Where Did God Go?????

I think it is also important to consider, though, that higher funding can increase the capacity of a school to pay teachers and improve the general comfort of the teaching/learning environment. No, more funding will not solve most of the education system's problems, but I think money is certainly an object. To attract high end teachers, setting aside optimism and idealism for a moment, a school must be able to pay well, not to mention these teachers will also be looking for comfortable, friendly teaching environments. Obviously there are other factors that contibute to the general attractiveness of a school, such as the community that feeds kids into the school, but to say money doesn't or can't help I think would be incorrect in many cases.

However, I obviously agree that wasteful spending is unavailing, and I think you are right in many ways.

The main point is that being rich doesn't make you smart and catholic schools aren't exactly rich.

agreed, but being smart can make you rich!

CT Track wrote:This continues to stray away from my original criticism of Miler's constant stereotyping and profiling. All of which are inconsistent and incorrect.

I never stereotyped anyone.

Oh jeez you just want to continue this loop don't you.

CT Track wrote:Oh jeez you just want to continue this loop don't you.

You just complained that this was getting off topic from the conversation about my "stereotypes", and now you are complaining about continuing it?

Adonai wrote:I think it is also important to consider, though, that higher funding can increase the capacity of a school to pay teachers and improve the general comfort of the teaching/learning environment. No, more funding will not solve most of the education system's problems, but I think money is certainly an object. To attract high end teachers, setting aside optimism and idealism for a moment, a school must be able to pay well, not to mention these teachers will also be looking for comfortable, friendly teaching environments. Obviously there are other factors that contibute to the general attractiveness of a school, such as the community that feeds kids into the school, but to say money doesn't or can't help I think would be incorrect in many cases.

However, I obviously agree that wasteful spending is unavailing, and I think you are right in many ways.

main difference:

most public high schools have a faculty comprised of teachers with general liberal arts degrees, letting them teach a variety of subjects.

on the other side of the spectrum my private school has teachers with actual degrees in the subjects that they teach. i.e. Latin teacher has a MA in Latin with a minor in greek and classical studies. AP Physics teacher has a phD in physics and 20 years of military/test flight experience. art history teacher is a world renowned art dealer while the drawing/art teacher is a accomplished artist. one math teacher has a BA/MA from berkeley in pure mathematics. just a few examples...

http://www.godlessgeeks.com/LINKS/GodProof.htm

Yea I stole it, but I thought it was so hilarious that I'd share it with the people of RT.

Haha there so stupid but funny. Heres some I liked:

ARGUMENT FROM BLINDNESS (II)
(1) God is love.
(2) Love is blind.
(3) Stevie Wonder is blind.
(4) Therefore, Stevie Wonder is God.
(5) Therefore, God exists.

ARGUMENT FROM SMUGNESS
(1) God exists.
(2) I don't give a crap whether you believe it or not; I have better things to do than to try to convince you morons.
(3) Therefore, God exists.

ARGUMENT FROM META-SMUGNESS
(1) Fuck you.
(2) Therefore, God exists.

ARGUMENT FROM MANIFESTATIONS
(1) If you turn your head sideways and squint a little, you can see an image of a bearded face in that tortilla.
(2) Therefore, God exists.

SLATHER'S ARGUMENT
(1) My toaster is God.
(2) Therefore, God exists.

ARGUMENT FROM ARGUMENTATION
(1) God exists.
(2) [Atheist's counterargument]
(3) Yes he does.
(4) [Atheist's counterargument]
(5) Yes he does!
(6) [Atheist's counterargument]
(7) YES HE DOES!!!
( [Atheist gives up and goes home.]
(9) Therefore, God exists.

Running With Scissors wrote:Haha there so stupid but funny. Heres some I liked:

ARGUMENT FROM BLINDNESS (II)
(1) God is love.
(2) Love is blind.
(3) Stevie Wonder is blind.
(4) Therefore, Stevie Wonder is God.
(5) Therefore, God exists.

Greatest Syllogism Ever.

EDIT: But how do we actually know Stevie Wonder is God? I have never perceived him "clearly and distinctly". I have never even perceived him through any of my senses, and even if I did, I can never trust my senses, because they give me information that is always changing. The senses are so deeply flawed! Anyway, even if he does exist, that isn't the real Stevie Wonder, the real Stevie Wonder is the Form of Stevie Wonder, and the Stevie Wonder whom we perceive is simply an imperfect copy of what we see.

Oh how I love my philosophy courses. . .

stupidest thread ever revived

+1

cry more god loving hippies

Seeing as I'm the only "god loving hippy" still here yet you have never made me cry, your sentence is inaccurate.

I forgot that you guys take everything you read literal.

i am god. the end.

no u

oh wait...

i have found god