mrb22667@kansas.net wrote:
> I've never completely understood this criticism. So am I supposed to find a
> piece of music boring to listen to if I've heard it before and know how it plays
> out? I don't. Am I supposed to find chemistry class boring because I know what
> students need to learn each year (the same rudimentary fundamentals) and each
> year, students learn those things? I enjoy watching my student progress even
> though I already "know" the outcomes in general and the points they will
> struggle at in general. I allow myself into their world looking at the subject
> matter through fresh eyes and enjoy it along with them when the light bulbs come
> on about how things relate. Why is God supposedly not able to enjoy us in the
> same way only even better? If free-will was proven to not exist (courtesy of
> LaPlace's demon) then your hangup might be more understandable, but it isn't.
> In fact determinism seems to be six feet under at this point.
Hi Merv,
I like the teaching metaphor very much - so nice comments!
Just a hypothetical musing, however: let's just say determinism wasn't dead. And let's just say that you knew, without a shadow of a doubt, that when you taught a particular point to your students and they were able to grasp it - how, precisely, would that effect your enjoyment of teaching?
It seems to me the problem with determinists at this point is that they don't push their reasoning anywhere near far enough. They are determinists only when it suits them. So, for example, you never hear a determinist arguing "if it is INEVITABLE that Merv is going to get enjoyment out of teaching students, then why would God bother creating Merv at all?"
Perhaps because THAT question so obviously answers itself!
Blessings,
Murray
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Mon Nov 16 17:08:23 2009
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Nov 16 2009 - 17:08:23 EST