Your secular "best" and "worst" for grades 5-8

[Kate in Arabia]

 

Wow, I didn't know there was anything religious about Life of Fred.

Sigh, I didn't either. That's disappointing. I thought I had read a lot of threads on this program and never saw mention of that. Sometimes I wish there was a "secular" tag (like the kosher or vegetarian tag for food) that could be attached to curricula.

[Sunshine State Sue]

Can someone explain if there is an "Objectivist" (the philosophy of Ayn Rand) "world-view" in History at Our House?

 

Bill

Bill, I'll answer your question if you first tell me what an objectivist theory of education is. :D Sort of joking. I'll answer, but I really don't know what it means. Would you please explain it in terms that a dumb blonde could understand?

 

I am on the HaoH yahoo group. Scott Powell asked for suggestions on how to improve his website. There was a long response from one lady. One of her points was:

I don't think that your webpage gives solid enough reasons why homeschoolers should choose your program over any other history programs. For me, over and above that it fits into the Objectivist theory of education, huge selling points are that I don't have to do any prep work, that you draw connections very well for the children and that we can learn history while we are in the van.

So, at least she thinks that it is objectivist. Is that a good thing or a bad thing?

 

HTH!

[MrPowell]

Originally Posted by Spy Car

Can someone explain if there is an "Objectivist" (the philosophy of Ayn Rand) "world-view" in History at Our House?

 

Bill

 

I can. I am the creator and teacher of the program.

 

There is no such thing as "Objectivist history," but since Ayn Rand's philosophical system touches on every fundamental question in philosophy from the nature of existence to the nature of a proper political system, and I am both very well appraised and in agreement with her philosophy, it does have an impact on the nature of my presentation.

 

For one, my general evaluation of the story of the United States and its government is positive. In particular, for instance, I do not vilify Columbus or Thomas Jefferson. This is not something I sneak into the curriculum. It's obvious. In Ancient history, as well, my admiration for Greece and the Roman Republic are evident. On the other end of the spectrum, my views are equally obvious. I condemn tyrannical monarchies and communism, and things like the persecution of Christians by the Romans and the persecution of the Jews by the Nazis (and many others). I am at the same time careful to present different views whenever historical controversies are involved, and to allow students to express their own views as appropriate.

 

The thing that will be far less obvious to the general observer is how the HistoryAtOurHouse curriculum applies the concept of the hierarchy of knowledge, as uniquely developed by Ayn Rand, to education. Simply put, respect for hierarchy means presenting the right information at the proper level of abstraction to so that students acquire knowledge as effectively as possible and emerge from their education as independent individuals. I discuss aspects of the theory and method involved in articles such as Kids Need History Early and Why History? (available at Secular Homeschooling Magazine.)

 

One last thing that it occurs to me to add is that respect for hierarchy means respect for the individual reasoning mind. I do not preach or attempt to convert students to any particular view. The program is secular, so it does not involve any religious outlook, but it also does not vilify or promote religion as such or any particular religion. I have successfully taught students from Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Buddhist, and atheist backgrounds.

 

Sincerely,

Scott Powell

www.HistoryAtOurHouse.com

[Spy Car]

Originally Posted by Spy Car

Can someone explain if there is an "Objectivist" (the philosophy of Ayn Rand) "world-view" in History at Our House?

 

Bill

 

I can. I am the creator and teacher of the program.

 

There is no such thing as "Objectivist history," but since Ayn Rand's philosophical system touches on every fundamental question in philosophy from the nature of existence to the nature of a proper political system, and I am both very well appraised and in agreement with her philosophy, it does have an impact on the nature of my presentation.

 

For one, my general evaluation of the story of the United States and its government is positive. In particular, for instance, I do not vilify Columbus or Thomas Jefferson. This is not something I sneak into the curriculum. It's obvious. In Ancient history, as well, my admiration for Greece and the Roman Republic are evident. On the other end of the spectrum, my views are equally obvious. I condemn tyrannical monarchies and communism, and things like the persecution of Christians by the Romans and the persecution of the Jews by the Nazis (and many others). I am at the same time careful to present different views whenever historical controversies are involved, and to allow students to express their own views as appropriate.

 

The thing that will be far less obvious to the general observer is how the HistoryAtOurHouse curriculum applies the concept of the hierarchy of knowledge, as uniquely developed by Ayn Rand, to education. Simply put, respect for hierarchy means presenting the right information at the proper level of abstraction to so that students acquire knowledge as effectively as possible and emerge from their education as independent individuals. I discuss aspects of the theory and method involved in articles such as Kids Need History Early and Why History? (available at Secular Homeschooling Magazine.)

 

One last thing that it occurs to me to add is that respect for hierarchy means respect for the individual reasoning mind. I do not preach or attempt to convert students to any particular view. The program is secular, so it does not involve any religious outlook, but it also does not vilify or promote religion as such or any particular religion. I have successfully taught students from Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Buddhist, and atheist backgrounds.

