Question...
ok... try to follow me... I have a philosophy question, but don't be scared... I don't think it is to deep... I think it is somewhat interesting...Term you need ... Existentialism meaning "existence preceeds essence". This means there is no purpose until you create it.
This semester I have been puzzled all semester with why many people base a childs value based on their actions. Now I completely understand having difficulty working with a child or becoming frustrated, even angry, with a child... believe me I have five students who shock the school based on their behavior. But they honestly don't think mis-behaving students are valuable. This morning I began rereaching "Don't Waste Your Life" by: John Piper (an excellent book by the way... my church here read it together last year)... anyway.... In the first chapter he discusses existentialism a little bit. This is the note I wrote down after I read this and I haven't been able to stop thinking about it.
"Does exestentialism effect the way we view students? If existence preceeds essence then the child has no value until he acts valuable. There is no intrinsic value in that child. If he never acts valuable then he isn't valuable. My Christian worldview states that a child is valuable because he is made in the image of God. He or she is also a gift from that same God"
Does this make sense to anyone? Is exestentialism what is causing the widespread belief that some children are not valuable?
I was observed again today:) The person who observed me today had never been to my class before. I just really enjoy how everyone who comes to my class says the same thing... "You have so many immature boys" "How do you handle this everyday?"
Well that is all... my thoughts for the day... Aren't you all glad you don't have to live in this head? :)
1 Comments:
Hi,
I can totally relate to your train of thought. Taking it even further, it makes one wonder whether existentialism and an existentialist view on life are any better than the notion that certain peoples are inherently superior to others...referring to Nazi Germany, obviously, and their justification on eradicating human life that they didn't think "worth living". I would imagine that an existentialist view would similarly be able to justify elimination of life not considered worth living, but not because of an inherently superior nature but because a person who, say, is retarded, would then, in existentialist thinking, never be able to "be" because they would never be able to actually shape their existence in order to BE...do you happen to know what Sartre's answer to that is?
Post a Comment
<< Home