A great post by David Buckingham here.
He explains why we in the Media & Film Department at The Sixth Form Centre have elected to move away from the British A level system and have adopted the International Baccalaureate for Film and Cambridge International A level for Media!
Ironically independent schools in the UK are permitted to run the international A levels, where as states schools are required to switch over to the new English A levels, the legacy of the ideologue Michael Gove. I will be interested to see how many are teaching IB & International A levels next year.
Humanism seems a reasonably good idea to explore.
I struggle though with it’s emphasis on the individual above community and am slightly concerned it might have hubristic tendencies.
I suppose there is also a lack of authority and moral guidance in humanism, which I struggle with. Probably very insecure of me…
Do we need to succumb to authority in order to be taught a moral framework? God of course represents that authority and the usual course of action seems to be to surrender to that authority.
However, whilst a surrender to authority seems comforting (God of our Fathers and all that) authority doesn’t like too many questions and is ultimately concerned with it’s own status and power and resist plurality.
So no authority? Perhaps.
OK. So I watch a video conference between the marvellous Jonathan Sack (Chief Rabbi) and the brilliant Richard Dawkins. Here if you’re interested. It’s a bit long.
To both of you thank you. At the time of writing I feel that gratitude most profoundly. Both remarkable teachers and decent, ethical and moral men.
I also would like to thank my daughter Emily, who just made me explain myself to myself.
That I must be able to explain an argument ‘clearly and cogently’ (Sacks) in order to be able to understand it. I must form the thought with clear logic and precise words. I must also value tradition and wisdom of the ages. I must remove the ‘self’ and replace that with the ‘other’.
From Dawkins I have delighted in his bravery and wit. His clarity of thinking. His refusal to back down from even the most sacred ground. His ability to apply reason to evidence. He has lead to me to most clearly sighted conclusion that there is no God. Not in any sense that bears a relation to the idea of God as described and defined by scripture.
So here I am.
I really want to know and I would like to open myself to suggestions….I’ve got some starting points.
I understand how ethics gives me the rule of law. The inviolable rule book? Hardly. Still it seems like a really decent attempt to codify human interactions and I would not be without that. It holds civilisation together!
The church is remarkable and one of my missions it to talk with my mother and find out what she thinks. I Know that religion has given her a beautiful framework, which includes a sense of the other as someone to be loved. My goodness what a profound idea! Love the other! However why does God get all the credit. He really ought to have spoken out before now in something less drenched and mired in symbolism.
I love to learn. I love to help others learn. I am a teacher.
I also love art and beauty.
I love ideas.
So ultimately that’s what I’m looking for. A beautiful idea. Got any?
Already seeing lots of flaws in my position and biases in my language.
Forgive my cultural baggage. I’m struggling with it. However it has been rather useful in terms of explaining the rule of law, clarity of thought, the scientific method, the understanding of the value of the other and a sufficiently pluralist view to understand that I too am the other to you know the other…
Sorry and thanks.