[Did you/your kid like Foerster's Alg. 2 as much as you liked Alg. 1?]

I'm curious about this as well.

[How do you handle it when your child is the victim of a slander campaign?]

The mere thought of an adult doing this to a young person is sickening. This woman could be going around and encouraging the next generation. God knows they need a smile and a friendly word of encouragement. Let your daughter know that most likely this woman is very bitter and has a low sense of self esteem combined with no integrity. She is really to be pitied. It must be a hard life when one harbors so much hostility.

Alternately, she could have a very high sense of self esteem and have a disorder like NPD, BPD or some degree of sociopathy.

 

I don't think there's any reason to pity her. I wouldn't actively hate the woman but she has proven herself to be a predator so give her a wide berth and have the authorities (police, school, lawyers) deal with her.

[How do you handle it when your child is the victim of a slander campaign?]

Question for you both - would it be worth it for me to calmly yet directly confront the rumor-spreading parent, calling her on this? Or is that just stirring up a hornet's nest and giving her more ammunition to twist to her evil use?

 

And... what is it with adults who do this, slander children? Is this a mental problem? I told my dd that yes, this woman is sick. I am wondering, though, just how dangerous she might be.

No. Someone who would spread rumors about an innocent kid is not going to respond to a confrontation in any good way. Talk to the administration, list them know you're speaking to a lawyer and then speak to a lawyer.

 

Immediately.

[What's up with Wuthering Heights?]

I read that in grade ten and in a class of about 25 kids I was one of two that LOVED it. I just remember getting swept up in it and yes, I did think poor Heathcliff was very sympathetic.

 

Now I have to go reread it.

[5th grade ds doesn't get math AT ALL--Help?]

Oooh, I like the idea of the math reference book. Written by him, so he can remind himself when he forgets. I am on it. Thanks for the suggestion. I am thinking I will like the Math Mammoth stuff, as well.

thanks,

K

Yup. One part of my son's binder is a glossary he builds. I like matey for him but at the beginning of every math session he does a few review questions from everything he struggled with in the past. I read through some Rod and Staff texts which gave me some structure for this as it's the only mastery math program I know of with constant review.

 

Also, pull out the manipulatives and model question after question with them, having him write them out as you go until he's doing it with ease then keep revisiting with a question or two a day. Don't make him do any conceptual leaps, lead him by the noise and let repetition teach him. Lastly, look for different explanatory videos, animations and such online to give him a different way to approach a problem or even just let him hear the explanation in a voice besides yours.

[Insurance Agent didn't advise Collision; Now accident; Now what?]

It's not what *she* paid, but what an insurance co would be willing pay out before declaring the car totaled. (not the same thing.)

Just think this bears repeating. One thing I learned was to check the blue book value of a car before buying. That's the value insurers look at to replace a car and it's good to try and stay close to that when buying a car.

[How much would you spend on hockey?]

nm

[Anyone else irritated by the use of "she" for the generic pronoun?]

Perhaps my issue is this.

 

Some women complain that the generic "he" pronoun makes them feel excluded. Their response is to use "she" for the generic in every case. So in protesting the language's exclusion of half of the population, they exclude half of the population. Does this rub anyone else the wrong way?

 

Alternating "he" and "she" seems fair-minded. Using "s/he" seems fair minded. However, exclusively using "she" as the generic pronoun seems like something else altogether.

Got it! And yes, I think I would find that annoying too.

[Feeling lost (as a parent) without Christianity]

Honestly, it must be exhausting to be a Christian.  I was raised in a Christian household, but never really got on the bandwagon.  I gave lip service to it, because it was expected, but honestly, I never believed.  I seriously cannot imagine have to pray my way out of a bad thought about another person or whatever all the time.  I would never stop praying, and nothing would ever get accomplished in my life.  I don't worry about stuff like that.  I may call someone a bad name, but I'm not going to berate my self about it for the rest of the day.  I don't have to pray for the strength not to give in to my baser nature so I don't go crazy and murder the people who live down the street and make noise late at night.  I simply know somethings are not to be done.  I also know that it's not a big deal if I call someone a bad name in my head.  I doesn't hurt me or the other person in any way.  I let out a little bit of irritation, they never know, life goes on.  I don't think I could live with the kind of pressure being a Christian seems to come with.

Ha! There's intense pressure with SOME flavours of Christianity but that's not, of course, applicable to all. I think there's some confirmation bias if you think that's the case. The ones for whom it's more pressure may be the ones who speak about that more while those of us who aren't finding it so much work or who have a very different experience are generally talking about homeschooling, chickens and David Tennant.

 

I spend a lot of time thinking about David Tennant myself.

[Feeling lost (as a parent) without Christianity]

Well, that's very kind. I always think your responses are kind and measured. I'm sort of an @$$, I think. At least on the board. If I can keep my head about me at all in these discussions and don't torture anyone, I feel as if I'm improving. :)

Pfft. If some of my responses are kind and measured it's only because I understand how truly @$$holey I can be and I am forever on guard against that. I don't always succeed though! :D

[Anyone else irritated by the use of "she" for the generic pronoun?]

It is interesting to note who hasn't posted on this thread.

Possibly. But it could mean it's just not a big deal for must folk. I think you assumed it would be but it hasn't panned out that way. Ether people are fine with not using "he" and "him" or they use "he" and "him" and don't give it too much thought.

 

I would like to see a case for why "he" is particularly classical. To me it's a very Classical thing to give extra thought to the words we use and who we wish to address when writing. And a gender neutral pronoun was good enough for the Greeks, the origin of all this Classicaliness (now there's a good word), why shouldn't it be good enough for us?

 

ETA: I think think you really should examine why you think it's an issue Classical homeschoolers should feel on way or the other on. I suspect it's really a pet peeve for you that you're unnecessarily attaching bigger values to. It may be irritating butthat doesn't mean it's wrong or not Classical.

[IDK!I Just DON'T KNOW!]

Another vote for MUS. You know it, your kids like it and it gets down. Let go of the feelings that it's not quite enough. It's a solid program.

[Feeling lost (as a parent) without Christianity]

I don't like to disagree with you, but:

 

"Then Samuel took the horn of oil and anointed him in the midst of his brothers; and the Spirit of the Lord came mightily upon David from that day forward."  1 Samuel 16:13A

 

After David sinned, he prayed, "Do not cast me away from Your presence and do not take Your Holy Spirit from me." Psalm 51:11

 

(Thank you for this interesting discussion.  I'm impressed with your patience and graciousness!)

Ditto!!!

[Feeling lost (as a parent) without Christianity]

Here's the trick.

 

It's impossible to know who is a Christian and who isn't by these rights. 

 

I know lots of folks who don't profess Christ but who feel the hungry and visit the imprisoned and care for the unwell.  But, these aren't Christians and are headed straight to hell. Then again, there are those among them who call themselves Christians--but whom I'm sure don't fit your definition. Gay, don't believe in eternal damnation, or even salvation in some cases, don't believe in Biblical inerrancy.

 

When it comes to people who call themselves Christians--it's impossible to tell who is and isn't. They might be doing these things too. And they might also be casting out demons and healing people. they might be doing all of the things--leading churches, Bible studies, missionaries. They're doing every single Christian thing there is.  But, they're not Christian--because they may eventually "fall away" or show that they never had the Holy Spirit.

 

Here's where this leads us.  We can never know if anyone is a Christian.  Ever. No pastor, no friend, no spouse. No one can be believed to be an "actual" Christian because even if they're doing all the right things, they may just be deceived and a deceiver. 

 

I was still a Christian when I came to this idea. I had been a  Christian for 20 years. I had been a missionary. Preached to my family. Lost friends who could no longer stand to be around me because I was always inviting them to study the Bible or to repent. I prayed to Jesus that I prayed he would see me die before I ever renounced Him.  I believed I was a Christian. My friends believed I was a Christian. My family, parents, spouse believed I was a Christian. I loved Jesus.  

 

But, apparently, I wasn't ever a Christian.

 

Here's what you have to do

 

You just have to wait until the moment they (you) die, and if they haven't committed a horrible sin or fallen away, then you might be able to hold out hope they (you) were a real Christian.  

 

You can't know. Even if you do miracles in the name of Jesus--you might just be another damned soul who doesn't even know it.

 

That's no better than having no hope of salvation at all.

Better and more thoughtful response then mine. Shucks.

[Feeling lost (as a parent) without Christianity]

The Holy Spirit didn't live in him!!!!  He was before Jesus died and rose from the dead and then sent the Holy Spirit to live inside of us.

How do you support that view? The Holy Spirit is part of the Trinity, is God, was there at creation. I'm assuming you would refer to John 14:26 but there's nothing in that that implies the Holy Spirit wasn't also at work before Jesus came on the seen, only that Jesus would send the Holy Spirit. Why would He deny the Hebrews who have a rich tradition of prophets, just the sort who you would expect to be full of the Holy Spirit?

[Feeling lost (as a parent) without Christianity]

Thanks. I put it in my Amazon cart.  I'm also going to borrow my son's Christian history books from his class at Baylor; though some of this may be a review from TOG..

Oh! Feel free to pass along recommendations to me as well. :D

[Feeling lost (as a parent) without Christianity]

Honestly if a person commits murder I'm not sure that the Holy Spirit every truly lived in them.

Except that if all sins are equal...When you sin, do you doubt that you're a true Christian? Do you think the Holy Spirit never lived in you?

