|
Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Students and Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
veiledsentiments
Joined: 20 Feb 2003
Posts: 17644
Location: USA
|
 Posted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 3:45 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
 us? off topic? NEVER!! 
Actually I think a discussion like this is of benefit to new teachers thinking of coming to this part of the world to teach. It gives a snapshot of situations that one encounters in this part of the world.
Religion is such a touchy subject, but it permeates the ME teaching situation and requires knowledge to navigate it safely.
VS |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
dmb
Joined: 12 Feb 2003
Posts: 8397
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 4:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| it permeates the ME teaching situation |
as oppossed to the me situation? I never realised the importance of capitalisation.... However I do realise the importance of VS.
Sorry... it's been a long day. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
veiledsentiments
Joined: 20 Feb 2003
Posts: 17644
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2006 1:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
but would vs be different from VS?
does it then become 'versus'?
yes, it has been a long day...
VS |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cyberscriber
Joined: 04 Dec 2006
Posts: 5
Location: cyberspace
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2006 9:38 am Post subject: OMAN TEFLERS |
|
|
HAVING SPENT MANY YEARS IN KSA I WAS LOOKING FOR A CHANGE OF LOCATION HENCE MY VISIT TO THIS OMAN FORUM. I APPRECIATE THE COMMENTS FROM THE VETERANS AND AGREE WHOLEHEARTEDLY. WE CAN'T CHANGE THE SYSTEM IN THESE MIDDLE EAST COUNTRIES. SADLY OUR EFFORTS ARE MISUNDERSTOOD AND IT IS THE STUDENTS WHO SUFFER. THEY HAVE TO LIVE THERE WHEREAS WE CAN LEAVE. WE CONTINUE TO WORK IN THESE AREAS FOR THE MONEY WE CAN SAVE. IDEALISM GETS REPLACED WITH REALITY PRETTY EARLY ON. GOOD LUCK THO TO NEWBIES WITH HIGH IDEALS BUT DONT EXPECT TO BE APPRECIATED FOR POINTING OUT THE OBVIOUS INADEQUACIES IN THEIR EDUCATION SYSTEM. WE JUDGE EVERYTHING BY OUR STANDARDS WHICH HAVE LITTLE BEARINGS ON THE CULTURE AND LOCAL WAY OF DOING THINGS.    |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
veiledsentiments
Joined: 20 Feb 2003
Posts: 17644
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2006 3:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Are you prepared to take the lower pay of Oman in order to change the lifestyle?
You have the teaching situation in the Gulf down pat... but...
Your posts do seem a bit like you are screaming... all caps AND bold?
VS |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
007
Joined: 30 Oct 2006
Posts: 2684
Location: UK/Veteran of the Magic Kingdom
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2006 5:59 pm Post subject: Re: OMAN TEFLERS |
|
|
| cyberscriber wrote: |
| ..... WE JUDGE EVERYTHING BY OUR STANDARDS WHICH HAVE LITTLE BEARINGS ON THE CULTURE AND LOCAL WAY OF DOING THINGS. |
I do not think external standards could change the culture and the way of doing things, especially in the Gulf area.
If they do not change their way of thinking and some of their ill-organized thing in life, by themselves, nobody, how powerful is, can change life for them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thel
Joined: 24 Dec 2006
Posts: 52
Location: Kitchen table
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 26, 2006 6:43 pm Post subject: "Revert" offensive? |
|
|
| veiledsentiments wrote: |
I put my response on the General ME board.
Personally I find the term 'revert' a bit offensive and rather arrogant in its assumptions. IMHO, one is free to use that term when speaking Arabic, but when one is speaking English, the word is 'convert.'
VS |
Hi VS,
At the risk of alienating myself given my newbie status, and the fact that from what I've read you have been an instructive, positive, generous voice on these boards, I'd like to take issue with the point quoted above.
The OP is using the word correctly. According to his definition, "revert," not "convert" would be the appropriate term in the English language. You're confusing the English language with English, or North American, cultural expectations. These are two different things. You're annoyance derives from a defense of that culture, not the misuse of a term. If a Christian or Jew were to say that there is only one true God, a Hindu might, using your train of thought, claim that they are using the word "God" incorrectly. Again, this would be strictly a value judgement ground in a specific culture/society. In this light, and though I'm not a Muslim, I don't find the term "revert" offensive because of the religious assumptions underlying it. Conversely, I wouldn't be well disposed towards someone offended because I chose to call myself an "agnostic," because of the fact that the beliefs defining the term would make assumptions contrary to the beliefs of the one so offended.
Thel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
007
Joined: 30 Oct 2006
Posts: 2684
Location: UK/Veteran of the Magic Kingdom
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 26, 2006 10:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
As far as I know, and from the literature, the term 'convert' is sometimes used when somebody change his faith from a religion to another one, or reversing his faith to the one which was his original faith.
