Do you think a Science teacher should teach that life is a dichotomy: Matter is living or it's dead.?

Question

Plants produce seeds or they don't, an element is either metal or it is not.
She teaches them that they have choices in life for which they are solely responsible for...do homework or not...behave or not...be good or bad.
She goes on to say: " Laws are supposed to be followed or there are consequences to those who choose to disobey. Murder is allowed or not. Vandalism is allowed or not...
Speed limits are allowed or not.
I find this hard to accept and wonder if she should be teaching psychology instead.
If truly life was this way we wouldn't need so many lawyers.
To me life has too many gray areas...Life is not just black and white.

I meant sociology and not psychology.

This teacher was highlighted in an article on the Red Light camera's installed in my city.
The Red Light program was put in place to catch those runners that cross into traffic. There is a $100. fine for first offense.

In this particular location a car ran into a cab and killed the occupants. I am for almost any program that will stop those runners.

My issue was that I was being fined the same amount because I made a right turn and was caught by camera as the light to turn went off.

There is no way that I would come in contact with another car because as you will notice when you drive in an intersection such as this the only other traffic that is moving is from the cross traffic making a left turn on the arrow.

The rhetoric coming from the Mayor is that the
cameras are saving lives.

I believe the city is taking advantage of this "saving lives" to a higher level....to make money.

Am I guilty and if yes than how guilty am I?

The full $100. or less?

Answer 1

She's right. She's telling her students the guidelines for living in a civilised society. The information you have provided on her does not list any grey areas, the topics you have listed are indeed black and white. Follow the rules or accept the consequences - what is wrong with that? It's true. If you speed while driving, the police officer isn't going to care why you were speeding, the fact remains that you were speeding, therefor breaking the law, therefore you get a ticket and have to face all of the other consequences for the decision you made to break a law. Ignorance is not a plea for innocence, and EVERYONE needs to know this. I think what she's doing is great, and what any responsible citizen would do. You're making a big deal out of nothing, and sorry but, she is doing the right thing. She's doing society a big favour, get off her case.

Answer 2

There are two sides to every issue. There is a truth to both theories, you see. Look at a quarter. When you flip it, to either get a head or a tail right. But neither the head or the tail is the whole quarter... there is silver (or gray--ahem) area in between. The whole quarter is head and tail, and gray area. The plants either produce seeds or they dont, but the neither the capability to produce a seed, or incapability are the product of the essence of a plant's life story. We do have a choice to accept to be good or to be bad... but this choice is not who we are... we are more than our choices, our choices are byproducts of who we are at the moment, what we have learned and experienced, and our attempts to be something more whether the choice is wise or unwise, is irrelevent. Once we make a choice, we move into a new existence, due to whatever effect was caused by our action or inaction, and then we are continually faced with a new series of choices to make, in result to our change in circumstance, and change in circumstance is always present, never faltering. She is correct to state that vandalism is either allowed or not, because she is looking at the external component of reality, whereas the gray area you are referring to is an internal component. A person keen on the gray area will want to know why the need for vandalism was present in the first place, rather than whether or not vandalism is enforced. You see, if we could eliminate the need between the two choices of vandalism or no vandilism, by structurally applying a system where vandalism was unneccessary, we will have safely tackled the problem in the realm of what is seen as a gray area. A person in the gray area understands that in certain cases vandalism may be seen as necessary in order to protect ones'self, wheras the other points out the societal restriction. Yet, they are also part of the problem, because rather than eliminating the need to vandalize, they simply state not to do so, but the need or at the very least, the desire to vandalize still remain, and the problem is not cured.

Answer 3

It sounds like your teach is just trying to get you to think for yourself. The very nature of your question sounds as if it is working.

Answer 4

life is black and white - do this and that happens
it really is very predictable and easy to change if you listen and learn along the way

Answer 5

Well, life is all about choices...

Answer 6

you're right.........