 

There is always free will. We always have the choice to enter or leave a relationship with God. Always. It may seem bizarre and unthinkab;e to you that some would choose to leave that relationship but I've no doubt it can happen. It's why we're human, why Christ died for our sins, why we need grace. Maybe to doubt that they were ever real Christians is to doubt that gift of free will?

[Anyone else irritated by the use of "she" for the generic pronoun?]

I am sure you are not the only one!  I can relate to your feelings that it is odd, and stilted, and weirdly Feminist and politically-correct: intrusive in things classical.  I realize you are not looking for disagreements generally, but since you suggest that as "classical" people you would expect us to prefer the use of "he", I want to mention that it is as a classical educator that I prefer alternation between masculine and feminine pronouns & assumptions. 

 

There are two reasons that I, as a classical educator, prefer to use both pronouns in some sort of sensible alternation.  First, I want my children to be in the habit of seeing feminine pronouns about half the time and therefore to notice (even if only subconsciously) when writing is skewed toward one gender, and develop a sense for what that implies about the assumed audience, the author, &c.  And, naturally, to check their ideas about what is implied against evidence. Frankly, the old writing that uses "he" as "neutral" is assuming a largely (if not entirely) masculine readership.  Thinking about authorship and assumed audience is an important part of classical training.

 

Second, and far more important: using the masculine pronoun exclusively as "gender-neutral" invites sloppy thinking.  My recent reading of Hicks' "Norms and Nobility" provides evidence of this: Hicks makes all sorts of assumptions about education, students, and educators that are very very male in their bias and make little sense for women.  Particularly it is clear that for Hicks, the active adult life of a virtuous and classically educated person will not be centered around the care of children and elders.  If he were alternating pronoun use he would have been forced to confront the ridiculousness of some of his assumptions, and think more precisely about what being virtuous, being classically inclined, and being human is. 

 

I see this in C.S. Lewis, too, an author for whom I have great respect & affection.  And others. 

 

There are also more personal reasons I prefer to see "she/her" incorporated.  I will never forget the first time I read a book on philosophy that used "she" to refer to philosophers (in half the chapters :) ).   I realized that, as a woman who reads the classics & philosophy, I'd always felt like an outsider looking in.  And why not?  it was stunningly clear that Nietzsche and Plato did not expect a woman to be plowing through their ideas.  And Seneca wanders off into meditations on the beauty of female arms in the middle of his advice on being detached from things superficial.  So: what a profound sense of community I felt from a male academic author assuming that women were a natural part of the philosophical world.  I think this is something essentially true & good. 

 

If Plato was willing to have women in gymnasia, might it be classical to have them in pronouns?  :)  -- just a wry thought. 

Gracious, that was a very fine post. :)

[Anyone else irritated by the use of "she" for the generic pronoun?]

So we should be forced to change our entire language because some miniscule percentage of people militantly refuse to identify themselves as either male or female?

 

Aren't we talking about a couple of pronouns and not the entire English language? There's a time and place for hyperbole; I'm not sure that was it. :D

[Feeling lost (as a parent) without Christianity]

I've been reading a lot of PeacefulWife's blogs and the one on people pleasing just shows how many things I make an idol ahead of God

 

http://peacefulwife.com/2013/04/07/the-snare-of-people-pleasing-2/

 

I'm not sure if I agree with her idea of idolatry. Idolatry is worshipping something in the place of God, even wrongly mistaking something for God. What she's describing is is more skin to sin, an action that takes us out of relationship with God. Yes, the people-pleasing may come before our relationship with God but it's not an act of worship. It's the (seemingly ironic) sin of selfishness, putting our own needs (the need to please, to be well thought of) ahead of the true needs of others. It breaks relationship with those around us and therefore God. 

 

Idolatry is a specific sin that doesn't so much deal with the relationship with others but with God directly. It can happen with things like the Golden Calf but it can also happen with charismatic leaders (think ATI and Doug Philips), with church ritual, even with the Bible. Even when we adore Jesus to the point that we aren't looking beyond that adoration to the greater message He communicated with his life and death. Once your focus is wholly on some intermediary or icon rather then on being receptive to that relationship with God, then you're into idolatry. None of this is to say that looking to the Bible or Jesus or an icon is wrong, only that looking at those things to the exclusion of also looking beyond them is where you find idolatry. 

 

So while the blog post is a good one, I don't think she's talking true idolatry. She's onto something but I think she needs a bit more reading to flesh it out properly.

[Feeling lost (as a parent) without Christianity]

Well, I grew up a Methodist and am currently a Baptist. No one else that I know feels the way that I do in my homeschool group or my church.. I don't know it is just reading a ton of stuff and blogs on my own I guess.. I don't share how I truly feel about any of this with anyone but here.

