What topic do you have the most knowledge, and can you explain it so a child can understand it?
-
This post did not contain any content.
-
This post did not contain any content.
I have two obscure knowledge bases; botany and wastewater treatment. I can and have taught both to children.
-
I have two obscure knowledge bases; botany and wastewater treatment. I can and have taught both to children.
What would you say are some of the core principals of both that you would teach to children?
-
This post did not contain any content.
Spinning wheels (at one point, I'm pretty rusty now)
-
This post did not contain any content.
I know how to appear like I know a lot of things. The trick is to hyperfixate on a topic once a week and then once you've learned slightly more than the average person, get bored and move onto the next thing. The only problem is when you run into someone who really knows their shit you feel like an idiot in comparison
-
This post did not contain any content.
Emotion regulation? Attachment styles and the consequences of insecure attachment and childhood trauma? Epistemology and the illusion of certainty? Why Kierkegaard>Nietzsche (but you need to read both!)? Idk, depends on the kid and how much time we'd have, I guess.
In earnest though, if there's one topic I think I have some data on that most will never have is on the two fundamental 'arguments' for not believing in God (one very flawed, the other not so much but lacking in weight and leaving you in an apparent 50/50). As someone who's been there but has made the crossing (or landed the jump, if you get the reference!), after years of bitterness and resentment towards ""Christianity"" in my early childhood and about 15 years of 'comfy agnosticism', I think I could explain to a child (maybe a young and precocious teen going through his first ideological crisis?) what's confusing them.
I once tried making caramel by microwaving sugar cubes though, maybe the child could teach me something back, lol.
-
Emotion regulation? Attachment styles and the consequences of insecure attachment and childhood trauma? Epistemology and the illusion of certainty? Why Kierkegaard>Nietzsche (but you need to read both!)? Idk, depends on the kid and how much time we'd have, I guess.
In earnest though, if there's one topic I think I have some data on that most will never have is on the two fundamental 'arguments' for not believing in God (one very flawed, the other not so much but lacking in weight and leaving you in an apparent 50/50). As someone who's been there but has made the crossing (or landed the jump, if you get the reference!), after years of bitterness and resentment towards ""Christianity"" in my early childhood and about 15 years of 'comfy agnosticism', I think I could explain to a child (maybe a young and precocious teen going through his first ideological crisis?) what's confusing them.
I once tried making caramel by microwaving sugar cubes though, maybe the child could teach me something back, lol.
What are the "Two fundamental arguments for not believing in God"?
I haven't heard the idea that there are only two fundamental theories.
-
This post did not contain any content.
"Digital humanities" is making computers help us understand our history and how we live together, as groups, as societies of people.
-
This post did not contain any content.
"Digital humanities" is making computers help us understand our history and how we live together, as groups, as societies of people.
-
Emotion regulation? Attachment styles and the consequences of insecure attachment and childhood trauma? Epistemology and the illusion of certainty? Why Kierkegaard>Nietzsche (but you need to read both!)? Idk, depends on the kid and how much time we'd have, I guess.
In earnest though, if there's one topic I think I have some data on that most will never have is on the two fundamental 'arguments' for not believing in God (one very flawed, the other not so much but lacking in weight and leaving you in an apparent 50/50). As someone who's been there but has made the crossing (or landed the jump, if you get the reference!), after years of bitterness and resentment towards ""Christianity"" in my early childhood and about 15 years of 'comfy agnosticism', I think I could explain to a child (maybe a young and precocious teen going through his first ideological crisis?) what's confusing them.
I once tried making caramel by microwaving sugar cubes though, maybe the child could teach me something back, lol.
God I need help with the first one. Second one also sounds interesting.
-
What are the "Two fundamental arguments for not believing in God"?
I haven't heard the idea that there are only two fundamental theories.
Oh, it's just what I've noticed in myself, and others when I ask them what they believe in and the convo goes from there.
It seems that in the end it's one of two things... There's what's known as the Epicurean paradox or the problem of evil, where the confusion arises from many sources: forgetting about the existence of free will and the causal chain of events, semantic nonsense or even simple immaturity. This is the one that's just all fluff, all wind, but words can kick one's ass, especially if you live more in words than in reality.
And then there's the one that I respect a little bit more: while the beginning of the causal chain that we can conceive (so, embedded in/attached to space and time) is evidently not a source of it, but also since things exist today we can't deny the 'proto-thing' existed then I can somewhat accept you telling me that this essence we call matter and energy was always there and God is not necessary and etc etc. God has been understood for millennia as the 'prime engine' and unmoved mover, behind the universe and before it, the One that 'comes from nothing' that we have to accept because nothing comes from nothing and things exist. But many folk just skip that part and say "things exist, that's all I can see and that's all I will believe in". That's fair, but I better not see you making any logical inferences then, lol.
-
God I need help with the first one. Second one also sounds interesting.
There's a barrier between what we hear and how we feel about it (which will then be expressed in words and action) and that's the barrier of ideology plus self-beliefs (what we think). Plus, how mentally agile you are will decide on how quickly you reply (that's why folks with ADHD can say and do some wild, impulsive shit, for instance). By analysing our beliefs critically and fearlessly, and tearing down the ideological house of cards that causes us cognitive dissonance and impedes us from reaching the right conclusions in many areas of our lives, we can better deal with the world and how it 'makes us' feel. Going from "people are not to be trusted" or "all women are sluts (but somehow they will never date me)" to "people are fundamentally good, but flawed to different degrees and in different ways and there's no need to live in fear" and "women and men are sexual creatures, most women are not prostitutes and this is just the way I've coped with my lack of success in the dating world and with the feelings of worthlessness and despair that come with it", for example, will 100% help you better handle your emotions.
