English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

22 answers

Not really. The role of a teacher is giving directions... balancing out the way of acquiring knowledge... and not necessarily to provide full ready-made answers in absolutism!

Give me an answer and I can always give you a better one. :)

There are questions for which we all just speculate here..... for example in relationships section. There are things for which there are no universal recipees. Therefore, it is good to read differing views on the same issue and pick good ideas for future improvement...

2006-06-16 09:34:27 · answer #1 · answered by Hibernating Ladybird 4 · 0 0

All you have done is restate a portion of Plato's Cave Allegory, the part about the ment tied to the rock looking at the shadows thinking they are the truth wen in fact they are only images of the forms that the people cannot see behind the rock. It is not until one goes outside the cave that one sees the truth and can bring it back into the cave and tell the people tied to the rock that they were wrong. I get that, and yet I get the fact people will teach things they don't know because they don't know they dont know things. And still they try to know things they don't know. It is all they have available to them to do. It is like questions of life and death, death being the big rock that prevents you from seeing what objects are behind it. You can't speak with any certainty what lies beyond death until you have been there and returned and even then why should the people in the cave believe you? Knowing and disbelieving are always at odds with each other, as are knowing and thinking. Come to think about it i am finding a problem in the to and from parts of this statement. I am coming back from a place I have never been, roughly translated, I am coming back from an impossibility. I am teaching what I don't know, a possibility. The problem is it is possible for me to teach what I don't know if i get it right regardless. The fact is I am right. Another fact is I don't know that. So how are the two tries the same? Could it be that the from should be a to? You can come back to somewhere you haven't been. It doesn't seem that way but it should be possible in the since of a limit approaching but not actually reaching its deatination, mush like the teaching approaches knowing without reaching understanding. Give it a thought it might make more sense.

2006-06-25 09:46:44 · answer #2 · answered by LORD Z 7 · 0 0

Humanity has not been to it's end. Yet I certainly hope that someone amoung us can, in some way teach us how to not achieve that end.
If in deed it were impossible to teach without first knowing, then what is the purpose of a question, one must ask before one can answer.
If I learn a thing, even if by trial and error, and another observses my doing so, and there by learns this same thing. Have I not indeed taught without knowing? This has happened throught out time, and will continue to happen so long as we shall exist.
If I am taught that doing this thing will cause my death, and I cease doing that thing, have I not in essence come back from that fate/place that I had not yet been?
Answering questions with questions, yes, I know, I hate that too.

2006-06-29 12:45:04 · answer #3 · answered by Jeri 2 · 0 0

Actually it's more like being there for the first time as a tour director. It's not always easy to stay in front of the group, but if you cram the night ahead you might pull it off--especially if you are good a building relationships, rapport, collaborative connections--using teaching methods.

I mean, you could also make the argument that if you are an expert, but you don't know how to teach it's like trying to walk a group of people bare foot over a mile long pathway paved in chards of glass. That isn't exactly ideal either, is it?

Ideally you know how to teach and what you are talking about.

2006-06-16 23:47:29 · answer #4 · answered by adieu 6 · 0 0

From where I've been reading, that is what Socrates was doing. By asking a series of well constructed questions (according to Plato) he could pull answers out of his students. They didn't know and they ended up coming back from where they hadn't been.

If children of dysfunctional families haven't had their intellect beaten out of them, they don't raise their children the way they were raised.

It takes an understanding person willing to question the way life is to develop a life they want and have the sense to find others to help.

So in a way, these parents teach their children what they didn't know and came back from where they don't ever want to go again.

2006-06-28 23:11:44 · answer #5 · answered by Ding-Ding 7 · 0 0

"No matter where you are, that's where you'll be"!

Why would anyone even try to TEACH something they didn't know? I'm certain it happens all the time! School teachers, parents!!! etc..... And the end result issssssss????? Our wonderful world as we know and love it today! :):):)

Coming back from a place we haven't been is exactly what we as human beings are trying to do! And you're statement in the question field is absolutely right!

2006-06-29 00:16:02 · answer #6 · answered by Izen G 5 · 0 0

Only if your mind was wandering in the past or future. If you are in the here and now, present then it should be more like going somewhere you haven't been and being instructed, on the fly, on how to get there!

2006-06-28 20:38:01 · answer #7 · answered by Brian R 2 · 0 0

Or like asking a question by making a statement.

2006-06-29 18:41:43 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I like this quote. It makes perfect sense and describes people in general.

2006-06-16 16:30:32 · answer #9 · answered by Ms.Help 3 · 0 0

It mean's that you should never say something that you don't know if it's the actual truth. Only say the things that you know are true.

2006-06-30 17:46:31 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers