ok, for this one, I’m a tad confused. Maybe I’m taking it too…
Question Answered step-by-step ok, for this one, I’m a tad confused. Maybe I’m taking it too… ok, for this one, I’m a tad confused. Maybe I’m taking it too literal. Can someone help me understand what is meant by saying that one cannot fully believe or understand something unless you intimately know the opposite. How well are you supposed to know that without fully compromising the part of yourself that believes and understands what you think you do? Here is what I am talking about “To fully believe in something, to truly understand something, one must be inti- mately acquainted with its opposite. One should not adopt a creed by default, because no alternative is known. Education should prepare students for the “real world” not by segregating them from evil but by urging full confrontation to test and modify the validity of the good. —Robert Baron, “In Defense of ‘Teaching’ Racism, Sexism, and Fascism” Arts & Humanities Philosophy HUM 1020 Share QuestionEmailCopy link Comments (0)