Also, I have crossed in the literature where the word 'revert' is also used for someone who changes his faith from a religion to another one.
And I agree with the above poster, the term 'revert', I think, is not offensive, neither the word 'convert'.
I am not an expert in English language, but can we say that the two words, 'revert' and 'convert' can be used interchangeably??
Any comments from the Linguistic and English language experts?
There is no compulsion in Islam to revert a person, and a person reverts to being a Muslim of his or her own free will.
While surfing the internet, I find the following topic about converting to Islam:
"Alexander Litvinenko, the former Russian intelligence agent poisoned in London, was buried according to Muslim tradition after converting to Islam on his deathbed.
The spy's father, Walter Litvinenko, said in an interview published recently that his son - who was born an Orthodox Christian but had close links to Muslims in Chechnya - made the request as he lay dying in University College Hospital. "
Source: http://www.islamictimes.co.uk/content/view/470/39/
BTW, Thel, What is the difference between "agnostic" and "atheist", do they have the same meaning? or they are completelety different? any clarification? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thel
Joined: 24 Dec 2006
Posts: 52
Location: Kitchen table
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 26, 2006 11:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hey, 007.
I think Huxley minted the term "agnostic." As far as I understand, an agnostic is one who neither denies nor confirms the existence of a Creator, supernatural Intelligence, God, whatever the expression. Pending evidence satisfying the agnostic, s/he reserves judgement. An atheist, on the other hand, flatly denies the existence of some supreme Being. Agnosticism grades into different degrees of willingness to belief/disbelieve, so the term carries some ambiguity and doesn't own some universally applicable criterion.
As for the convert/revert debate, I understand a distinction between the terms: the OP says that Muslims believe we are all born Muslim, so that any claim to the religion subsequent to one's birth is indeed a case of reversion. Conversion refers to a change from one state into another, but for Muslims (again, according to the OP), Islam is immutable, always present. Seems to me, then, that from a Muslim's perspective, we're talking about an awakened consciousness rather than a change of consciousness.
I what kind of reception this conversation would have in a ME TEFL classroom? Offense? Indifference? Approval?
Well, bye.
Thel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thel
Joined: 24 Dec 2006
Posts: 52
Location: Kitchen table
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 26, 2006 11:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Borealis wrote: |
| nomadz wrote: |
| He did not assume. This is the belief of all Muslims. Regardless, if one says convert or revert, we still believe that everyone is a Muslim at birth. No one is trying to shove a religion onto you. |
Nomadz assertion "he did not assume..." = "this is not an assumption because it is a fact. We know it's a fact because we believe it to be a fact." This is a circular argument if ever I heard one. If it is not "shoving religion onto you" then what exactly is it? Such blinkered arrogance is typical of many followers of religions which purport to be the "one true way", Moslem or otherwise. It's worth keeping in mind that there are a myriad paths to the creative force of the universe. To tell people who differ in their interpretation of the path that they are wrong is the cause of much of the strife we see in the world today.
Borealis |
Hi, Borealis,
I see what you mean about nomadz reasoning being circular, but I'll venture to make a few points I think relevant to this thread (though the thread itself has diverged from all things strictly TEFL).
The first point is the most obvious: in stating that there are "myriad paths to the creative force of the universe," plurality is implied, and this plurality creates the illusion of inclusivity--the statement speaks for everyone and is irrefutable. Nonetheless, you're making assertions (for instance, that there are myriad paths to anything; that there is a creative force in the universe; that there is a universe). When you admonish nomadz, you are in effect telling him that he is wrong and pushing your own belief of what is right, thus possibly causing "much of the strife we see in the world today."
The second point is touched about elsewhere in this thread, when someone speaks of the ME as being permeated with religion. If we can move away from the strictly nominal, we might begin to agree that what we call religion shares many features of any given ideology, including scientism, liberalism, capitalism, communism, etc. Science is probably the be example of the Western World's form of religion. We take its absolute objectivity for granted, and bow down to it far more often than once a week or five times a day. When nomadz says that "we know it's [Islam] a fact because we believe it to be a fact," the reasoning is not consequential, but we reason in that exact same way in our relationship to science: a fact is a fact because it is a fact; it has been proven because it has been proven. We call our religion "Science" and believe in it with what can aptly be called "blinkered arrogance." If you want to pursue this chain of thought, I'd recommend reading Paul Feyerabend. He puts an interesting spin on the claims made by science as the exclusive holder of absolute truth. Again, I'm not a Muslim and would not choose to live according to that faith, but I don't see a qualitative difference between one sets of assertions over another when both sets are self-justificatory. Everything, in the end, comes down to an act or series of faith. How that faith takes shape, who inculcates it and why, its nature and meaning--these are different questions.
