Calls for compulsory school Islam classes after axe attack

#1
http://www.thelocal.de/20160720/calls-fo...axe-attack

Local authorities are calling for classes on Islam to be brought in at schools across the country after a radicalized Muslim youth attacked passengers on a train with an axe on Monday. “It is appropriate to bring in classes on Islam in state schools or schools overseen by the state,” Gerd Landsberg, head of the association of local councils, told the Rheinische Post on Wednesday.

In this way the state can gain more control over the upbringing of Muslim youths, Landsberg said. On Monday evening, an attacker whom investigators believe was a 17-year-old refugee from Afghanistan, seriously wounded four people with an axe and is reported to have shouted "Allahu Akbar" (God is great) several times.

Terror group Isis later released a video in which the youth made threats in Pashto while holding a knife. Senior figures in the church had already called at the end of May for Islam classes to become compulsory at schools.

The head of the Evangelical Church in Germany (EKD), Heinrich Bedford-Strohm, said that religious education was the best way to immunize Muslim youths against the dangers of Islamist fundamentalism.

He also said he was in favour of Muslim religious associations taking over responsibility for providing this education, just as churches are responsible for religious education about Christianity.

Six of Germany’s 16 states currently offer classes in Islam at school.
Reply
#2
Not a new idea. I can remember it being recommended in Australia as well, a few years back.
Here's an article on the subject I read:
http://www.abc.net.au/religion/articles/...034311.htm

At the end of the day, all of the attention seeking behaviour in forms ranging from sympathetic discussion to armed conflict is achieving exactly what it meant to. Constants demands for attention are resulting in Islam becoming the spoilt brat of the religious world. Or that girl who resorts to flashing her tits on spring break.

It strikes me that the more extreme events occurring in the world as a result of this particular religion are achieving something in the west as well. If attention-seeking antics are indeed resulting in more discussion, "understanding" and a shift in thinking to the extent that the expansion of exposure to religion (in the form of more mosques, in this instance) is in fact an answer, then Islam is achieving its primary objective.
The more paranoid amongst us who have noticed it cannot help but consider the possibility of a multi-pronged master plan on the level of a John Le Carre novel.


Or, as Oscar Wilde would have it - "The only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about".
Reply
#3
This is not just a matter of a few people acting out, but one of world peace. I am fully in favor of religious education in public schools with a goal of finding common grounds. To me, it has always seemed obvious that to know God's truth requires studying all religious/spiritual beliefs and I can't think of anything that is more likely to reduce our conflicts.

For sure there needs to be an understanding that Judaism, Christianity, and Islam are basically the same belief. Then surely we need to understand the Palestinian situation or religious conflicts anywhere in the world. My goodness people kill each other because of these conflicts and is there a better way to stop this than education?
Reply
#4
What form should that education take, then?

The core concept inserting itself into religious discussion (albeit not isolated to it) is that understanding leads to tolerance. From this, it is somehow becoming universally understood (in the west) that tolerance is a positive thing, and something to be achieved, seemingly, at all costs.

Perhaps there should be more discussion regarding what form that cost will ultimately take.
Reply
#5
The 2012 Texas Republican agenda was to prevent public education from teaching the higher order thinking skills. This goes with Christian efforts to requiring textbooks to teach creationism along with evolution. presenting both as equally valid explanations. The reasoning for this, to protect Christian teachings and prevent questioning church and parental authority, assuming the parents are also Christians.

Before the 1958 change in education was as complete as it is today, I was told to do a paper on Islam in a southern, California school. Liberal education includes study of all things. Education for technology is radically different with serious social, economic and political ramifications.
Reply
#6
(Nov 16, 2016 05:01 PM)Carol Wrote: The 2012 Texas Republican agenda was to prevent public education from teaching the higher order thinking skills.  This goes with Christian efforts to requiring textbooks to teach creationism along with evolution. presenting both as equally valid explanations.   The reasoning for this, to protect Christian teachings and prevent questioning church and parental authority, assuming the parents are also Christians.

Before the 1958 change in education was as complete as it is today, I was told to do a paper on Islam in a southern, California school.  Liberal education includes study of all things.  Education for technology is radically different with serious social, economic and political ramifications.

There is no consensus among academics/educators as to how critical thinking could even effectively be taught. But that 2012 Texas agenda seemed to be focused on getting rid of critical theory (which is not equivalent to, nor even facilitates, critical thinking). Actually, critical theory does the oppose of improving critical thinking skills, since it presumes a negative bias toward all status quo indiscriminately. Higher-order thinking skills is a teaching methodology "sometimes deliberately omitting direct instruction of traditional methods, facts, or knowledge", so that may not be what you would intuitively think the term means.

Students would likely still be told to do papers on Islam in California, since critical theory favors anything minority over anything majority. If Christianity is ever addressed, it is invariably as a negative, rather than neutral.

Basic skills education doesn't have any social, economic, or political ramifications, but HOTS education based on critical theory is indoctrination.
Reply
#7
(Nov 16, 2016 04:05 AM)Ben the Donkey Wrote: What form should that education take, then?

