Chapter 5 Content

Part 2 Education’s Challenges
Chapter 5 Content
            Textbooks
                        On Free Enterprise vs. Socialist
                        On Morality and Religion
            Humanism in Language and Math
                        Language
                        Mathematics
            Language 7 Evolution – Tom Wolfe’s “Kingdom of Speech” 
           Critical Thinking and Political Correctness
                       Critical Thinking – Autos and Origins
                        Political Correctness

Part 2 Education Challenges – Chapter 5 Content

Textbooks

Today’s texts used in US public schools and even some Christian schools have substituted content in the academic subjects with values opposed to traditional Judeo-Christian principles. Rather than delving into curricula in depth, we will note the altered content in the chart below. It is up to the reader to inquire deeper. The best approach for an interested parent is to obtain texts in the area of interest and read them. I assure you, you will be shocked and surprised.

You will notice in every subject area the foundations are always opposites.  In every subject area, the Christian parent will have to counter the foundations the child is learning which is a very daunting task but not impossible.

The components removed and the items substituted are;

Examples of the content of some commonly used textbooks are listed below. I hope these examples will develop enough curiosity so that you will look further. Some of the themes woven through many of the reading series used in grades K through 8 include;

REBELLION AGAINST PARENTS (Glamorized and normalized),

VALUES CLARIFICATION (No moral absolutes, Pro-Choice),

ROLE ELIMINATIONS & REVERSALS (LGBTQ, Transsexual),

MAGIC & SUPERNATURALISM Without GOD (Harry Potter, ghosts, spirits, etc.),

DEATH, DYING, & REINCARNATION (suicide, infanticide, and euthanasia)

ONE-WORLD GOVERNMENT, PACIFISM, ANARCHY

EVOLUTION, ANIMALS EQUAL TO HUMANS. (Man = Animals. Origin “from pond scum to dirt”)

Most of these themes violate the religious faith of Christian parents and thus infringe on their First Amendment right to free exercise of religion. Here are some examples drawn from some commonly used texts.

A sixth-grade reader claims that the Declaration of Independence, Bill of Rights and the United States Constitution reflect Humanist values, but censored the fact that they contain Biblical principles.

High School Civics “Only with a world government is there a chance of saving the earth for humankind.” In practice, it is saving the earth from humankind.

Geography Text:  “The Communist governments provide many benefits for their workers such as health care, long vacations, and old age incomes. Personal incomes tend to be low, but expenses are also small.”

On Free Enterprise vs. Socialism:

“All problems are to be solved by the national government.”

Gary Newell said, “We are the only nation in the world that does not teach its economic system in its schools.”
US. News & World Report confirmed this in a recent study reported:

Of the students polled: 61% agreed, “The profit motive is not necessary to the survival of free enterprise
62% agreed, “Workers should not produce all they can.”
62% agreed, “The government has the responsibility to provide jobs.” The results of this survey demonstrate a substantial lack of knowledge by the students of the operation of the free enterprise system. In other words, it is the government’s responsibility, not mine. The more we teach “rights” of the individual, the more we foment revolution (guided and controlled by elite educators.) The more we teach responsibility of the individual, the closer to reformation of the body politic.

Author Note: Free Enterprise is the ONLY economic system that benefits everyone according to their abilities and efforts.  View this YouTube video to hear Milton Friedman explain why it’s the only system that free the masses from poverty. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RWsx1X8PV_A

On Morality and Religion:

Sociology: “There are exceptions to all moral laws depending on the situation. What is wrong in one instance is right in another.”

People and Culture: “Among all the hundreds of middle eastern gods, a very different kind of God emerged. This was the god of the Hebrews. Here is a Hebrews children’s story that tried to, explain how people began believing in this kind of God.” Most Jews and Christians find this explanation of the origin of their religion complete nonsense!!! 

