Education

     In a classroom setting, is it appropriate for the teacher to mention their own religious views? If so, how and where should they draw the line?

  
This concept is something that has been up for debate for quite some time now. Even today educators are debating the concept of religion in a classroom. In my opinion, as a student going to school to be a teacher, I believe these are issues that should be discussed. If and when religion is brought up in a classroom (secular schools aside), in my opinion, is something that should be brought up in a wide manner. For example, if a student asks the teacher a question about "God" or "Jesus" the teacher should do their best to leave their own religious affiliations out of the discussion.

 If a student brings up the matter of the teacher's religion, there is a fine line between when the educator should share their "faith" and where they begin "preaching" or forcing their views onto their students. This is where the line should be drawn; the teacher should take into consideration the diversity of their classrooms and respect the faiths (or non-faiths) of their students. This is also so the teacher themselves will not lose respect or cause a sense of disgust in their students because of religious views.

I believe that educators have the right to their religious or non-religious views, but I do believe there is a time and place for religion and the classroom may not be appropriate, unless the conversation can remain neutral and be fundamental and educational. With regards to a religion class, I believe that it should remain a theology course where ALL religions are mentioned and expressed and, once again, not one religion is put above another.

Accepting New-World Empericism

 Is it possible to study supernaturalism without accepting at least some aspects of this-world empiricism?

    From further class discussions and re-thinking the concept it would seem as though if someone were to study pure supernaturalism it would be very difficult to not accept aspects of real-world empiricism. However, there are some of those who do purely rely on supernaturalism and deny all aspects of real-world  empiricism. By doing so, there are severely limiting their ability to see something from all angles. The idea of leaving the answers to a spiritual or higher being without considering the stable constructs around one is very difficult to consider legitimate. I believe that you cannot properly study supernaturalism without seriously considering the logical aspects of empiricism. Without the this-world empiricism considered it would be difficult to say that "a higher being created this beautiful ocean," as you cannot consider the fact that this ocean does or does not exist without considering the this-world empiricist aspect. To say that a higher being exists and only a higher being, that there is nothing else, is illogical.