The core concept inserting itself into religious discussion (albeit not isolated to it) is that understanding leads to tolerance. From this, it is somehow becoming universally understood (in the west) that tolerance is a positive thing, and something to be achieved, seemingly, at all costs.

Perhaps there should be more discussion regarding what form that cost will ultimately take.

(Nov 17, 2016 01:33 AM)Syne Wrote:
(Nov 16, 2016 05:01 PM)Carol Wrote: The 2012 Texas Republican agenda was to prevent public education from teaching the higher order thinking skills.  This goes with Christian efforts to requiring textbooks to teach creationism along with evolution. presenting both as equally valid explanations.   The reasoning for this, to protect Christian teachings and prevent questioning church and parental authority, assuming the parents are also Christians.

Before the 1958 change in education was as complete as it is today, I was told to do a paper on Islam in a southern, California school.  Liberal education includes study of all things.  Education for technology is radically different with serious social, economic and political ramifications.

There is no consensus among academics/educators as to how critical thinking could even effectively be taught. But that 2012 Texas agenda seemed to be focused on getting rid of critical theory (which is not equivalent to, nor even facilitates, critical thinking). Actually, critical theory does the oppose of improving critical thinking skills, since it presumes a negative bias toward all status quo indiscriminately. Higher-order thinking skills is a teaching methodology "sometimes deliberately omitting direct instruction of traditional methods, facts, or knowledge", so that may not be what you would intuitively think the term means.

Students would likely still be told to do papers on Islam in California, since critical theory favors anything minority over anything majority. If Christianity is ever addressed, it is invariably as a negative, rather than neutral.

Basic skills education doesn't have any social, economic, or political ramifications, but HOTS education based on critical theory is indoctrination.

Where did you get that information? 

Replacing liberal education with education for technology did have huge social, economic and political ramifications, and if you disagree first begin with explaining liberal education, and the good reason for replacing it in 1958.

(Nov 16, 2016 04:05 AM)Ben the Donkey Wrote: What form should that education take, then?

The core concept inserting itself into religious discussion (albeit not isolated to it) is that understanding leads to tolerance. From this, it is somehow becoming universally understood (in the west) that tolerance is a positive thing, and something to be achieved, seemingly, at all costs.

Perhaps there should be more discussion regarding what form that cost will ultimately take.

Syne's argument kind of ruined the meaning of my reply to you Ben, so I will use a quote that I believe is one of the best explanations of the origin purpose of education in the US.  


Quote:"When we ask about the relationship of a liberal education to citizenship, we are asking a question with a long history in the Western philosophical tradition. We are drawing on Socrates' concept of 'the examined life,' on Aristotle's notions of reflective citizenship, and above all on Greek and Roman Stoic notions of an education that is 'liberal' in that it liberates the mind from bondage of habit and custom, producing people who can function with sensitivity and alertness as citizens of the whole world." --Martha Nussbaum, Cultivating Humanity: A Classical Defense of Reform in Liberal Education, 1998

That quote is from this web site  https://aacu.org/leap/what-is-a-liberal-education and it also quotes Jefferson and Lincoln.  We did not introduce vocational training until 1917 when we were preparing for WWII and at this point we retained liberal education and held education for citizenship as a priority.  However, in 1958 as part of the Military Industrial Complex actions taken by the Eisenhower administration, that education was replaced by education for technology for military and industrial purpose, and there are huge social, economic and political ramifications to this, leading to major social breakdown, reactionary politics, crippling the legislative process, and causing economic dependency.   I see this not only as a fight over which purpose education will serve but as a fight for the democracy we inherited.  [/quote]

I was in school when the act was implemented and in Los Angeles. We were living in fear of an atomic attack and my teachers were walking around in shock. Not until about 3rd period did a teacher explain the purpose of education had been changed. From now on students would be prepared for a technological society with unknown values, and we should thinking of how we will live when robots replace the need for labor. Too bad, our education did not continue preparing us as liberal education once did because here we are in an amoral society, with a very fragile economy, afraid of tomorrow, and facing a very unknown future with Trump. Kind of like Germany when Hitler took control of Germany.
Reply
#8
(Nov 17, 2016 04:49 PM)Carol Wrote:
(Nov 17, 2016 01:33 AM)Syne Wrote:
(Nov 16, 2016 05:01 PM)Carol Wrote: The 2012 Texas Republican agenda was to prevent public education from teaching the higher order thinking skills.  This goes with Christian efforts to requiring textbooks to teach creationism along with evolution. presenting both as equally valid explanations.   The reasoning for this, to protect Christian teachings and prevent questioning church and parental authority, assuming the parents are also Christians.

Before the 1958 change in education was as complete as it is today, I was told to do a paper on Islam in a southern, California school.  Liberal education includes study of all things.  Education for technology is radically different with serious social, economic and political ramifications.