These examples represent a small sample of the false, misleading, propaganda statements contained in most commonly used texts. In many cases, teachers use supplementary materials that include even more radical propaganda. These issues in public education were documented as early as the 1980s’ 

In 1985, Paul C. Vitz, Professor at New York University, published a study funded by the federal governmentthat confirms texts are severely deficient, being both biased and censored. From the back cover of his book describing the study:

“In 1983, Professor Vitz systematically examined ninety widely used elementary social studies texts, high school history texts, and primary readers to answer the questions:

Are public school textbooks biased?

Are they censored?

Funded by the National Institute of Education, his study revealed some startling findings: Religion, family values and certain political and economic positions are systematically omitted from children’s textbooks. Here are a few examples:

• In a total of 670 stories from grades three and six readers, not one reference to representative Protestant religious life was found.
• Sixth-grade social studies texts neglected, often to the point of severe distortion, Jewish and Christian historical contributions.
• Aggressive feminist themes were prominent in many of the texts.
• None of the social studies books dealing with modern American social life mentioned the words; ‘marriage,’ ‘husband’ or `wife’; nor did these books ever represent being a mother or a homemaker as a worthy and important role for a woman.”

Confirming our suspicion that the Humanist conspiracy that controls education has implemented their values in textbooks, Professor Vitz states in his preface; “Before I began researching this project, I was surprised by the amount of partisan political opposition to its funding. Although I was able to stay out of most of the political controversy, I received first-hand reports about the struggle.

Also, eliminated was the earliest American continent experiment in socialism, of record. The Pilgrims first tried to say all work, and share to all equally, not private property or wealth. That led to nearly being eliminated by starvation as people realized they could eat of the production of others without contributing. So they did not work as hard as they could, nor as smart as they could, and some did as little as possible to contribute. So many starved that winter, when goods were used up before the new growing season. IF a person chopped wood to keep his cabin warm the all for one and one for all practice allowed his “neighbors” to take what they thought they needed from him. Not many survived that winter. Even the meals consisted of a few morsels of food, a starvation fare.

Very simply, it was clear that the deeply entrenched liberal education establishment did not want to fund any research capable of challenging their views.”

Humanism in Language and Math

The Humanist Manifestos 1, 2 and 3 are the foundation of US public education. Children in public schools are taught every subject based on humanist presuppositions. Language, reading and mathematics remove absolutes and put relativism in its place. These two examples are from subject areas that most people would not expect to see a conflict of values, which is why I choose them.

Language:  Using phonics to teach language starts with the absolutes—letters and sounds—and goes to the relative—word and sentence formation.

They were, and maybe still are teaching reading by rote, so that whenever a new word is encountered, the student has no way to figure out how to read it out loud, how it should be pronounced. Could also point out a lot of weird English language words. For instance, read is pronounced two ways one for present tense and one for past tense. And the past tense sounds just like the color red. I’ll try to think of other examples.

The look/say method begins with the relative and never builds a foundation of letters, so reading skills never fully develop. Look/say readers are most often poorer readers than those taught by phonics. The absolute has to come before the relative because that’s how God designed it. As a child develops speech, he or she starts with sounds. Listening to a baby test his or her vocals is always interesting. We don’t expect them to begin with words. Word and sentence formation come after the development of the phonic sound of letters.

Mathematics:  In mathematics, particularly Common Core, problem-solving methods are taught with little or no time spent on the mechanics of numbers. The absolutes in math are the numbers and their relationships: adding, subtracting, multiplying, and dividing. Common Core starts with the relative and never teaches the absolutes of the basics of number structure. If you were born before the middle of the twentieth century, you probably remember memorizing the times’ tables which, along with addition and subtraction, are the absolutes that build the math system all the way to calculus. Without the foundation of numbers, the mind won’t ever “get it.” Math becomes a mystery instead of a problem-solving tool. As a parent, look at the Common Core math-teaching materials: number lines, unnecessarily complicated calculations, etc. I could go on with more issues in science, history, and other subjects, but these two examples are enough to illustrate the point that learning and knowledge are always built on a foundation of absolutes.