There's nothing to do about mental agility though, I've found, besides being permanently medicated/sedated or high on weed. And none of those sound healthy/ideal.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Business design and operations. I can't even successfully explain it to adults, let alone a child.
-
This post did not contain any content.wrote on last edited by [email protected]
Early childhood development and history, and no, while the whole point of my degrees is how to teach children, I cannot teach how to teach children to children.
-
This post did not contain any content.wrote on last edited by [email protected]
Photography and mechanical keyboards, and cooking. I am no Ansel Adams, and I donāt know every new photography technology and setting, but in terms of the fundamentals and the core principles, I can definitely teach a class, and have taught people, although not children. I havenāt taught the other two, but I could definitely expand on them for, well, hours for mechanical keyboards, and days to weeks for cooking. Iām almost certainly forgetting several topics too, but whatever, this is Lemmy.
EDIT: If anyone is rolling up in here teaching classes on residential plumbing, electrical, demolition, or contracting, hit me up. I need to my house down to the sticks, and redo all the electrical and plumbing and the floors and the walls and the insulation. Iām trying to figure out how much of this I feel like tackling myself, or is even possible of tackling myself, versus how much I am willing to pay professionals to just take care of for me. Oh, also I designed a sweet fence for an area of my backyard to keep my pets safe, so would love tips on building that too. Cheers!
-
Oh, it's just what I've noticed in myself, and others when I ask them what they believe in and the convo goes from there.
It seems that in the end it's one of two things... There's what's known as the Epicurean paradox or the problem of evil, where the confusion arises from many sources: forgetting about the existence of free will and the causal chain of events, semantic nonsense or even simple immaturity. This is the one that's just all fluff, all wind, but words can kick one's ass, especially if you live more in words than in reality.
And then there's the one that I respect a little bit more: while the beginning of the causal chain that we can conceive (so, embedded in/attached to space and time) is evidently not a source of it, but also since things exist today we can't deny the 'proto-thing' existed then I can somewhat accept you telling me that this essence we call matter and energy was always there and God is not necessary and etc etc. God has been understood for millennia as the 'prime engine' and unmoved mover, behind the universe and before it, the One that 'comes from nothing' that we have to accept because nothing comes from nothing and things exist. But many folk just skip that part and say "things exist, that's all I can see and that's all I will believe in". That's fair, but I better not see you making any logical inferences then, lol.
It seems that in the end itās one of two thingsā¦ Thereās whatās known as the Epicurean paradox or the problem of evil, where the confusion arises from many sources: forgetting about the existence of free will and the causal chain of events, semantic nonsense or even simple immaturity. This is the one thatās just all fluff, all wind, but words can kick oneās ass, especially if you live more in words than in reality.
I am assuming we are speaking about the Christian God in this context.
God is all knowing, and omnipresent. This means that God knows in advance the result of it's own decisions.
If God granted free will to humans knowing that humans would commit horrible acts with it against each other, how can that God be considered benevolent?
And then thereās the one that I respect a little bit more: while the beginning of the causal chain that we can conceive (so, embedded in/attached to space and time) is evidently not a source of it, but also since things exist today we canāt deny the āproto-thingā existed then I can somewhat accept you telling me that this essence we call matter and energy was always there and God is not necessary and etc etc. God has been understood for millennia as the āprime engineā and unmoved mover, behind the universe and before it, the One that ācomes from nothingā that we have to accept because nothing comes from nothing and things exist. But many folk just skip that part and say āthings exist, thatās all I can see and thatās all I will believe inā. Thatās fair, but I better not see you making any logical inferences then, lol.
The question remains both Theologically and Scientifically unanswered: If "nothing" can come from "nothing", where did the "thing" that created "everything" come from?
If we accept the Big Bang or Creationism as two theories explaining the same event from a different point of view, what was existence prior to that? Did God simply exist in infinite nothingness up until the point of creation? Wouldn't the existence of God contradict "nothingness" simply by existing?
-
This post did not contain any content.
The Star Wars Expanded Universe (now called "Star Wars Legends" because of Disney)
-
Photography and mechanical keyboards, and cooking. I am no Ansel Adams, and I donāt know every new photography technology and setting, but in terms of the fundamentals and the core principles, I can definitely teach a class, and have taught people, although not children. I havenāt taught the other two, but I could definitely expand on them for, well, hours for mechanical keyboards, and days to weeks for cooking. Iām almost certainly forgetting several topics too, but whatever, this is Lemmy.
EDIT: If anyone is rolling up in here teaching classes on residential plumbing, electrical, demolition, or contracting, hit me up. I need to my house down to the sticks, and redo all the electrical and plumbing and the floors and the walls and the insulation. Iām trying to figure out how much of this I feel like tackling myself, or is even possible of tackling myself, versus how much I am willing to pay professionals to just take care of for me. Oh, also I designed a sweet fence for an area of my backyard to keep my pets safe, so would love tips on building that too. Cheers!
Hey I got a PDF on electrical work from my online electrician course I can give you. If you're at all mechanically inclined you'll have it down pat by the end of the book.
-
This post did not contain any content.
I might be able to explain to them canning and gentle kids friendly food safety? Education is difficult and not what I'm good at.
-
This post did not contain any content.
I can teach anyone any board or card game so long as I can play it once on my own. In my 20s I used a local charity coffee shop to teach the entire graduating class of my small town how to play magic the gathering.