 

Sincerely,

Scott Powell

www.HistoryAtOurHouse.com

 

Thanks for the answer Scott. Can you elaborate a bit on the concept of "having respect for hierarchy"? You seem to be using the term in two different fashions, and I'm not sure if there is something "over-aching" to this idea. I've not encountered it previously.

 

What about "values"? Ayn Rand famously praised the "virtue of selfishness". She felt any act that went against ones personal survival was an evil. That the communitarian vales of Christianity are abhorrent. In fact all religion is abhorrent. Do these attitudes crop up in your curriculum?

 

And what about her economic ideas? Is a near-worship of capitalists and unregulated capitalism reflected in your materials?

 

Do we have duties to one another? Or is it every person for themselves?

 

Bill

[wjpike1]

We LOVE History at Our House. It was the one thing that was missing from our History curriculum. It provides a chronological spine of factual information taught in an intersting and engaging way. I use Ambleside Online for my main curriculum. Of course I have to tweak it to remove Christian content, but otherwise I like it's emphasis on History and Literature. I also appreciate the fact that it is challenging. But it relies mainly on the reading of stories about History. The stories are great, and I even like the History book they use, but what was missing was that chronological spine of information that ties it all together. HAOH provides that for us.

 

The class is in a lecture format. The kids call in on a conference call either once a week or daily (or you can choose just to listen to the recorded lectures on your own time) at a set time and listen to a half hour discussion of the day's topics. Visuals are provided on the class website. So for instance, when they learned about the Rosetta Stone, they had a link to a picture of it to look at. Mr. Powell involves the kids in the lecture by asking questions and by patiently listening to their ideas, predictions, and insights. There is review built into the lectures, but I think in a good way. My daughter needs that to help her remember the important points. She doesn't seem to be bored with it. I would not have her doing other work during the lectures because I don't see how she would be able to focus and pay attention to what was being taught. I do have her write down any key words or names that come up just to help her remember them. Sometimes she'll doodle, but I hear her answering questions and participating so I know she's listening.

 

Weekly class notes are provided. This gives her something to refer back to when she has forgotten a name or something, and also gives us something to study from for tests. Sometimes they do timelines so they can understand what different things were happening around the world at the same time. Mr. Poweel patiently spells out the words the kids need to fill out their timelines.

 

Along with all of that, there are weekly Geography and History Through Art lessons. For Geography there are blank maps to fill out and map keys to know what to put on them. I am amazed at what my daughter knows now compared to when we started. For Art, he chooses beautiful historical paintings and slowly helps the children to understand what is going on and to look closer than they ever would have on their own. Often he doesn't tell them the title until later during the lectures when one of them excitedly realizes that what they are talking about is what they saw in their art class.

 

There are occasional tests for both Geography and History that are graded by the parents based on their child's levels. Grading keys are provided, but you can grade them in whatever way works for your family. I have found the testing to be very low-key with plenty of prep provided to help them be successful. They are also great for impressing grandparents!

 

I really can't say enough about HAOH. It's a great opportuntiy for my child to learn with other kids around the country and still be safe at home. As with all curriculums, it won't be a fit for every family, but it has sure been a great fit for us. My high school age daughter listened to the Lower Elementary class lectures this year and enjoyed it enough to want to do the highschool level lectures next year. At the very least, you should check it out for yourself http://www.historyatourhouse.com/

 

 

Wendy

[Storm Bay]

Originally Posted by Spy Car

Can someone explain if there is an "Objectivist" (the philosophy of Ayn Rand) "world-view" in History at Our House?

 

Bill

 

I can. I am the creator and teacher of the program.

 

There is no such thing as "Objectivist history," but since Ayn Rand's philosophical system touches on every fundamental question in philosophy from the nature of existence to the nature of a proper political system, and I am both very well appraised and in agreement with her philosophy, it does have an impact on the nature of my presentation.

 

Sincerely,

Scott Powell

www.HistoryAtOurHouse.com

 

Sure there is. What there is no such thing as is history written with absolutely no subjectivity. To write one would mean a history that is as dry as dust. But even then what someone chooses to include in that involves some subjective decisions.

 

There is also no such thing as science that is not subjective. Humans are inherently subjective. It's part of what makes life interesting.

[Spy Car]

This statement from Mr Powell's adult eduction web-site rather undermines his claim that there is no such thing as "Objectivist History":

 

"Objectivists recognize the value of history but have not yet had a viable means of securing that value in full. Modern academic historians have rendered the subject either impenetrable or distasteful. History, as it is written today, is either antiquarian or politicized. Histories written in the late nineteenth century have been a superior alternative for more ambitious readers, but even these sources fail to make history truly accessible, since their common sense approach defaults to intrinsicism, which divorces the past from the present. It’s no wonder that some many adult students of history ask me, “where can I get started?” The answer is A First History for Adults™!"

 

Bill

[Spy Car]

Sure there is. What there is no such thing as is history written with absolutely no subjectivity. To write one would mean a history that is as dry as dust. But even then what someone chooses to include in that involves some subjective decisions.

 

There is also no such thing as science that is not subjective. Humans are inherently subjective. It's part of what makes life interesting.