In US public schools, no presuppositions, except those compatible with humanism, are officially permitted. There are many Christian teachers in public schools that base their teaching on Christian principles, but it can only be done covertly. The “official” line is humanism. In the seventies, I taught for four summer sessions on Biblical Creation at the North Carolina Governor’s School. This “School” is a summer program for the top rising seniors in North Carolina public schools from across the whole state. In the fourth year, I took a poll, by a show of hands, how many believed in some form of Creation. As with the general population, about half raised their hands. The program’s stated purpose that allowed me to make my presentation was to “provoke critical thinking in the students.” This opportunity ended abruptly when several Humanist teachers in the room saw half the hands go up for Creation. My contact person, a Christian, later told me the teachers that ran the program were very upset because I had so many convincing arguments for Creation and against Evolution. The lesson here is, in public schools, you can teach, but only according to Humanist presuppositions—so much for the First Amendment in education. Showing only one side of an issue destroys critical thinking in students and makes “political correctness” the goal. They become advocates for whatever, without any reason or foundation for their beliefs. That’s relativism which is without absolutes.  The only absolute is that there are no absolutes and they are absolutely certain that all values are relative.

Language and Evolution – Tom Wolfe’s “Kingdom of Speech.”

Our uses of language, in both written and oral form, are the principle means we educate.  I diverge from Christian education here to include a weekly Blog (4/28/2017) to highlight the origin of language and its impossibility to have evolved from grunts of “primitive man.”  Tom Wolfe, in thuis book, focuses on two major points: 1) the development of the Theory of Evolution as developed in the 1850s by Darwin and others and 2) the surrender of linguistic scholars to explain how language could have appeared by Evolution.  The Tower of Babel is a far better explanation! Even before that, just as children learn from examples, hearing parents talking, and others. So, Adam and Eve learned from the daily evenings spent listening to Jesus talk with them.

Blog 2017 17 The Origin of Language Stumps Evolution.  Author Tom Wolfe in “The Kingdom of Speech.”

Many of my BLOGs have dealt with the impossibility of Evolution and the credibility of Biblical Creation (In six days, approximately 6,000 years ago) in the area of science but answering the question of where we came from is more than a just a scientific one.  It encompasses all the nature of humankind because we’re made in God’s image.  This week I’m deviating from my usual blog to review a book.  In The Kingdom of Speech, author Tom Wolfe makes a compelling case against Evolution based on the origin of human language.   In the early pages, Wolfe makes the point that ALL attempts to explain how language could evolve have failed.  In a 2016 article, eight of the world’s most prominent Evolutionists conceded total defeat.  In his, closing Wolfe states “To say that animals evolved into man is like saying that Carrara marble evolved into Michelangelo’s David.”

Back cover: “Language in all its forms advanced man far beyond the boundaries of natural selection, allowing him to think abstractly and plan ahead (no animal was capable of it); measure things and record measurements for later (no animal was capable of it); comprehend space and time, God, freedom, and immortality; and remove items from Nature to create artifacts, whether axes or algebra. No animal could even begin to do any such thing. Darwin’s doctrine of natural selection couldn’t deal with artifacts, which were by definition unnatural, or with the mother of all artifacts, which was the Word. The inexplicable power of the Word—speech, language—was driving him crazy.”  —from The Kingdom of Speech

Background: First there was the word. Or was there?  Before Tom Wolfe was a bestselling novelist, he was a groundbreaking journalist. Now the maestro storyteller turns his attention to the mystery behind the creation of his own most valuable tool: language. In The Kingdom of Speech, Wolfe makes the captivating, paradigm-shifting argument that speech — not evolution—is responsible for humanity’s complex societies and achievements. From Alfred Russell Wallace, the self-taught Englishman who beat Charles Darwin to the theory of natural selection but later renounced it for its inability to explain human speech, to the Neo-Darwinists, who for years argued that there is a language “organ” in the human brain, Wolfe examines how science has repeatedly tried and failed to account for man’s gift of gab. Flash forward to the present day and the controversial work of another outsider, anthropologist Daniel Everett. After thirty years of studying a tribe isolated deep in the jungles of the Amazon, Everett revealed a people whose prehistoric level of speech had led to a society without religion, ceremonies, hierarchies, marriage, or ornaments, and without the ability to plan ahead or to consider a past beyond personal lifetimes, thus defying the current wisdom that language is hardwired in humans. With trenchant wit and uproarious humor, Wolfe cracks open the secretive, solemn, long-faced, laugh-out-loud zigzags of Darwinism, both old and neo-, and he shows the endless importance of the courageous outsider in overturning our most cherished ideas about ourselves. Provocative and fast-paced, Wolfe’s latest tour de force will have everyone talking.

