Flaw Awareness
I've always struggled with sensitivity during an argument. Don't get me wrong, I like to think I'm very sensitive with people's feelings. But apparently not when I'm in the middle of an argument. I adamantly believe in the three pillars of argument: ethos, pathos, and logos. I rarely express my own experiences or feelings in an argument unless I'm aware of the way that I'm exploiting myself. I very rarely let my own feelings get in the way of my point. I speak of this in an academic sense and a personal sense (most of the time). This is mostly to protect myself. I don't reveal my struggles and troubles to many people because I'm aware of how angry they make me. I'm aware how I dissolve under an argument when I can't keep my own feelings in check.
Recently I was in a class where we were discussing the current education system format. Many of the future teachers talked of grade levels versus intelligence levels. We debated the systematic way that kids get pushed through the system. We talked of the pros and cons of each of the systems proposed along with the current system seeing as we'd all been through it.
Everyone has different experiences in grade school. Many of them are unpleasant. I myself don't like to think about high school because I was often ashamed of what I did to try an fit in and emotions spiraled out of our control. There were fights among friends, fights among enemies, and a lot of isolation despite the fact that we were all going through puberty together. I like to repress that as much as possible because it still has an effect to this day. Blows to my self esteem come from my past. The shield that I draw around myself derives from four years of hell and a few spots of heaven.
So when we discussed a possible system where kids were organized based on intelligence versus grade level it dredged up memories for everyone, both good and bad. Because of this argumentative shield I've developed on the most analytic part of my brain, I argued from a different view. I like playing devil's advocate because it makes me question my own belief system. I get my intellectual high off of trying to see things from a different point of view.
This got me in trouble. I realize that certain ideals don't sit with everyone. I realize that some people are extremely passionate about their point of view. Was I arguing for an intellectually based system of organization in education? No. My personal beliefs revolve around the social maturity of varying grade levels. To mix a 12 year old in with a 18 year old would cause too many social problems on such a massive scale of reorganization. Bullying would increase drastically and so might drop out rates due to stress.
I like to argue for a more systematic approach of pre-requisites. If a student passes varying levels of literature classes they can progress to a higher level. Only when they have passed the necessary levels can they graduate. Many would progress on time, many ahead, and a many behind. Have I thought through all the kinks? God no.
But the basis for our class debate was the issues of intelligence over maturity. I tended to argue intelligence over maturity because I didn't quite agree with either.
This led to tears and personal experiences revealed.
I think I realized one of my flaws. Sometimes, when I am personally invested in an argument, I become too analytical. I use too much of my brain instead of my heart. While I don't know if I can change this in myself just yet, I think it's always good to be aware of your flaws, especially when you plan on walking into a classroom of hormone riddled teens in the near future.
Recently I was in a class where we were discussing the current education system format. Many of the future teachers talked of grade levels versus intelligence levels. We debated the systematic way that kids get pushed through the system. We talked of the pros and cons of each of the systems proposed along with the current system seeing as we'd all been through it.
Everyone has different experiences in grade school. Many of them are unpleasant. I myself don't like to think about high school because I was often ashamed of what I did to try an fit in and emotions spiraled out of our control. There were fights among friends, fights among enemies, and a lot of isolation despite the fact that we were all going through puberty together. I like to repress that as much as possible because it still has an effect to this day. Blows to my self esteem come from my past. The shield that I draw around myself derives from four years of hell and a few spots of heaven.
This got me in trouble. I realize that certain ideals don't sit with everyone. I realize that some people are extremely passionate about their point of view. Was I arguing for an intellectually based system of organization in education? No. My personal beliefs revolve around the social maturity of varying grade levels. To mix a 12 year old in with a 18 year old would cause too many social problems on such a massive scale of reorganization. Bullying would increase drastically and so might drop out rates due to stress.
I like to argue for a more systematic approach of pre-requisites. If a student passes varying levels of literature classes they can progress to a higher level. Only when they have passed the necessary levels can they graduate. Many would progress on time, many ahead, and a many behind. Have I thought through all the kinks? God no.But the basis for our class debate was the issues of intelligence over maturity. I tended to argue intelligence over maturity because I didn't quite agree with either.
This led to tears and personal experiences revealed.
I think I realized one of my flaws. Sometimes, when I am personally invested in an argument, I become too analytical. I use too much of my brain instead of my heart. While I don't know if I can change this in myself just yet, I think it's always good to be aware of your flaws, especially when you plan on walking into a classroom of hormone riddled teens in the near future.