There is no consensus among academics/educators as to how critical thinking could even effectively be taught. But that 2012 Texas agenda seemed to be focused on getting rid of critical theory (which is not equivalent to, nor even facilitates, critical thinking). Actually, critical theory does the opposite of improving critical thinking skills, since it presumes a negative bias toward all status quo indiscriminately. Higher-order thinking skills is a teaching methodology "sometimes deliberately omitting direct instruction of traditional methods, facts, or knowledge", so that may not be what you would intuitively think the term means.

Students would likely still be told to do papers on Islam in California, since critical theory favors anything minority over anything majority. If Christianity is ever addressed, it is invariably as a negative, rather than neutral.

Basic skills education doesn't have any social, economic, or political ramifications, but HOTS education based on critical theory is indoctrination.

Where did you get that information? 

Replacing liberal education with education for technology did have huge social, economic and political ramifications, and if you disagree first begin with explaining liberal education, and the good reason for replacing it in 1958.

Why on earth would I extend you that courtesy when you clearly do not. Instead of arguing points and citing sources to support them, you seem to prefer fallacies. So if you really want an adult discussion, you should cite sources that define what you mean by liberal education. After all, it was you who brought it up. Make your case. You cannot honestly debate from a position you assert but do not clearly define, otherwise you could simply claim a different definition at any time.

Once you've cited sources to define what you mean by liberal education (and how the NDEA was bad), then I'll be happy to have an honest and open discussion about it.
Reply
#9
the idea is clearly illogical and quantifiably insane on a premis of holding free will and a free mind to be the epicentre of mental construction.
Reply
#10
(Nov 17, 2016 04:49 PM)Carol Wrote: Syne's argument kind of ruined the meaning of my reply to you Ben, so I will use a quote that I believe is one of the best explanations of the origin purpose of education in the US.  


Quote:"When we ask about the relationship of a liberal education to citizenship, we are asking a question with a long history in the Western philosophical tradition. We are drawing on Socrates' concept of 'the examined life,' on Aristotle's notions of reflective citizenship, and above all on Greek and Roman Stoic notions of an education that is 'liberal' in that it liberates the mind from bondage of habit and custom, producing people who can function with sensitivity and alertness as citizens of the whole world." --Martha Nussbaum, Cultivating Humanity: A Classical Defense of Reform in Liberal Education, 1998

That quote is from this web site  https://aacu.org/leap/what-is-a-liberal-education and it also quotes Jefferson and Lincoln.  We did not introduce vocational training until 1917 when we were preparing for WWII and at this point we retained liberal education and held education for citizenship as a priority.  However, in 1958 as part of the Military Industrial Complex actions taken by the Eisenhower administration, that education was replaced by education for technology for military and industrial purpose, and there are huge social, economic and political ramifications to this, leading to major social breakdown, reactionary politics, crippling the legislative process, and causing economic dependency.   I see this not only as a fight over which purpose education will serve but as a fight for the democracy we inherited.

I was in school when the act was implemented and in Los Angeles.  We were living in fear of an atomic attack and my teachers were walking around in shock.  Not until about 3rd period did a teacher explain the purpose of education had been changed.  From now on students would be prepared for a technological society with unknown values, and we should thinking of how we will live when robots replace the need for labor.  Too bad, our education did not continue preparing us as liberal education once did because here we are in an amoral society, with a very fragile economy, afraid of tomorrow, and facing a very unknown future with Trump.   Kind of like Germany when Hitler took control of Germany.
I can see where you're coming from, and I agree with your premise in that education can lose grounding if it becomes too far removed from a philosophical basis - but if the issue is one of educational philosophy, why one religion in particular?
Teach philosophy, not religion. Anything else is simple pandering. 

Also, and probably OT - " but as a fight for the democracy we inherited" is a direct indictment on the left in the USA after the Trump election. Quite frankly, from an outside observers perspective, it seems to me that the American Left has completely lost sight of what their "democracy" is all about... one did not see the same reaction from the right when a black man was elected president not long ago.

The reaction from the Left in the USA recently has me more frightened for your countries future than the fact of Trump as president. And that is saying something.

Wanted to post more on the first point, but not tonight.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Eco-religion calls for mass psychedelic disobedience (spiritual political practices) C C 2 46 Aug 20, 2019 04:54 PM
Last Post: C C
  Is it time to look beyond the idea of liberal Islam? C C 3 402 Jan 5, 2018 06:36 PM
Last Post: Syne
  Islam’s hidden history of Muhammad images C C 0 578 Jun 24, 2015 06:51 AM
Last Post: C C
  11 reasons to explore Islam C C 0 403 Mar 14, 2015 06:49 AM
Last Post: C C
  Will Austria’s experiment with Islam work for grassroots believers? C C 0 382 Feb 27, 2015 04:34 AM
Last Post: C C
  "Why We Fight Islam" (European Politics) C C 0 496 Jan 20, 2015 07:10 AM
Last Post: C C
  How Does Islam Relate to Christianity and Judaism? C C 0 525 Oct 14, 2014 05:11 AM
Last Post: C C
  Does Abdellah Taïa feel a contradiction between Islam and homosexuality? C C 0 492 Oct 5, 2014 05:18 AM
Last Post: C C



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)