Which is most unethical?

[Boojatta]

[Finder]

1. I chose other because the question is rather vague.IMO n/t

[Sammy Pepys]

2. I don't see any of those as unethical....n/t

....

[ashling]

3. If by "teaching"

you mean promoting, and to the exclusion of their own and other doctrines so as to claim that the doctrine being promoted is the truth , then the answer would be one thing, but just "teaching" might yield anopther answer.

[Boojatta]

5. Yes, I should have made that more clear.

If you imagine the point of view of an inquisitor persecuting a heretic, then such matters as whether the doctrine is taught as true or simply taught as a possibility seem to be relatively insignificant distinctions.

I did mean: both teach and claim that it is true.

If we're talking about a doctrine that can be neither proven to be true nor proven to be false, then it's difficult to apply the principle that it is wrong to make false claims. Is it wrong for me to teach a true doctrine simply because I believe that the doctrine is false?

The thread could get amusing if some people sincerely choose choice number one, the choice of a persecutor of heretics.

[bryant69]

11. The phrasing of the question makes that unlikely

It might be different if the question were phrased more concretely - say teaching children a false belief system, or teaching a doctrine that you find abhorent - say teaching hatred or abuse as good and necessary.

Bryant

[RaleighNCDUer]

4. That's a little squishy.

Are you talking about an educated person being forced to teach creationism, or a zealot being forced to teach evolution? If they have no choice, the ethical dilemma is to teach or to quit. Then the question is, does what they are being required to teach negatively outweigh the positives of teaching?

The wording of the poll is too nebulous to make a choice, to my mind.

[Boojatta]

6. It is posed as a question of ethics and I didn't say anything about

anyone being forced, so you should assume that the person who does the teaching is not being forced.

[RaleighNCDUer]

8. maybe I just am not getting it.

If coercion is not an issue, why would anyone teach a doctrine in which they don't believe? If it's just for the cash, then yes, it's unethical in all the several cases listed. #1 is not unethical, because it is simply bhe basis of all teaching - you believe it, making it 'the truth' and share that truth by teaching. It is unethical to knowingly teach a lie, unless you are under coercion.

[Boojatta]

9. To lie is to assert a statement while knowing that it is false.

Typically, religious doctrines are not known to be true and are not known to be false.

Here's an example. Suppose in some country there is an official religion and it seems that 90% of the people in that country sincerely believe in that religion. If you go there to teach that religion to people, then it wouldn't make much sense for most people there to make accusations against you. "Our religion, although we believe it, is a lie. How dare you come here and teach lies to us?"

[Boojatta]

16. Suppose I don't believe that Shakespeare wrote the plays that are

said to have been written by him. Would it be wrong for me to teach the plays and to make no comment about the author? Would it be wrong for me to use "Shakespeare" as a handy synonym for "the author" when speaking of one of those plays?

If coercion is not an issue, why would anyone teach a doctrine in which they don't believe? If it's just for the cash, then yes, it's unethical in all the several cases listed.

If everyone obeyed this rule of ethics that you are putting forward, then what would be the consequences? Perhaps I am wrong, but it seems that your thought is that the individual teacher is right and the institution is wrong and if all individuals obey your rule, then wrong institutions will no longer get help spreading falsehood. So falsehood will be taught less effectively or to fewer people.

However, even if we assume that the institution is wrong and the individual teacher is right, isn't it possible that a teacher who remains employed by an institution might have some positive influence on the institution? Isn't it possible that if teachers obey your rule, then institutions will tend to persist teaching falsehood for longer than they otherwise would teach falsehood?

[saltpoint]

7. Is it wrong for an English teacher to teach Hemingway, even though

that teacher dislikes Hemingway?

Is it wrong for a music instructor to teach a piano student Bartok, even if that instructor finds Bartok over-rated?

Is it unethical for a literature professor to require LORD OF THE FLIES of her students, even though at least one of its characters is a sadist?

[Boojatta]

10. "No" answers the first two questions.

Also, probably "no" to the third, depending on whether or not the sadist is being held up as a model to be emulated.

[saltpoint]

14. I hear ya.

Ethical constructs don't appear very readily or vividly until they are absent.

It is when they are breached that they become most apparent.

Or when they become layered in contradiction. A just institution represented by unjust functionaries. A good school but a poor teacher, a well-intending organization ripped off by an inside job, etc.

[Goblinmonger]

12. Good points. My answers

1. Hemingway was a racist, sexist pig. He brought a new writing style to literature so this English teacher still teaches him.
2. Bartok should be the poster child for OCD. He gives the exact time that each piece should take to play for god's sake. I still listen to his stuff at times and my daughter enjoys playing his violin pieces for a change.
3. Lord of the Flies kicks ass. Poor Piggy, what's he do to when he's told the conch doesn't work on that side of the island?

[saltpoint]

15. Agree with you on Hemingway -- both the person and the writer.

Students need to understand why he's important as a writer and psychic chronicler of his age. I like ISLANDS IN THE STREAM better than the more canonized novels, but even it is too spare, too emotionally stingy.

Agree also on Bartok. He's too percussive for my taste but music students often love him for just that reason.

I'm a Piggy fan from way back. It's Roger I'm afraid of. Roger is a conch-stomper from the word 'go.' Golding didn't mess around when he wrote that story, did he?

[TheBaldyMan]

13. it is not a matter of degree in this case, it is either ethical or not

It is like asking , 'Which is the most pregnant state, 3 months, 6 months or 9 months?'

[skyblue]

17. When the Catholic Church teaches that Condoms don't prevent AIDS

to people in struggling countries that is certainly unethical. When religious groups teach that getting an abortion will make it more likely for you to get cancer that is certainly unethical. When groups teach that aluminum tubes were fit to store weaponry that obviously were not that is certainly unethical.

But, sadly, in life what are ya going to do, most jobs involve selling a product that people don't really need. Being pure is not going to happen. Animals have to kill to exist, so I guess we can't acheive purity because we were screwed by our creator(s).