 

Objectivism and "objective" are not synonymous. "Objectivism" is a philosophy built around radical selfishness being the highest virtue. And things such as self-sacrifice or even charity, or aiding the weak as anti-virtues.

 

It has nothing to do with an attempt to be "non-subjective". KWIM?

 

Bill

[wjpike1]

I am certainly not an expert on Objectivist philosophy. I have read Ayn Rand's books and enjoyed them. I am interested in the philosophy but am not much further than that in my understanding of it. I'm sure that any invidual will necessarily interact with the world based on their philosophy/belief system, and it would naturally have some bearing on how things are taught in a class. That's true of any teacher or adult your children come in contact with, and for that matter, any curriculum or learning materials you buy (They had to be put together by someone who came to the table with their own beliefs/philosophy). I can tell you just as a parent using the program that Scott is very careful about stepping on anyone's toes as far as belief/religion. When one of the kids comments on something where you can tell it is based on their own family teachings and beliefs, he says something like, "That's an interesting idea, but let's get back to out story." I have not myself been offended or bothered by anything that has been said or by how anything was presented. Here is what I have noticed: He loves America, especially it's founders and government. He rejects communism and seems to feel that a Republic is the best form of government. He doesn't think that people should be ruled by others. He is disappointed when a group seems to have been on a positive path and then moves to a more negative one (i.e Roman Republic to Roman Empire).

 

I regard to the "hierarchy of knowledge," my understanding of it is that it is chronological, but also based on what we as humans learned first (Scott will have to correct me on that), for instance Newton's ideas about Gravity should be taught before a discussion about black holes which we as a species only learned about much later. (Don't quote me on that. It's just my understanding of it so far.)

 

I am thinking that the comment about "there is no Objectivist History" just means that Objectivist philosophy doesn't specifically address how to teach History.

 

Wendy

[Lori D.]

Here's my list for you. Entries marked with ** mean that the author is a Christian, but that the work is non-religious -- written in a secular fashion. We heavily use real books and really like most of the books on the Sonlight, Ambleside Online and 1000 Good Books lists. While there are some Christian books in those lists, the majority are classics, Newberrys, and just well-written works. Hope this is of help! Warmly, Lori D.

 

 

 

BEST

 

Math

- Singapore Primary 4A/B, 5A/B, 6A/B

- Math-U-See** OLD Intermediate (gr. 4,5,6 concepts); NEW Delta, Epsilon, Zeta, Pre-Algebra

- Key to ... series (for practicing specific math concepts)

 

 

Literature

- Glencoe free online literature guides (gr. 5-12)

- Garlic Press publishers literature guides (gr. 5-12)

- Lightning Literature & Composition 7 and 8** (gr. 6-9)

- Literary Lessons from the Lord of the Rings** (gr. 7-12)

- Figuratively Speaking (gr. 5-9)

- Walch Toolbook: Prose and Poetry (gr. 5-9)

 

 

Grammar

- Winston Grammar Basic (gr. 4-6)

- Winston Grammar Advanced (gr. 6-8)

- Grammar with a Giggle (gr. 3-6)

- Giggles in the Middle (gr. 6-8)

- Take Five Minutes: A History Fact a Day for Editing (gr. 4-8)

 

 

Spelling

- Megawords (gr. 4-12)

 

 

Vocabulary

- English From the Roots Up** vol. 1 and vol. 2 (gr. 3-12)

 

 

Writing

- Wordsmith Apprentice** (gr. 4-6)

- Wordsmith** (gr. 6-8)

- Scholastic writing series: Descriptive Writing; Narrative Writing; Expository Writing; Persuasive Writing (gr. 5-8)

 

 

Science

- Reader's Digest How ... Works series of books (gr. 5-8)

- TOPS Rocks & Minerals (gr. 6-10)

- TOPS Analysis (gr. 7-12)

- TOPS Solutions (gr. 7-12)

- TOPS Heat (gr. 6-10)

- TOPS Motion (gr. 6-10)

- Adventures in Science: Electricity (gr. 3-8)

- Usborne Internet Linked Human Body (gr. 4-8)

- Usborne Internet Linked Plants (gr. 4-8)

- Usborne Internet Linked Animal Kingdom (gr. 4-8)

- Rader's science websites: http://www.biology4kids.com; http://www.geography4kids.com; http://www.chem4kids.com; http://www.physics4kids.com; http://www.cosmos4kids.com

 

 

 

History

- historical fiction

- The Complete Book of US History (gr. 3-6)

- Cornerstones of Freedom series (gr. 3-6)

- Story of the World** (gr. 1-8)

 

 

Geography

- Beautiful Feet** Geography Guide & Map Pack and 4 Holling C Holling books (gr. 4-8)

- The Complete Book of Maps and Geography (gr. 5-6)

- Maps Charts & Graphs series (gr. 5-8)

- Carson Dellosa Discovering the World of Geography series (gr. 6-8)

 

 

Cultures

- library books on historical / cultural fiction or games or making food

- movies set in various countries; travelogues

- Inside ... series (The World's Great Religions series by Milliken) (gr. 5-8)

 

 

Logic / Critical Thinking

- Logic Liftoff (gr. 4-6)

- Orbiting with Logic (gr. 5-7)

- Dr. Funster Think-A-Minutes (gr. 3-6)

- Dr. Funster's Creative Thinking Puzzlers (gr. 3-6)

- Critical Thinking Activities in Pattern, Image, Logic (gr. 4-6) and (gr. 7-12)

- 10-Minute Critical-Thinking Activities for Englishy (gr. 5-12) -- by Eaton; Walch Pub.