Yrs,
Thel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
veiledsentiments
Joined: 20 Feb 2003
Posts: 17644
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 27, 2006 2:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
Discussing a topic like this in the classroom would be a quick way to lose a job in the Middle East. I'd say that you have never been there. Right?
You are free to not be offended by any terms, just as many of the rest of us are free to be offended. To be honest most religions succeed in offending me regularly... so it goes.
VS |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thel
Joined: 24 Dec 2006
Posts: 52
Location: Kitchen table
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 27, 2006 4:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| veiledsentiments wrote: |
Discussing a topic like this in the classroom would be a quick way to lose a job in the Middle East. I'd say that you have never been there. Right?
You are free to not be offended by any terms, just as many of the rest of us are free to be offended. To be honest most religions succeed in offending me regularly... so it goes.
VS |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thel
Joined: 24 Dec 2006
Posts: 52
Location: Kitchen table
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 27, 2006 4:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
Sorry for the mis-post above, VS. I had just said that you're right, I've never been to the ME. I guess scepticism in certain areas isn't much appreciated there. Pity. Before more or less deciding on Korea, we had seriously entertained going to Qatar, Saudi or Egypt (especially Egypt, for obvious cultural reasons...some entertaining fellow named "Thrifty" griped often about life there, but magic must be there).
Regarding the freedom to be offended or not: point taken. Though it seems to me more like a case of choicelessness than freedom. Whatever the case, and as you say, so it goes.
Cheers,
Thel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
007
Joined: 30 Oct 2006
Posts: 2684
Location: UK/Veteran of the Magic Kingdom
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 27, 2006 6:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Thel wrote: |
| ....the OP says that Muslims believe we are all born Muslim, so that any claim to the religion subsequent to one's birth is indeed a case of reversion. |
I think there is a mis-understanding about "we are all born Muslims .."�..In fact the prophet (PBUH) in one of his Hadith (saying) said that "any child is born natural (or by nature), and is up to his father and mother how they are going to 'mould' or 'shape' their child, if they are Christian, the child will be brought-up as a Christian, if they are Jewish, the child will be brought-up as a Jewish, and if they are Muslim, the child will be brought-up as a Muslim, etc. "
So, I think at the end it is the family environment and culture which affect a person's life, tradition, and religion.
But, when the child is grown up and become an adult, then he will use his brain to judge things, including his tradition and religion, and he may decide at one time in his lifetime, to change his faith or his concept of life, according to his conviction. An here the mind (or the brain) plays a big role in one's decision.
So, at the end, I think it is up to the human being to make his mind and to choose the way or the path he thinks is the right one (matter of conviction).
In fact, in Islam, human beings are asked to use their minds in thinking about all things in this life, with some limitations. The human being is a created being and he can not know everything. For example, the mind and the science cannot understand, or at leat did not discover, the explanation for the soul, death, and other things which still unsolvable!
| Quote: |
| �. If we can move away from the strictly nominal, we might begin to agree that what we call religion shares many features of any given ideology, including scientism, liberalism, capitalism, communism, etc. Science is probably the be example of the Western World's form of religion. We take its absolute objectivity for granted, and bow down to it far more often than once a week or five times a day. When nomadz says that "we know it's [Islam] a fact because we believe it to be a fact," the reasoning is not consequential, but we reason in that exact same way in our relationship to science: a fact is a fact because it is a fact; it has been proven because it has been proven. We call our religion "Science" and believe in it with what can aptly be called "blinkered arrogance. |
I do not think you can compare religion with other ideologies like capitalism or liberalism. Because religion deals with faith, spirituality, and the relationship between man and God (for the believers). Whereas ideology like capitalism or communism is a form of thinking, and a collection of ideas, and does not involve spirituality or belief.
"religion is a communal system for the coherence of belief �typically focused on a system of thought, unseen being, person, or object, that is considered to be supernatural, sacred, divine, or of the highest truth" (Wikipedia).
And science is not a way of religion, science is a science, Here is a typical dictionary definition of Science: "The observation, identification, description, experimental investigation [scientific method], and theoretical explanation of phenomena. Such activities restricted to a class of natural phenomena. Such activities applied to an object of inquiry or study." (http://www.journaloftheoretics.com/Editorials/Vol-1/) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thel
Joined: 24 Dec 2006
Posts: 52
Location: Kitchen table
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 27, 2006 9:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| 007 wrote: |
| Thel wrote: |
| ....the OP says that Muslims believe we are all born Muslim, so that any claim to the religion subsequent to one's birth is indeed a case of reversion. |
I think there is a mis-understanding about "we are all born Muslims .."�..In fact the prophet (PBUH) in one of his Hadith (saying) said that "any child is born natural (or by nature), and is up to his father and mother how they are going to 'mould' or 'shape' their child, if they are Christian, the child will be brought-up as a Christian, if they are Jewish, the child will be brought-up as a Jewish, and if they are Muslim, the child will be brought-up as a Muslim, etc. "
So, I think at the end it is the family environment and culture which affect a person's life, tradition, and religion.
