"As trialled the the ethics classes will allow children to learn to think, their IQ will improve and bad behaviour will be substantially reduced. Those benefits will be long lasting for them and for society."

Are you still quoting Haddad or is that your idea? If so, I would be curious to see the evidence to back this up. As a teacher with more than 20 years experience, it will revolutionise how I teach if you can...

Hmmmm. That MindBodySpirit malarkey didn't do much for your temper, did it Boaz?

>>Children who simply study 'Ethics' learn "if it feels good and I can get away with it.. go for it"<<

I know that you sincerely would like to believe that. But it simply ain't so.

All you have done, in fact, with your frivolous - and somewhat lop-sided - scenario, is to demonstrate how little you understand about ethics, and even less about ethics teaching.

Ethics has nothing to do with "do as I say". Even in Confucius' time, the Golden Rule was "never impose on others what you would not choose
for yourself", which was not a bad starting point from which to discuss the consequences of various behaviours and their impact on society.

Here's a more modern example, taken from an interview with a lecturer on "ethics and international affairs"

"A large part of the exercise is to persuade students that you're not trying to teach them what they ought to think about a particular topic. What you're trying to do, rather, is to get them to address ethical issues in a systematic, scholarly way, to think through the implications of the positions they hold, and to see how those positions would work in more general terms."

In other words, it allows people to work out for themselves that ethics are a critical component of the glue that provides moral cohesion between members of societies.

As you freely admit, simply "knowing" doesn't turn people to good. There are sufficient examples from your own religion to confirm that. But awareness - particularly that which you have arrived at under your own steam, as it were - puts you well on the path.

Quite outstanding mental gymnastics there Pericles :)

I'ts not temper at work, it's lack of time. Short and to the point for the next few days.

Mental gymnastics notwithstanding, you know as well as I do that ultimately secular ethics boils down to what you think you can get away with.

We can argue this point when I've got more time, but we have covered this ground in the past..

YABBY.. pull those nippers back mate.. ur on the wrong track.

"Hardly so, Boaz. Threatening them with hellfire if they misbehave
and promising them a ticket to heaven if they comply, is just
brainwashing them into the church doctrine of hope and fear."

You are telling us more about your own upbringing or experience rather than the Christian position on ethics.

It's reallllly simple.

1/ Love God first
2/ Love your neighbour.

Trying to do '2' without 1 is like a car without brakes or an engine. Give it a push and woooooshhhhh off it goes out of control.
The statutes God has given is are all summed up by "2", but if we don't recognize that they come from someone bigger than us or deny the first outright, then logically and reasonably we are left with our own choice.

HELLFIRE...seeing as you mentioned it, I'll elaborate a bit. Jesus spoke of
a) A wide and easy road which leads to destruction.
b) A narrow hard road which leads to salvation.

The 'Gospel' we proclaim is a balance between "a" and "b". It would be irresponsible to proclaim the narrow road without mentioning the wide one. "a" is a statement of 'fact' not a threat.
"b" is a statement of fact also, one with a glorious end.

rational-debate
The thoughts expressed were my own very brief summation of the report on a trial conducted in Scotland. The report could be found at;
http://www.rotherham-gt.co.uk/docs/p4c/impact2.doc
But, if you have trouble ask the editor of OLO to supply your email address and I will forward you my file copy as an attachment.
The NSW trial was based on the Clackmannanshire trial. Prof. Phil Cam who devised the content for the NSW Ethics Trial has been involved with the Clackmannan school authority.
Briefly, sixteen months of one hour per week of philosophical discussion of open ended questions led to an increase of 6.5 units in the cognitive ability of the trial classes, virtual elimination of bad in class and schoolyard behaviour such as bullying by the trial class students and a doubling of communication in both directions between students and teachers. There were no measurable improvements in the control classes.
Re-testing, two or so years after the trial, showed the two groups had further diverged with no reinforcement!In other words the benefits are likely to last a lifetime and benefit future partners and offspring, at least in MHO.
From memory 190 students were involved and divided into two groups of nearly the same size.

No, Boaz, not really.

>> you know as well as I do that ultimately secular ethics boils down to what you think you can get away with.<<

That's where you get the story wrong, every single time.

I strongly suggest that you do some proper research into what ethics education actually consists of, in real life, and at the same time how ethics relate to people's value systems.

I know you hate to do these things because i) you are indeed far too busy and ii) you already know the answers.

But you might, just possibly, learn something.

Hey, who am I kidding, right?

"the benefits are likely to last a lifetime and benefit future partners and offspring".

Personally I believe that such a dramatic change could only occur as a result of the personal touch and example of the particular teacher, rather than by the course-material. Sadly though, I was not able to download that document in order to find out more about that teacher.

But let us assume for now that it is indeed the course-material which does the magic. Let us further assume that one needs to be of a certain age (not too young nor too old) in order to receive the full benefits of this ethics-course - this raises a serious ethical dilemma:

Should a student from the ethics-study group tell students from the control-group about what they studied in ethics-class?

If s/he does, then the trial would fail, indicating no difference, thus the project will be dropped.
It s/he doesn't, then the control-group students, along with their partners and offspring, would miss on a lifetime benefit.