I highly recommend ALL who have an interest in language, and the question of origins read Tom Wolfe’s book.  He proves Evolution is FALSIFIED by human language.  To get Charlie’s weekly blog go to http://charlieliebert.blog  http://sixdaycreation.com answers questions about Origins.

Critical Thinking & Political Correctness

One of the most important things education must do is teach students to think, reason and analyze different viewpoints.  This lack of critical thinking skills in today’s students is a MAJOR failure in US education.  Colleges are failing to produce students that can think and instead they graduate mind-controlled minions that only hold one view and consider all others inferior even to banning all opponent’s speech. 

Critical Thinking – Autos and Origins

We’ll address this issue by describing and illustrating critical thinking in a problem-solving process and then, in contrast, the folly of political correctness.  The problem solving process I’ll use is in 5 steps

1) Problem Statement:  Definition of problem or issue.

2) Alternatives: List ALL possible alternatives. Including brainstorming.

3) Evaluation: Advantages and disadvantages of every  Alternative

4) Analysis: Reduce to 2 or 3 alternatives and do an in-depth analysis of each one. 

5) Decision.  Pick the best solution.

Step 1 – Create a Problem Statement that is a clear, concise description of the problem or decision to be made.  For example:

“Should I buy a Ford or a Toyota?” (Car Selection) or

“How did human life originate on the Earth?” (Origins)

Step 2 – Alternatives.  Make a list of all the possible answers to the question.  Brainstorming sessions should be part of this process. At this juncture, it should be allowed and encouraged to name as many possibilities as the people can imagine.  You want as many possibilities as you can name.  Don’t be concerned if they are feasible, just list them all. 

Car Selection Alternatives: Ford, Toyota.

Origins Alternatives: Atheistic Evolution, Theistic Evolution, Biblical Creation, Panspermia, Old Earth Creation. 

Step 3 Evaluation: For every alternative list advantages and disadvantages, evaluate each one and eliminate any that are either not feasible or workable.  You may return to any you eliminate later if the selected ones fail.

Car Selection Evaluation: Ford, or Toyota; Considerations things such as cost, efficiency, comfort, style, availability, safety features, carrying capacity, maintenance histories, used values, political impacts etc.

Origins Evaluation: I’ll eliminate all but two.  Atheistic Evolution, Theistic Evolution, Panspermia, Biblical Creation, Old Earth Creation. Consider such as: what is observed, what can be reproduced, on what proof or authority is it based, is it reasonable, does it fully explain reality? etc.

Step 4 Analysis: In-Depth Evaluation.  Critical thinking begins when you take 2 or 3 options and construct a detailed analysis of each one.   Ask all the hard questions.  Don’t be afraid to be hard on each alternative.  Put aside all judgment and advocate for each one separately.  Be hard on all and don’t favor the particular one you like.  Question everything including assumptions, implications, potential results, consequences, etc.  Seek more knowledge where necessary.  Ask the “what if?” questions, “If I select or believe this then…!”

Car Selection Analysis: Ford, Toyota.  For each alternative examine; style, gas mileage, power, interior design, features and anything else you find relevant.

Origins Analysis: Atheistic Evolution, Biblical Creation.  For each of these alternatives create the evaluation.  We won’t do this analysis here because it’s in two of my published books.  “ANSWERS for the hope that is in you!”  and “Without 3 Miracles Darwin’s Dead.”