- Think-A-Grams (gr. 7-12)

- Word Winks; More Word Winks (like Think-A-Grams) (g.r 7-12) -- pub. by Mindware

- Plexers; More Plexers (like Think-A-Grams) (gr. 7-12)

 

 

Art / Music

- Looking at Pictures (Richardson) -- (gr. 1-8)

- Usborne Internet Linked Introduction to Art (gr. 5-8)

- Draw Squad (Kistler) -- (gr. 1-12)

- Meet the Great Composers vol. 1 and vol. 2 (gr. 3-8)

- free website Classics For Kids (http://www.classicsforkids.com/) (gr. 3-8)

 

 

 

DIDN'T WORK FOR US

 

- Saxon (too much repetition; concepts too broken up)

- Spelling Power (not enough explanation and practice by vowel patterns)

- Spelling Workout ("busy work" without real learning)

- Artistic Pursuits gr. 4-6 (too "light"; not enough specific art instruction)

- Analytical Grammar (too workbook-y)

- Put That In Writing 1** (too formal; too repetitive; dull examples of good writing)

Edited June 15, 2009 by Lori D.
added info

[wjpike1]

Ooooh! I second the Beautiful Feet Geography stuff. The maps are so nice and I love the H.C. Holling books!

 

Wendy

[Ray]

History through Art is an extra part of HAOH it’s a great tool for developing reflection. While DD may sometimes draw the same conclusions as MR. Powell, sometimes she doesn’t, and during times of non-agreement her wheels start turning. For example during a discussion about a painting showing Napoleon and a sphinx many ideas came up about what the painter was trying to show us. DD focused in on the horse “what nobody is talking about how beautiful the horse is†I asked “why is that important†DD said “the boss is going to have the best horseâ€. This was before the Art discussion made it clear we were looking at the General Napoleon.

HAOH also has a writing component, note-taking and some map work. While DD notes are nothing to brag about the note-taking is writing with a purpose and it’s another thing where she thinks about what is important and why. A side benefit is the increased tolerance for writing has allowed me to add an important activity to her math studies. I will print out one of her word problems and add to the bottom of the paper simple questions for her such as “How did you know what operation to use� “What clues did you see� Before we did this ‘reflection’ orally, but I would end up asking too many leading questions and not allow her much freedom to think about it. With the writing the conclusions are her own. These pages end up in her ‘math notes’.

 

Ray

 

ps. we are not in this grade yet, but no plans to stop using HAOH when we are.

[MrPowell]

Sure there is. What there is no such thing as is history written with absolutely no subjectivity. To write one would mean a history that is as dry as dust. But even then what someone chooses to include in that involves some subjective decisions.

 

 

 

My point is simply that I know a fair number of Objectivist intellectuals in academia and in schools who are also historians or history teachers, and not one of them presents history in exactly the same way. History is more about one's pedagogical values (which represent a very delimited and applied area of philosophy, requiring specialized knowledge) than it is about one's broad premises.

 

Sincerely,

Scott Powell

[MrPowell]

Objectivism and "objective" are not synonymous. "Objectivism" is a philosophy built around radical selfishness being the highest virtue. And things such as self-sacrifice or even charity, or aiding the weak as anti-virtues.

 

Bill

 

I'm a little concerned that this discussion thread is in danger of diverging from questions and answers about secular curricula into something else. I do not consider that this divergence is appropriate, nor it is my intention to debate the merits of any philosophical position on this group. However, in the interests of the truth, and as someone who is well versed in Objectivism, I can tell you plainly that Ayn Rand's philosophy is not "built around radical selfishness." Nor did she denounce charity or aiding the week as "anti-virtues." Sadly, it is not uncommon for people to vilify her concept of rational egoism out of a failure to understand it.

 

Here, for the record, is an exact quote from Ayn Rand taken from a Playboy interview done with her in 1964:

 

"My views on charity are very simple. I do not consider it a major virtue and, above all, I do not consider it a moral duty. There is nothing wrong in helping other people, if and when they are worthy of the help and you can afford to help them. I regard charity as a marginal issue. What I am fighting is the idea that charity is a moral duty and a primary virtue."

 

In the future, I'll be happy to answer any questions about the pedagogical philosophy that drives HistoryAtOurHouse and makes it unique, and I prefer to restrict myself to that theme. Anyone who is interested in learning more about Ayn Rand's philosophy, Objectivism, should turn to the professional philosophers who are authorities on that philosophy at www.aynrand.org.

