Dear CJ,

I came across this quote from the economist and
author Tor Hundloe who I thought gives a very
good outline for why teaching philosophy would
be an excellent idea in our schools. He writes:

"At some time in our distant past we started on a
never-ending journey of asking questions about the
world we live in. As the enduring myths from the
four corners of the globe show, two matters exercised
pre-modern people. One was nature. We needed rain.
We needed sunshine. We didn't want destructive storms
and floods and droughts. There were in all societies
gods who made these things happen. The other thing to
exercise our minds were human relationships.

Theft, murder, incest and many other human possibilities
were detrimental to the human pursuit of health and happiness.
We invented gods who would tempt us, and others who would
turn us away from uncivil behaviour. As in our minds, we had
those gods fight with each other. We invented gods who were
benevolent and those who were malevolent. Slowly, gradually
our brains grew in size, as our knowledge accumulated,
we moved from the mystical to the empirical; and then
philosophy was born.

Today our understanding of the world we live in, our
understanding of our social, economic and political
relationships, and our understanding of our personal
relationships (how we should live) are all traceable back to
the early days of philosophy...All of us practice philosophy
at some level when we consider how we should relate to our
fellows, who we should vote for, or what to do about the
threat of climate change. We have been thinking about issues
in a rational way since the time of the first philosopher..."

The hole in CJ's argument, from my perspective is assumption that RI classes teach anything but dogma. Which was both my and our children's experience ...they opted out after 1&2 lessons. The youngest simply refused to attend lessons.

Bronwyn's idea doesn't make the dubious assumption that Christian children in all schools don't need ethics.

However, the practical implementing the of exclusion of RI is unfortunately almost impossible.

I do believe a prerequisite of practical Philosophy (as opposed to Learning about the various schools there of, techniques and jargon etc.)would help the children to think and benefit Australia would be appropriate.

Another option might be a unit of a structured comparative religions wouldn't go astray. It was available as an HSC topic some years in Victoria. From memory it was an interesting topic.

My favoured option could be current events but from different national and regional perspectives. e.g. Rupee News (http://rupeenews.com/ a Pakistani take on the world. The difference between what our media tells us and the details on this site says about the Afghan war compete with reports related facts, attitudes, interrelations and effects of the various 'stans is fascinating.

The hole in CJ is not in his argument but the gaping hole in his mind, brought about by a total misunderstanding of the Holy scriptures, and how they cover the field, when it comes to ethics and morality. In this respect many Pastors and Chaplains come in for accusations of serious dereliction of duty, because they are like the people referred to in the Holy Bible, Jesus said that the blind lead each other into the ditch. Blinded to reality, they have allowed the people to be led into believing a corporation is a desirable state, and that legislation can exempt people from the necessity to have a soul. The very essence of a soul is a conscience, and the essence of ethics is to give the soul peace.

The State by legislation has created corporations of us all, whereas we are in reality living individuals. As corporations we can have no mind of our own, but must blindly obey the dictates of Parliament, and Statute Law. This is necessary for the heartless State must be able to steal to sustain itself, or it will perish. It can only steal from a corporation, because an individual, by reference to the Holy Bible, has a soul, and can only be judged by the Holy Ghost.

This week I met a Muslim, whose argument that he is a living breathing individual, outside the jurisdiction of State Magistrates, has all of them confused and unable to deal with him. He says that the State has made him a corporation, and this is against the teachings of Allah. The conscience of the magistrate is engaged, and he must let the Muslim go. If Christians were taught the basis of Christianity, as thoroughly as this Muslim has been taught, there would be no poverty in Australia.

There is light being cast upon reality, by the million or so Muslims in Australia. They do not like being treated as corporations, entities as defined in Queensland, and they are confusing State Magistrates by their theology in its similarity to Christianity. Jury trial is Christianity

It isn't a bad idea to establish a generic Philosophy class to encourage and stimulate students to think about ethical issues.

If religion once provided a framework for morality/ethics (albeit rigid with it's own intolerances) there is a good argument for some more formal/informal lessons on Ethics ie. replacing formal religious instruction using 'fear' with a better way to, as PTB put it, to nourish the soul/conscience.

However, there is no point in teaching children to think if we don't also raise the bar on social expectations for behaviour. Having been exposed to both the public and private school systems there is much room for improvement in expectations in behavioural standards among students.

I am not arguing zero tolerance in the cases of children, but a more rigorous solution to reducing the level of bullying, disrespect and bad language. Manners and behaviour may sound trite but it is the foundation to creating a more tolerant and respectful society. Religious intolerance probably topping the list.

"Jesus said that the blind lead each other into the ditch."

I couldn't help laughing. Tell an atheist to walk into a ditch and they'll ask why. Tell a fundamentalist god wants them to walk into a ditch and they'll offer to blind themselves on their way in.

What would a modern 'ethics' class consist of?
Topics such as 'Your legal rights at 16'; 'Safe Sex and Contraception'; 'Consent: the essence of Morality'; 'Friends, the New Family' etc...
I'm attracted to the idea, but at High School level I feel the topics would be rather shallow.