AC Grayling's new college

[sandwiches]

Seriously, would you trust this man with your child's education?:

www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/guest-voices/post/college-should-teach-how-to-think-not-what-to-think/2011/08/31/gIQAjA9PsJ_blog.html#pagebreak

College should teach how to think, not what to think
By AC Grayling

"In my view philosophy is the opposite of religion; it explores, debates, speculates, proposes and rejects answers to, the great questions of life and the universe -- whereas the religions claim to have the answers already. It is a striking fact that there is much less diversity of opinion among the schools of philosophy on these matters than there are among the religions of the world, each claiming to have the right answers despite the fact that so many of those proffered answers, when pushed to the limit, blaspheme the answers given by the others...

But at any rate the New College of the Humanities is not an atheistic college; it is a college dedicated to careful thought and responsible argument, based on evidence and reason, aimed at achieving greater understanding of ourselves and our world."

If you got a free bottle of snake-oil that would be different.

[merkavah12]

Well, I'll give him this much: he's a braver man than I thought. I'm glad those Marxist maniacs didn't scare him off.

[James Hannam]

I have to admit that I am a big supporter of Grayling's new venture. The university sector in the UK badly needs shaking up and his college makes a great start doing that. We need more private college's to loosen the state's stranglehold on higher education.

Don't worry about the students turning into mini-Dawkins. They will be bright kids who can make their own minds up. Heck, if I could I'd be applying for a job teaching there. It sounds an excellent place to work.

Best wishes

James

[dannym]

Aug 31, 2011 20:28:13 GMT sandwiches said:

By AC Grayling

"In my view philosophy is the opposite of religion; it explores, debates, speculates, proposes and rejects answers to, the great questions of life and the universe -- whereas the religions claim to have the answers already. It is a striking fact that there is much less diversity of opinion among the schools of philosophy on these matters than there are among the religions of the world, each claiming to have the right answers despite the fact that so many of those proffered answers, when pushed to the limit, blaspheme the answers given by the others

Fallacious. The implication here is that exploration, debate, speculation, proposition and rejection of answers. . . are all in direct opposition to religion. Speaking for Christianity, Grayling’s assumptions here are plain false. This is the type of nonsense I’d expect from a hot-headed student who hasn’t really read much.