 

Sincerely,

Scott Powell

www.HistoryAtOurHouse.com

[Spy Car]

However, in the interests of the truth, and as someone who is well versed in Objectivism, I can tell you plainly that Ayn Rand's philosophy is not "built around radical selfishness." Nor did she denounce charity or aiding the week as "anti-virtues." Sadly, it is not uncommon for people to vilify her concept of rational egoism out of a failure to understand it.

 

This is a back-handed way of suggesting I don't understand the teaching of Ayn Rand and "Objectivism", when that isn't the case. I understand her philosophy quite well.

 

 

Here, for the record, is an exact quote from Ayn Rand taken from a Playboy interview done with her in 1964:

 

"My views on charity are very simple. I do not consider it a major virtue and, above all, I do not consider it a moral duty. There is nothing wrong in helping other people, if and when they are worthy of the help and you can afford to help them. I regard charity as a marginal issue. What I am fighting is the idea that charity is a moral duty and a primary virtue."

 

 

This is the "soft-sell" version. Her admitting that in her philosophy that charity is not a "major virtue" or not a "moral duty" understates the case so much as to make the statement laughably dishonest.

 

People looking for "secular" materials may not want to replace religious theology in their educational materials with materials espousing an extremist ideology. And they should at least know what they may be getting themselves into.

 

Bill

Edited June 16, 2009 by Spy Car

[nmoira]

People looking for "secular" materials may not want to replace religious theology in their educational materials with materials espousing an extremist ideology. And they should at least know what they may be getting themselves into.

:iagree:

[wjpike1]

It's an excellent program - bottom line. Check out a sample lecture and decide for yourself

http://www.historyatourhouse.com/main/samples/HAOH%20-%20Sample%20Recorded%20Lecture%20(excerpt).mp3

 

Wendy

[MrPowell]

This is a back-handed way of suggesting I don't understand the teaching of Ayn Rand and "Objectivism", when that isn't the case. I understand her philosophy quite well.

 

As I stated earlier, I am not going to debate the merits of Objectivism on this forum. I would simply invite anyone who has not arrived at a conclusive view themselves, to consider the fact that you may not be the most objective source on this topic, and to be aware that there is an authoritative source on it: http://www.aynrand.org.

 

People looking for "secular" materials may not want to replace religious theology in their educational materials with materials espousing an extremist ideology. And they should at least know what they may be getting themselves into.

 

If HistoryAtOurHouse did anything of the sort, I am certain that my fast-growing Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, and Jewish, and other clientele would clue into it, and be sending out all kinds of wild alerts around the Internet. Strange that this hasn't happened in three years I've taught the program to homeschoolers across America and the world. Still, I'm sure some people will be thankful for the service you have rendered in saving them from an extremist ideology that is so dangerous that it is otherwise undetectable. :tongue_smilie:

 

Scott Powell

www.HistoryAtOurHouse.com

[Spy Car]

It's an excellent program - bottom line. Check out a sample lecture and decide for yourself

http://www.historyatourhouse.com/main/samples/HAOH%20-%20Sample%20Recorded%20Lecture%20(excerpt).mp3

 

Wendy

 

If this is "excellence" then we have very different understanding of the term. I find this lecture simple-minded, and aimed at the indoctrination of children in a very crude fashion.

 

European integration began far before the fall of the Soviet Union, and was driven in large measure because of the Soviet threat. This is not the impression you get from the lecturer.

 

Living in a "free society" (which is something I'm grateful to be doing) doesn't erase "guns vs butter" issues.

 

The "communist history coop" is a terrible "example" of communism. If you are going to critique communism why not do it in an intelligent fashion? This "example" appears to appeal to the emotions of children rather than give them an understanding of communism.

 

This is propaganda. Not even good propaganda.

 

Bill

[Lovedtodeath]

So am I understanding that in the same way that a Christian can write a secular history program, Scott Powell, an Objectivist, is teaching a secular history program? Is that the assertation here?

 

Okay, so I see in the time it took me to help a screaming toddler. Bill is actually speaking about the program, not just the author.

Edited June 15, 2009 by Lovedtodeath
more information

[Peek a Boo]

This is a back-handed way of suggesting I don't understand the teaching of Ayn Rand and "Objectivism", when that isn't the case. I understand her philosophy quite well.

This is the "soft-sell" version. Her admitting that in her philosophy that charity is not a "major virtue" or not a "moral duty" so understates the case so much as to make the statement laughably dishonest.

 

Bill, you are doing a very thorough job of misrepresenting the Objectivist viewpoint --your efforts match that of AiG's to a T and garner as much credibility. Not backhanded-- I will say outright that you have a poor grasp of the Objectivist Philosophy.

 

As someone who cut my discussion board teeth on the capitalism.org forums, I can assure you that helping others is not an "anti-virtue" --it is blindly helping others that is seen as the anti-virtue.

 

Objectivism does rely on the virtue of self-interest: charity is accepted as something that DOES cause joy to some people, and for THOSE people, it should be pursued as far as possible.

 

Self Interest is what drives us to want to live in the Best community. That means the Best Hospitals, the Best fire department, the Best Schools, the Best stores, and the Best ways of dealing w/ societal problems. It IS in my Self Interest to give to those causes that I believe will affect my self interest.

