people or hold vastly different values than yourself is self-defeating. I'd much rather do business with people I know I can have long term business relationships with. From my perspective, it just makes more business sense. "

[Englishish]

[Global Hobo]

[jdl]

Ah, the fine line that shifts as we navigate life all the while trying to find our 'true north'. Interesting how our moral stances and actions over time seem to be so self serving in retrospect. I suppose a good case could be made for not teaching/doing business with (pick a religious/political/ethnic/racial group of choice). And certainly we all do have the responsibility to form our moral concepts and precepts...the question remains "Is the main principle one of 'feeling comfortable' ". What are the guiding principles used as our 'longitude and latitude' as we form this integrity called morality and ethical action?

Oops, have to pull over to top up the tank in the hum vee while the petrol price is down. I know a station that donates a few cents a litre to bio-fuel and alternative energy research.......the more I buy the more I am helping the cause. I feel so much more comfortable doing this.... Such integrity.

Wait a minute ..... that doesn't have any logic, does it? Oh heck, I am sure it does...just can't find it now and really not too interested in the search...coffee time...looooove my latte.

[johnslat]

Dear Global Hobo,

"That's a fair comment. But I think it's wrong to assume that brutal killers in brutal regimes will choke back their tears and discover we're all just the same because they learnt English. The world's wars aren't all misunderstandings due to language differences."

Has anyone suggested the above, that "brutal killers in brutal regimes" would be transformed into enlightened saints by their having learned English?

Or could I rightly consider your statement above to be a straw man?

The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position. This sort of "reasoning" has the following pattern:

Person A has position X.
Person B presents position Y (which is a distorted version of X).
Person B attacks position Y.
Therefore X is false/incorrect/flawed.
This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because attacking a distorted version of a position simply does not constitute an attack on the position itself. One might as well expect an attack on a poor drawing of a person to hurt the person."

Regards,
John

[Global Hobo]

[johnslat]

Dear Global Hobo,

No offense taken - but if the mozzar quote was what prompted your response, I'm afraid it still seems like a straw man (though perhaps a smaller one) to me.

Regards,
John

[Global Hobo]

[coledavis]

I was recently offered a job where the school itself seemed nice enough but the parent company was one created specially to provide services to the US military. Although I don't think that the school itself was culpable in any way, I turned it down.

[jdl]

Well done Coledavis! Was your principle here one of "I will act in accordance with my beliefs by declining involvement in activities which may represent an unacceptable compromise "?

I was impressed that you selected to take action which affected you alone rather than one dedicated to changing the beliefs and behaviour of others. Seems to be a distinction here between personal ethical action and crusading?

How did you arrive at your decision?

[coledavis]

[jdl]

Thank you.