But, when the child is grown up and become an adult, then he will use his brain to judge things, including his tradition and religion, and he may decide at one time in his lifetime, to change his faith or his concept of life, according to his conviction. An here the mind (or the brain) plays a big role in one's decision.
So, at the end, I think it is up to the human being to make his mind and to choose the way or the path he thinks is the right one (matter of conviction).
In fact, in Islam, human beings are asked to use their minds in thinking about all things in this life, with some limitations. The human being is a created being and he can not know everything. For example, the mind and the science cannot understand, or at leat did not discover, the explanation for the soul, death, and other things which still unsolvable!
| Quote: |
| �. If we can move away from the strictly nominal, we might begin to agree that what we call religion shares many features of any given ideology, including scientism, liberalism, capitalism, communism, etc. Science is probably the be example of the Western World's form of religion. We take its absolute objectivity for granted, and bow down to it far more often than once a week or five times a day. When nomadz says that "we know it's [Islam] a fact because we believe it to be a fact," the reasoning is not consequential, but we reason in that exact same way in our relationship to science: a fact is a fact because it is a fact; it has been proven because it has been proven. We call our religion "Science" and believe in it with what can aptly be called "blinkered arrogance. |
I do not think you can compare religion with other ideologies like capitalism or liberalism. Because religion deals with faith, spirituality, and the relationship between man and God (for the believers). Whereas ideology like capitalism or communism is a form of thinking, and a collection of ideas, and does not involve spirituality or belief.
"religion is a communal system for the coherence of belief �typically focused on a system of thought, unseen being, person, or object, that is considered to be supernatural, sacred, divine, or of the highest truth" (Wikipedia).
Hi 007,
My understanding is that science is, overlaps with, or is supported by, ideology. And ideology of any sort involves faith. Everything does. Any economic, sociological, historical or political theory or manifest organization relies upon a legion of irreducible tenets. At the point of irreducibility lies faith. As it happens, the nodes of faith linking the ideas that ultimately fall under the rubric of Some Ideology obscure the reality that faith is nonetheless the underpinning of that ideology. With religion, rather than multiple points of faith, we have a small number of propositions, which makes the underlying faith necessary to sustain them much easier to discern (for instance, God exists; whereas, taking communism, whatever the stripe, innumerable ideas link up to create the illusion of some self-contained and all-encompassing system, even though each idea in and of itself must rely on faith, faith in the idea as it is, and faith in the other ideas that necessarily support the given one).
And science is not a way of religion, science is a science, Here is a typical dictionary definition of Science: "The observation, identification, description, experimental investigation [scientific method], and theoretical explanation of phenomena. Such activities restricted to a class of natural phenomena. Such activities applied to an object of inquiry or study." (http://www.journaloftheoretics.com/Editorials/Vol-1/) |
I'm familiar with the definition of science and have learned the scientific method. One thing that speaks in favour of the point I meant to express is the word "theoretical" in that definition. Few dispute that the theory of evolution possesses irrefutable explanatory power, yet it is a theory; it must be a theory. And "theory" can be translated, without much of a stretch, into "faith-based." The distinction made between spirituality (or religion) and science largely boils down to this: religion makes claims on an extra-natural explanation for how and why things are; science restricts itself to the natural. But each step along the scientific process involves spirituality insofar as it demands a constant faith in the ability it has to perceive a thing, and even that the thing exists. It was once thought that some invisible "ether" mediated energy; this idea was held as scientific and was arrived at to resolve some physical mystery I now can't remember. This was certainly an act of faith.
It seems to me that people respond to science very much as ancients (and modern religious people) respond to God. Each is viewed as an unassailable authority governing all of existence. Each has its "holy men" (whether priest, Brahmin, scientist, what have you); and each describes itself in absolutist terms; that is, claims that it is the sole proprietor of absolute truth. I understand what you mean in this post, but I guess I find them similar in how they affect and effect people; and in how they help organize our society. My take on is susceptible to some undermining scrutiny, but that's where I'm coming from now.
This is interesting.
Thel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
This page is maintained by the one and only Dave Sperling.
Contact Dave's ESL Cafe
Copyright © 2018 Dave Sperling. All Rights Reserved.
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