 

You think wanting to live in the Best Type of Community is a Radical idea?

You would rather live in a down-trodden area where people Just Don't Care??

[Spy Car]

As I stated earlier, I am not going to debate the merits of Objectivism on this forum. I would simply invite anyone who has not arrived at a conclusive view themselves, to consider the fact that you may not be the most objective source on this topic, and to be aware that there is an authoritative source on it: http://www.aynrand.org.

 

How would you know if I'm an objective source or not? I'm certainly not an "Objectivist" source.

 

I've read Ayn Rand. I know what "rational egoism" represents. And parents deserve fair warnings about what you are offering up.

 

Bill

[Peek a Boo]

How would you know if I'm an objective source or not? I'm certainly not an "Objectivist" source.

 

I've read Ayn Rand. I know what "rational egoism" represents. And parents deserve fair warnings about what you are offering up.

 

Bill

 

Your previous posts already detail that you are NOT an objective source about Objectivism, lol.

 

You've "read Ayn Rand" like AiG has "read about evolution."

[Karenciavo]

And if anyone does have a source for a good secular logic, please do let me know! Every time I see a new title mentioned I get all excited and check it out, only to find out that it is Christian. :glare: I'm this close to buying the Kreeft book and trying to parse it (someone please don't tell me that one isn't secular too).

 

Well, prepare to get :glare:, Peter Kreeft is Catholic and if you are referring to his book Socratic Logic it is absolutely not secular.

[Lovedtodeath]

In regards to Ring of Fire...

 

I bought 2 of the discs *used* and they are on the rock cycle and earth science. They seem to be secular, but I haven't really delved into them, so maybe I am in for a shock. I hope not. I plan on selling them again anyway so it is no big deal. I like a lot of the literature selections in WP, and have used their IGs on occasion (in a totally warped way)... and other than a few overtly creationist books, can be secularized.

 

I can't wait to do HAOH. I am doing the MP3 classes, not live... I still have to talk my husband in to the expense, but that is no big deal.

 

Be sure to update us on both programs. If the Ring of Fire discs work with an old earth viewpoint, keep me posted and you might have a buyer. :D I have been very interested in those.:)

[Spy Car]

Bill, you are doing a very thorough job of misrepresenting the Objectivist viewpoint --your efforts match that of AiG's to a T and garner as much credibility. Not backhanded-- I will say outright that you have a poor grasp of the Objectivist Philosophy.

 

As someone who cut my discussion board teeth on the capitalism.org forums, I can assure you that helping others is not an "anti-virtue" --it is blindly helping others that is seen as the anti-virtue.

 

Objectivism does rely on the virtue of self-interest: charity is accepted as something that DOES cause joy to some people, and for THOSE people, it should be pursued as far as possible.

 

Self Interest is what drives us to want to live in the Best community. That means the Best Hospitals, the Best fire department, the Best Schools, the Best stores, and the Best ways of dealing w/ societal problems. It IS in my Self Interest to give to those causes that I believe will affect my self interest.

 

You think wanting to live in the Best Type of Community is a Radical idea?

You would rather live in a down-trodden area where people Just Don't Care??

 

This is beneath you Peek. "Objectivists" don't want to build the "best community", they the "creative geniuses" want the masses to stop leaching off their creative talents. And would rather withdraw and see society collapse than have their blood-sucked by the weak.

 

There is no more anti "community" philosophy I can come up with. But you know this.

[elegantlion]

One book I found recently is Science Matters. It's an LCC rec for middle school science. It's touches on different areas of science to help create scientific literacy. I recently reviewed the just released 2nd edition on my blog.

[Matryoshka]

Well, prepare to get :glare:, Peter Kreeft is Catholic and if you are referring to his book Socratic Logic it is absolutely not secular.

 

Aaaaah! :willy_nilly:

 

I need a *heavy sigh* emoticon. :(

 

Surely there must be one individual out there who can write a secular logic program??!!! :banghead:

[swimmermom3]

One book I found recently is Science Matters. It's an LCC rec for middle school science. It's touches on different areas of science to help create scientific literacy. I recently reviewed the just released 2nd edition on my blog.

 

Elegantlion, that's two books in two days. First, Dante's Divine Comedy, and now, Science Matters. Home schooling has developed a real joy in studying science that never existed before-at least for me. My ds love it. I am always looking for good science resources, especially secular ones. By the way, your web page graphics are smashing:cool:

[Storm Bay]

Objectivism and "objective" are not synonymous. "Objectivism" is a philosophy built around radical selfishness being the highest virtue. And things such as self-sacrifice or even charity, or aiding the weak as anti-virtues.

 

It has nothing to do with an attempt to be "non-subjective". KWIM?

 

Bill

 

 

This I know. I should have been more clear; objectivism is one way of being subjective. His history is objectivist, but I also think that there is no objective history which are 2 different things. I was typing in a hurry.

[Storm Bay]

My point is simply that I know a fair number of Objectivist intellectuals in academia and in schools who are also historians or history teachers, and not one of them presents history in exactly the same way. History is more about one's pedagogical values (which represent a very delimited and applied area of philosophy, requiring specialized knowledge) than it is about one's broad premises.

