Quote:
Originally Posted by kerry
WTF is the problem? Does any serious historian think that the Holocaust was 'merely a political scheme created to influence public emotion and gain'? Not to my knowledge. 'Leading the witness' as CMAC puts it is a gentle way of describing the problem. There would be no problem at all with giving the students two serious pieces of historical analysis of the Holocaust with different conclusions and asking the students to assess the strengths of the argument and the credibility of the evidence.
I don't even know what 'compose a written debate' means. Construct an disagreement? Make an argument?
|
I expect more than a few of us have constructed pedagogical assignments that in retrospect, were poorly worded. I blush to admit having been there, done that, got the well-worn tee shirt.
In my past as an educator, I forcefully argued in favor of special creation and challenged my students to meet the position head-on. I was dismayed how many of the responses were a sort-of faith based response ("because it doesn't explain evolution" for example). I am not even close to a creationist but I sure as heck try to understand their arguments sufficient to honestly represent them. Anybody who presents themselves as a practicing scientist in the many threads of biology should be able to do the same, IMO. Failing to understand an opposing theory (on any subject) is the best possible way to invalidate one's own argument.
There is no doubt in my mind that the holocaust occurred. But I'll be damned if I'll accept a faith-based argument like, "all the books say so." That sort of argument supports the Pope vs Galileo.