Reasons to cheat (3) Reasons to remain honest (3)
1. higher grades
2. everyone’s doing it
3. the teacher’s unfair
1. “cheating is bad”
2. “honesty is the best policy”
On a scale from 1 (most inclined to cheat) to 5 (I will remain honest), I would decide: 3
Reasons to take drugs Reasons not to take drugs
1. you will fit in
2. everyone’s doing it
3. it will feel pleasurable
1. “drugs is bad”
2. it makes you do things that you don’t even mean to do
3. you don’t need to do drugs to fit in
On a scale from 1 (most inclined to take it) to 5 (I will not take the drug), I would decide: 5
Reasons to bomb Reasons not to bomb
1. it’s your job
2. authority might deprive you of your job
3. they caused deaths too
1. they’re also people
2. children and old people are involved
3. it’s morally wrong
On a scale from 1 (most inclined to bomb) to 5 (I will not bomb), I would
Based on our discussion on the Philosophies of Knowledge, the layer of meaning that can be considered as absolutist the most is the Literal meaning of the text, because this layer talks about how factual topics that the author wants to talk about, and can be interpreted by looking at what is literally there, making the exposition of the topic “absolute”. Besides this, the literal meaning is often given by the Church, meaning that the meaning that we get from these scriptures come from authority.
Meanwhile, the layers of meaning that can be considered to be relativist is the Author’s meaning, and the Textual meaning of the text, because the information and insights that one gets from these layers are often inferred (since the Author cannot be consulted anymore), and often agreed upon by a majority of people. This leads us to think that the explanation that we get from these two layers of meaning is based on the opinions of different people, and are just cumulated to which ones are more logical and meaningful, making it relativist.
Lastly, the layer of meaning that is considered to be Evaluativist is one’s Personal Meaning, because these conclusions that we personally come up with has been filtered by what we hear from authority, and the arguments that have been brought up. With one’s Personal Meaning, one is able to determine the truths of the scripture based on reason, while staying within the boundaries that the authority, the Church, has influenced us to believe, ultimately making this layer of meaning Evaluativist.
Even though I have not been reading the Bible lately, I can remember the times when I read through the whole Bible years ago, when I was still in grade school. Since I was still young back then, I can say that I read the Bible in between it’s Literal Meaning, and the Author’s Meaning, possibly because I still was not exposed to what the agreed meaning of the text is, as seen by its Textual Meaning. Besides this, I would only read the Bible as how it was written, but then would somehow get what the author is trying to imply because I would take the lessons that wants to be conveyed to us, often about Jesus’s great works and actions, that each passage in the Bible holds.
Ever since I was young, I loved reading books, and was able to train myself to become a speed reader. Because of this, this was also the way I would read the Bible by reading the passage fast, and only think about the literal meaning that it wants to give off. However, after the lesson on the layers of meaning, I was able to learn to slow down whenever I’m reading, and look deeper into what the text wants to tell me, taking a passage’s Textual Meaning and even my own Personal Meaning into consideration when interpreting the text, which really helped me understand its message better.
Now that I have learned of the existence of the different layers of meaning, I can tell myself to focus on the other layers of meaning that I did not mind, or know about, in the past. I believe that by taking the deeper layers of meaning, such as the Texual Meaning and the Personal Meaning, then I would be able to make my Bible reading experience a lot richer and fuller.
One of the most well known aspect of Art that a lot of people are considered to be into is Music, since Music is one of the most universal forms of Art that has existed even before man became civilized. Music is something that appeals to our emotions, since the sound that it produces can effectively change the mood that we feel. However, this emotion that we get from listening to music is not something that we would get from, for example, mathematics, science, or even ethics.
Mathematics and science are the areas of knowledge that are considered to have the most logic, and common sense in them. However, these traits are the ones that one would not be able to derive from an Art, or Music in particular. Similarly, one would not be able to find emotions that one can feel and experience when listening to Music when solving Mathematic problems, or conducting Scientific research. Others do say that listening to Music when performing something Math or Science related can help and motivate someone do better. On other other hand, it cannot be the same the other way, since Mathematics and Science can only calculate and study the details of Music, but cannot help in the production of it.