 

Sincerely,

Scott Powell

 

 

Objectivists will vary just as any group varies, of course. But there is still a bias and someone outside of it can see it more easily.

[elegantlion]

Elegantlion, that's two books in two days. First, Dante's Divine Comedy, and now, Science Matters. Home schooling has developed a real joy in studying science that never existed before-at least for me. My ds love it. I am always looking for good science resources, especially secular ones. By the way, your web page graphics are smashing:cool:

 

Thank you, the blog is courtesy of Lena (scroll to the bottom of my page for her link). Homeschooling has expanded my mind and my amazon shopping cart.

[elizabeth]

http://www.socialstudies.com/ This website has an amazing range of primary source material and lists of texts for AP some will work for strong 7th and 8th grade students. The maps and wall posters are great. I could not have covered history as well without this go to resource for non sectarian materials.

Wheelock's Latin- Dr.Dale Grote who wrote the guide to Wheelock's is my hero.

Wordly Wise 3000 -Vocabulary study that has prepared dd for PSAT to the extent that we are not covering any roots, prefixes etc.

Philosophy - http://www.amazon.com/Philosophy-Kids-Questions-Wonder-Everything/dp/1882664701/ref=pd_sim_b_1/189-1607848-4680846 And there is a second text if the first bodes well. Intro to Great Books /Socratic method of teaching great for transitioning away from traditional relationship of teacher/student to that of mentor /facilitator and novice.

Singapore Math-we all know what it is and it has been a winner for dd insofar as she prefers self teaching materialsthat do not have a great deal of repetition.

Physical Science-CPO science textbook and several experiments that did not require a great deal of equipment. Dd loved this and she has a solid background for tackling high school physics. http://dev.cpo.com/home/2/ForEducators/MiddleSchoolPhysicalScience/tabid/263/Default.aspx

A Little History of the World-EM Gombrich a wonderful book we used to supplement The Story of the World by SWB and we have enjoyed both .

Classical Writing Aesop - excellent , rigorous and very teacher intensive. If literature and composition is your idea of geek bliss you will love this program. If not you will want to gouge your eyeballs out just trying to deal with understanding the method of spiraling difficulty between level1 to 5 within each subset of tasks.

I cannot list the things that did not work as I am absolutely relentless in scrutinizing every program , book and lesson plan before I even consider buying it. The things I initially thought would work well and further investigation revealed they would not are few and far between .

Generally we used the book lists and questions for book reports as laid out in The Well Trained Mind but I supplemented heavily as we are a Catholic and Jewish family and our literature selections reflect that orientation. For us it was more a matter of adding to rather than excluding works suggested in TWTM. Suffice it to say that we went heavy on the folklore/mythology parts of the lists and added significantly in regard to Near Eastern cultures.

RS4Kids is to be noted as it is the one program I bought before I realized that they promote Intelligent Design. After I received mailings from ID groups affiliated with that curriculum's authors it became apparent to me that it would not be useful for our family.

[Peek a Boo]

This is beneath you Peek. "Objectivists" don't want to build the "best community", they the "creative geniuses" want the masses to stop leaching off their creative talents. And would rather withdraw and see society collapse than have their blood-sucked by the weak.

 

There is no more anti "community" philosophy I can come up with. But you know this.

 

pointing out the obvious is never beneath me.

 

Objectivists want what is best for the individual. That is by extension the best community. Each individual will of course contribute to those areas they deem most important to their self-interest. There is a HUGE difference between selfISH and acting in one's own self-interest.

Absolutely we want the masses to stop LEECHING off the creative talents: the old "give a man a fish, feed him for a day, teach a man to fish feed him for a lifetime."

 

Objectivism does not exist to create mini-Ayn Rands.

 

Again-- you are doing the exact same thing w/ Objectivism as AiG does w/ evolution, and it is just as obvious. But please --do carry on. ;)

[Peek a Boo]

Objectivists will vary just as any group varies, of course. But there is still a bias and someone outside of it can see it more easily.

 

I tend to see it pretty easily, but then again, I know what I'm looking for. :D

 

However, I have not used the curriculum in question so I can't speak to it specifically.

[Colleen in SEVA]

... original comments deleted...

Edited June 16, 2009 by Colleen in SEVA

[stripe]

A Little History of the World-EM Gombrich a wonderful book we used to supplement The Story of the World by SWB and we have enjoyed both .

I found Gombrich's approach to religion to be somewhat curious.

 

For example, he has an entire chapter about Jesus and the "Good News," that basically implies that we readers accept Jesus as our savior.

 

He includes some characteristics of Judaism that might come across as pejorative, i.e. that they are obsessively legalistic and this is of no spiritual benefit/import.

 

He also has a rather simplistic characteristic of Buddhism. I am not sufficiently well versed in that tradition to evaluate them, but they seemed to be rather dismissive.

 

His comments about Islam are rather "interesting" as well, particularly his claim that Islam is anti-intellectual.