Step 5 Decision: The decision point in the critical thinking process occurs when you’re ready to select the best answer to the Problem Statement defined in step one.  It can be a simple as: “I’ll buy a Ford!”  OR as complex as “Human life originated on the Earth by Biblical Creation!”

Now that we’ve seen an example of how the critical thinking process works in selecting alternatives let’s see what is required to make it useful.  First, the question must be defined and it can’t be ambiguous or vague.  In law court tort cases, the judge is very careful to define the issue.  For example: “Did his income tax return contain invalid data from the real estate transaction that defrauded his partner?”  In most criminal cases it’s usually simple.  “Did he/she break the law or commit the crime?”  Be careful, however, to avoid a logical dilemma question which can’t be answered by a simple yes or no.  Here’s an example:  Answer this question with a simple yes or no answer.   “Have you stopped beating your wife?”

Answer = Yes!  “Oh, so you admit you did beat her.”

Answer = No! “When will you stop beating her?”

This question cannot be answered with a simple yes or no because I never beat my wife. 

Critical thinking starts as we develop possible solutions to problems.  Listing all alternatives at first is imperative even though you may not want to consider a particular one.  In our origins question an Atheist will never believe any form of Creation, and likewise, the Christian will not consider Atheistic Evolution.  In both cases, the internal presuppositions have eliminated some of the possible answers.  For the Atheist: “there is NO God” cannot be violated.  For the Christian: “the God of the Bible is REAL” is a foundation that can’t be denied. Because you don’t like something does not mean it’s not a possible answer.  Problem-solving steps 3 and 4, Evaluation and Analysis is where the critical thinking takes hold.  Understanding all the aspects of each option, without negative bias, is essential for good solutions, and the more information, the better.  We don’t want conclusions yet we want more questions.  It is also important you avoid logical fallacies or allowing presuppositions to dictate the questions.  For example, an Atheist may say: “because there is no God no form of Creation is possible.”

Political Correctness

Now we come to the problem that is always a barrier to critical thinking, each person’s worldview, and personal presuppositions.  Using critical thinking to achieve perfect results is never possible because of one’s presuppositions, biases, and limitations.  The best we can do is use the process with as much relevant information as possible to make sound decisions, which brings us to the concept of “political correctness.”  A simple explanation of PC is: “You are only allowed to think the way politically correct colleagues think.  If you don’t, you must be censured and silenced.”  The right to offend does not exist.  Practicing PC flies in the face of everything we know about freedom and free speech in particular! Another way to define PC is: “Only group think is allowed.  Don’t think on your own!”  Here is a definition of “political correctness” from a student master’s thesis.  “Political correctness is attitude, behavior or policy not to offend, distress or upset any group of people in society who are a unique group, religious, political, social, etc.”  Another definition I read somewhere is that: “PC is the ability to pick up a turd by the ’clean end.’”

The term began in the late 1980s as a quick way of conveying concern about the leftist influence in the Universities, media, and culture.  It also refers to academic policies that seek to increase multiculturalism through affirmative action, prevention of hate speech, and moving the content of the university curriculum away from academic studies into behavior modification of the students This is also called the “culture war.”

A simpler definition: “Political correctness is language, ideas, policies, or behavior seeking to minimize offense to specific groups of people to offend no one nor develop veried viewpoints.  After Trump’s election in 2016 many college campuses banned conservative speakers as being offensive. 

The original PC concept is everyone should “be nice” to everyone else and not critical or unkind, which is an absurd and foolish idea given the diverse nature of humans.  In spite of what sounds to be lofty idealistic aims PC always prevents honest dialogue.  A good example of PCs impact is the deterioration of race relations in the US from 2008 to 2016.  PC has suppressed and prevented any real dialogue between competing groups and lies on both sides are continually perpetuated. PC suppresses speech rather than frees it and is a clear violation of the core principles of the Constitution’s First Amendment. 

Key Concept:  Political Correctness – stifles critical thinking, prevents dialogue, perpetuates lies, and promotes division.

It's only fair to share...

Facebook

Twitter

Linkedin