Besides, the things that one would learn from Ethics would be similar to the traits that one would learn from Mathematics and Science, only that it mainly revolves around reasoning and morality. With Ethics, one can learn how to handle situations with different ways of reasoning, trying to get over the problem as safely and logically as possible. These areas of knowledge are not usually associated with an area of art like Music, because reasoning is not something that one would want to be affected by one’s emotions, which is the main aspect that Music works around.
Seeing how other Areas of Knowledge focuses on the more practical skills that one would need to survive in life, such as logic, common sense, reasoning, or maybe even morality. Meanwhile, the Arts, Music in particular, appeals to our senses more, mainly sense of hearing and touching, and our emotions.
Xavier School was first established on June 6, 1956 by three people, Fr. Jean Desautels, Fr. Louis Papilla, and Fr. Cornelius Pineau. The school was named after Saint Francis Xavier, one of the first Jesuit missionaries in China, which made the school establish itself as a Jesuit Chinese-Filipino school. Besides this, the school was also named after Xu Quangqi, a nobleman from the 1600’s who converted to Christianity, and helped spread it around China.
The school’s goal is to provide children with the best quality education that one can receive, while prompting them to grow as religious, well-balanced young men. The school also recently took in the K-12 educational system, which lets students go through grade school, middle school, and high school, compared to when middle school did not exist before. Besides this, on the start of the year 2010, Xavier School was also granted the status of being an International Baccalaureate World School, which is offered to selected students on the 11th and 12th grades.
Besides having the reputation of being a school with excellent quality, Xavier School also trains its students to be leaders. The students are encouraged to take up a few of the more than 50 clubs and committees that the school offers, which can help one grow in their field of specialty. Meanwhile, they also encourages its students to embrace religion, to be spiritual, while having the ability to be balanced with studies at the same time.
Xavier School promotes a student’s personal growth through its vision, to be “persons fully alive, endowed with a passion for justice and the skills for development.”, and through the 6C’s (Community, Character, Compassion, Culture, Competence, and Conscience) that it embeds in each student. This is in hopes of them not only internally growing with Character, Conscience, Compassion, and Competence, but also be of service to the Community while being able to appreciate one’s Culture in their Chinese-Filipino roots.
“Luceat Lux”, meaning “Let your light shine” in Latin, truly encapsulates what the school wants of its students; to mature into responsible and spiritual young leaders by going through personal growth, and by being aware of what is happening in one’s community.
What philosophy of knowledge is/are present in the clip? Explain.
I think that there are two philosophies of knowledge present in the clip, mainly relativism and evaluativism. The Americans in the movie were mainly relativists, because they’re biased towards the Americans being the good guys during war, particularly during the 911 terrorism attack that happened.
However, the Muslim dude is more of an evaluativist, because he actually argued about which side is the real terrorists. Even though he sounded partial to being on the Muslims’s side, he gave logical reasons and evidences to support his claim.
Did active listening happen? What makes you say so?
Active listening only happened with the Muslim dude, because he was the only one who gave reactions to other people’s statements after thinking through it logically. Meanwhile, the other students reflexively replied to the teacher’s words without thinking, possibly to get the answer out from him faster. The Muslim dude listened to others, gave facts, and actually gave his insights on that matter.
What questions would you have asked had you been in the situation? List as many as you can.
- What could be the reasons behind the Americans being (too) biased towards their side of the conflict?
- Are the numbers that the Muslim dude give actually real statistics?
- Who ARE more of terrorists, the Americans, or the Muslims?
- How does discussing about the Jihaad, and understanding it, actually help with the conflict?
- Is it in a human’s nature to be biased towards his/her origins?
- In what ways can we avoid being biased towards something just because they’re partial to what we think is right?
- Why aren’t the other students giving their opinions?
- What’s the point of talking about Jihaad and understanding it when it doesn’t directly concern me?