 

And he also makes comments in passing that I am not sure how to characterize, along the lines of "one day you should read the Bible, but don't rush" -- which suggests that we readers are Christians, but perhaps lapsed in our faith.

 

All in all, I felt this aspect of the book was weird. The narrative was interesting, but I was disappointed to see those examples in particular. Of course, this was after I bought the book. :001_huh:

[nmoira]

For example, he has an entire chapter about Jesus and the "Good News," that basically implies that we readers accept Jesus as our savior.

I too found parts of Little History to be curious.

 

I put the book away at the point where he characterized people as being "better people" or something very like after the advent of Christianity.

[Storm Bay]

I tend to see it pretty easily, but then again, I know what I'm looking for. :D

 

However, I have not used the curriculum in question so I can't speak to it specifically.

 

 

I'm not opposed to objectivism, per se, although I don't totally espouse all of it, either. On the one hand I do think that the masses shouldn't leach off of individual creativity, but on the other I think that charitable giving is a virtue when it's done thoughtfully to a cause you support. My point wasn't that it is good or bad, nor directly related to one curricula. My point was that there is objectivist history written and that there is no such thing as a totally objective (not the same as objectivist, of course, but now meaning the opposite of subjective) history. That was basically was it.

[Tohru]

subbing... a lot of great suggestions and links!

[Lovedtodeath]

I found Gombrich's approach to religion to be somewhat curious.

 

For example, he has an entire chapter about Jesus and the "Good News," that basically implies that we readers accept Jesus as our savior.

 

He includes some characteristics of Judaism that might come across as pejorative, i.e. that they are obsessively legalistic and this is of no spiritual benefit/import.

 

He also has a rather simplistic characteristic of Buddhism. I am not sufficiently well versed in that tradition to evaluate them, but they seemed to be rather dismissive.

 

His comments about Islam are rather "interesting" as well, particularly his claim that Islam is anti-intellectual.

 

And he also makes comments in passing that I am not sure how to characterize, along the lines of "one day you should read the Bible, but don't rush" -- which suggests that we readers are Christians, but perhaps lapsed in our faith.

 

All in all, I felt this aspect of the book was weird. The narrative was interesting, but I was disappointed to see those examples in particular. Of course, this was after I bought the book. :001_huh:

 

I too found parts of Little History to be curious.

 

I put the book away at the point where he characterized people as being "better people" or something very like after the advent of Christianity.

Thank you! Thank you! A Little History of the World-- E.H. Gombrich review: I am utterly befuzzled that people will accept this book and at the same time call SOTW not secular enough.

[nmoira]

 

Thank you! Thank you! A Little History of the World-- E.H. Gombrich review: I am utterly befuzzled that people will accept this book and at the same time call SOTW not secular enough.

I agree wholeheartedly.

[stripe]

I guess he had his own issues with questions of religion , and his inner turmoil on his own identity is reflected in the text, at least how I read it.

 

I think in order for a resource to be secular, it should be devoid of text suggesting just how salvation is obtained.

[Peek a Boo]

I'm not opposed to objectivism, per se, although I don't totally espouse all of it, either. On the one hand I do think that the masses shouldn't leach off of individual creativity, but on the other I think that charitable giving is a virtue when it's done thoughtfully to a cause you support. My point wasn't that it is good or bad, nor directly related to one curricula. My point was that there is objectivist history written and that there is no such thing as a totally objective (not the same as objectivist, of course, but now meaning the opposite of subjective) history. That was basically was it.

 

I agree 100%.

[Storm Bay]

I agree 100%.

 

Not surprised :).

[pooh bear]

Real Science 4 Kids is not a truly secular curriculum.

 

Dr. Keller is an advocate for Intelligent Design. She has signed a list called Dissent from Darwin. This is a podcast from the Intelligent Design the Future website.

[Peek a Boo]

Real Science 4 Kids is not a truly secular curriculum.

 

Dr. Keller is an advocate for Intelligent Design. She has signed a list called Dissent from Darwin. This is a podcast from the Intelligent Design the Future website.

 

 

But is the curriculum secular?

 

The author's bias is a different question.

A Christian can write a completely secular curriculum.

 

I have not used RS4K so I can't answer the question i posed. :)

[Lovedtodeath]

I have not used RS4K so I can't answer the question i posed. :)

I have not used RS4K either. In another thread it was discussed and this was the conclusion: Though the claim is that RS4K is a secular curriculum, the term designed is used throughout, and the author should have known better.

 

Though I typically prefer secular curriculum, it doesn't bother me. I believe in ID, being an old earth creationist of sorts, but it is good to know for some with whom the term designed would conflict.

[funschooler5]

NOEO Chemistry

 

I'm really want to get NOEO Chemistry II, but I keep looking at this page on their website http://www.noeoscience.com/about_us.html. Is their curriculum really secular? Their samples look great, I just don't want to be surprised after I buy it. :tongue_smilie:

[funschooler5]

GWG (with some caution - I wouldnt use this year after year)

 

I just purchased GWG for 4th and 6th grades. Is there too much review to use it year after year?