Thanks for sharing with us. :)

 

ETA: You sound like you're really hungry for good reading and thought on Christianity. Can I recommend a book? It's Christianity by Diarmaid MacCulloch. It's a beast of a book but it traces the development of Christianity since before there was Christianity. It's not theology so it's not something I'm recommending to win you over to a certain position, but it does have a fantastic overview of Christian beliefs, churches, ideas, etc. and I think you'd really enjoy it if you're as curious as I suspect you are. It would also be a great jumping off point into reading the works of people like Plato, Aristotle, Origen, Augustine, Martin Luther, Calvin, etc. who've shaped Christian thought. 

 

I

[My wife wants to homeschool our kids.]

I appreciate the opinions on here, my wife will be happy that I reached out on this to learn more. Someone mentioned social circles.. where I work, when I brought up the idea to one of the executives I work with during a social conversation, they frowned on the idea.

 

Many of my siblings are very critical of the idea and while my wife is very enthusiastic, I am experiencing some pretty strong social pressures against it. I get that for many people it is the best option and I am still struggling with the idea.

I probably wouldn't bother mentioning it too much right now. It's a decision for you and your wife to make and you guys should be free to do that without pressure one way or the other.

 

It really shouldn't be about homeschooling vs. Public school. Instead, think about what would work for your family. Once it's reframed that way t you can look at the specific options you're family has. Many public schools are excellent but is your local school excellent? I like Laurel's suggestions regarding that.

 

I'm going to echo everyone else regarding getting out and meeting the local homeschooling community and lurking here to get an idea of what homeschooling might look like for you guys.

 

You could also just try it for a year. I'm assuming you're child is young so there's little risk to homeschooling kindergarten to see if it agrees you guys. It makes it easy to deal with pressure as well, "we're just trying kindergarten at home this year," instead having to go into a big explanation. People tend to be much less judgemental, or at least quieter about their disagreement, when you are already doing something as opposed to considering it and asking their opinion.

 

But be fearless about this.:) You're looking for the best path for your family, not what other people approve of.

[Feeling lost (as a parent) without Christianity]

It was righteous anger. So the other poster who got angry at the person about to molest her children would be the same thing. Nothing wrong with that. Being angry itself isn't a sin just what you do with it.

 

Most of the time if I get angry it isn't righteous...it is because I didn't get my selfish desires met.

Okay, I'm getting my geek on because I find your perspective really interesting.

 

Would you mind sharing your denomination? I'm assuming your Calvinist? How do you or how does your church trace this belief in terms of past Christian writers they'd reference and scripture?

 

I'm not looking to tell you you're wrong, I'm looking for stuff to research to understand the basis of this belief further out of curiosity. Because I'm a geek like that.:D

[How do you "leave" a church?]

The OP said her reasons are it is too far away, too small, she doesn't like the sermons and she doesn't like the music. The church is not a fit for her family and that's why she is leaving. She mentioned nothing about a revelation from God telling her it is time to switch churches.

 

An example of how someone can arrive at "blaming God"? I've got one for you. I have a couple working at my Christian school. They signed a contract to work for two years as new teachers do. But after one year here they just don't like it. The don't like the country and they miss their family and they want to leave. But that means they are breaking contract and going back on their word, and leaving us in a very difficult situation.

 

They don't like dealing with that guilt so instead they use the Christian trump card of "God is leading us..."

 

Uh sorry. You are going back on a promise and showing a lack of integrity and leaving a bunch of students without a teacher. God doesn't "lead" people to do stuff like that. That's your own crappy decision so man up and stop blaming God.

Further to that, would God less you to do something without reason?

 

Well, barring big exceptions, probably not. Especially with rather human concerns like which church you attend and whether you homeschool, if God is leading, there likely real concrete reasons can shared

[How do you "leave" a church?]

For the Christians I know, it's usually somewhere between very difficult to impossible to differentiate between the two. Which is why I don't think it's rude/impolite/offensive at all.

 

And in the context I'm referring to it is most certainly not "blaming God." I can't even wrap my mind around how one could arrive at that interpretation.

 

I can't imagine a minister/priest who would be offended by it. Certainly none of the ministers I've had experience with would be bothered by it or question it. They would respect it.

 

Other posters here may have had different experiences, or be coming at this from a different angle. And that's okay.

If the reason you're leaving a church is some feeling that you're being led by God divorced from any possible motivation, fine. But I think generally it's some reasons external to that and then maybe an additional feeling, if there's a feeling at all. So then you communicate the reasons.

 

I generally attribute (and perhaps wrongly but it is what it is) the, "God is leading me," but to either folks who aren't as self-aware as they should be, folks that are wildly naive about their own motivations and desires or folks who don't want to come clean with their motivations.

 

It's definitely not part of my religious tradition which may be part of why I have a problem with it.