White Teacher Diverse Classroom

Context: this is a paper written by a Champlin Park English Teacher, it is really great in it's Rhetorical elements however it pose a great question and argument. Which is : Does having a white teacher in a class that is really diverse affect the learning of the students of color? I not trying to make this a race issue but this does affect it. His evidence is from his own experience in high school, college, and as a teacher of color.

Illegal vs legal

A comment from a previous post got me thinking about this. I said that the pen is mighteir than the sword in that the pen has the power to create the sword. This commentor jokingly said that Mr george should order that all pens seen in school should be confiscated and student dealt with.it brought to the conclusion. Back to my question, there are certain things that are illegal that is less destructive than some legal things. For example, cigarettes is prone to be more deadly that some illegal substances yet it is legal. I know that there a lot of reasons to why that is, but why?

The Pen V.S The Sword

Given the ancient qoute which states that the "pen is mightier than the sword". In a way it can be taken literally or metaphorically.
Literally: the pen is the instrument in which most idealogies and belief originate. The sword is a destructive action then result from certain ideologies and belief. The pen is a creative and destructive force which can be neither good or bad. However the sword only purpose is to destroy and the positivity and negativity is debatable. With the pen you create the sword. For example, spell out the word S.W.O.R.D you create the idea of the sword. With a pen one could order someone to buy or make a sword. But one can't create a pen from a sword. You can threatened someone to give you a pen or make you one but it not the same in context. In your opinion, is the sword mighteir than the pen and vice versa

Some things cannot be taught they have to be experienced

People always say practice makes perfect. It is certainly true in my personal beleif. In a way practicing something is exposing yourself to that experience. You do homework to get used to the lesson. In a way practicing is a way of experience. In a way one can't learn somethings without practice.

Somethings can't be taught, they have to be experienced

It the idea of learning a different language and how you are tuaght a certain way and when you listening to a native speaker it is totally different
For my ethnography, I was studying Adelante, and spanish learning club in CPHS. And they had a Chilean came and present to them. I notice that the way she spoke was totally different from what we were taught. So I came to conclusion that somethings can't be taughts you have to experience. There many example like. To what extent do you agree?

Sports vs academics, which is more important?

Sports or school which is more important? What I am asking is should I spend more time playing sport or do school work. Knowing that if I play college sports, it will be division 3, which award no scholarship. However, if I improve academically, it could impact my college acceptance and financial aid packet. What will you do?

is there such as wrong?

I was watching the Mentalist a couple days ago and I found this interesting. Jane the main character was talking about the idea of there is no such thing as wrong, there is only; moral and immoral, ethical and unethical, legal and illegal. What can be translated as wrong in one area or culture can be totally acceptable in another area or culture. There can't be universal idea of wrong. For example Murder can be defined in so many ways. If you kill someone you are murderer. If you are a soldier killing someone is patroitic. Then there the idea of intent which one has to include self-defense, manslaughter, and plain murder. Another example is the use of language. Foul language is seen as unacceptable in most places. However in certain areas, families and generations, foul language is a norm. To what extent can an idea of wrong be limitted. Society defination of wrong changes along with experience, emotions, and perception. Is there such a thing as wrong?

Identity part 2

identity varies based on culture, and ethnic or physical backgroung. our identity is constantly evolving with our experiences and struggles.  however our identity is not our own but a combination of society . how does the idea of platonic self and identity differs. In a conversation with Micheal during tutorials I realized that we not what we say we are or try to create, we were nurture into a certain belief.

Identity v.s. Platonic Self

How are the idea of platonic self and identity similar and different. Platonic self is when you invent what you want to be. It like the Great Gatsby, one could disregard their physical circumstances or reality. And create a mental picture of what want to be. Identity is just the physical and reality of who we are. Identity can be a part of your platonic self. We always talk about creating our true indentity. something that makes us who we are. our identity is the unique characteristic that makes us unique. In what ways does identity and platonic self differs and are similar?

Limits of Language

TO what degree to you feel the statement "Language always Fails" is true? How so?

My personally definition of Language is: Language is a written or spoken form of Human communication which originate from some form of thought.It is the interpretation or articulation of a true thought that exist in one's mind, however it does not always expresses that true thought, rather you get interpretations and different version of the image that exists in your mind. That why there no such thing as the truth, because language only give you, an interpretation or version that has been manipulated by emotions, perceptions, reason, and other variables that makes that true thought valid.In other word, there no such thing as truth, we are all liars in one way or another. 

how do you justify true knowledge

True knowledge exist only in our thoughts or mind. Everything we see, heard or learn is only an interpretation of the truth that exist in our minds. How do we know or justify that what we learn in school in true and accurate knowledge (especially History)?