'State schools are creating amoral children'

I think Dawkins, who irritates the hell out of me, is right; morality is essentially a social construct. The desire to advance the interests of your own child is instinct. The attempt to advance the interests of all children is moral. Which is why the whole private v state thing is ultimately a moral decision. Independent schools cannot, as they're forever suggesting (in a for god's sake don't remove our charitable status/tax dodge kind of way) be "part of the solution" because they are the problem. They leach ( not all, but too many) talented teachers and pupils from the state system ;just as importantly, if not more so, they leach the kind of able, involved parents who have the resources and , frankly, the leisure to raise hell when schools are failing their sons and daughters. So we're left with this crazy educational apartheid that wastes talent and fosters mistrust on both sides. Viewed sociologically , private schools are a really crap idea.

Read Stanislas Dehaene on what is innate.

.....but it is culture and Civilization which have developed it so that we are as nice as we are.

Dawkins thinks morality comes from our tribal village pasts when we were all interconnected.

I don't think we're born a blank sheet. Even if you don't believe in a God or creative force of some sort (although I find it hard not to believe in a creative force, as the Big Bang theory sounds pretty forceful to me and appears to have created something!), surely if you believe in evolution, then you believe that living things have evolved as a result of their interactions with each other and the world around them, meaning there must be some kind of ordering going on, to enable living organisms to survive together. Every so often, something happens that throws everything out of the window so you almost have to start again, but otherwise, we are gradually changing over time, not just changing after birth, so something must have been hardwired into us before we breathe our first breath. Also, we can't train other animals to behave exactly like humans, however hard we try.

But do you accept Chomsky's theory that language is innate? Or that birds flying is?

(that's re your comments on right minded people...).

happy - I think that is why headmasters of private schools need to be careful when the word "amoral" passes their lips, or they might just find themselves being blamed for all the amoral students who pass through their schools. There are so many other ways he could have expressed himself that would have been less unfortunate, as I think many are in agreement that opportunities in sport, music, drama, critical thought, voluntary work, etc, are of great value and can give people a sense of meaning to their lives.

Do you Nit I don't believe that something/someone/an order put us here but I think I'd like to believe some part of personality is innate, rather than we're born a blank sheet and can be completely influenced by what goes on around us be it good or bad.

See Slipshod for me, if I were to accept that anything was innate, I'd have to believe that something/someone/an order put it there, and I don't.

Is Mart being stalked unkindly ?

I doubt it rabbit frankly I don't think any right minded person thinks any sector has a monopoly on turning out the morally superior except maybe Quaker schools. If they were achieving this I sure there wouldn't be shouting it from the roof tops because isn't humility part of moral superiority?

What "not again"?

Here's another way of looking at it... Is there any evidence within society that, all other things being equal (ie taking into account the likely influence of home life and wealth), people who have been privately educated are morally superior to the rest of us, or at least, not as amoral? Do they avoid tax less? Or use company paper for personal reasons less? Or speed less in their cars? Or commit adultery less often? What do they do or not do to demonstrate their superiority?

Oh, fuck. Not again.

Martorana- collaboration; humour; violence; love; envy;
Iots I suppose. I agree with Nit that cultural materialism is important in shaping our environment and thus our response to it, but I think that is a kind of editing of our nature which seems to have remained reasonably constant.

@ TOSN That seems odd, rude and stupid in pretty much equal measures, Nneoma

Well that is the image I get of her anytime I read her post. Not pleasant I know.

I just hope she is genuinely concerned about the girl she is mentoring. The type of pity that she shows towards people she deems disadvantaged is stifling.

Not also sure why she loathes private ed for its elitism but wants her daughter in Cambridge/Oxford.

That's interesting, slipshod- what sort of things?

' I'd refer to 'human nature' as a lazy and, in my opinion inaccurate, way to indicate 'behaviour which is normative in our society','

I would suggest that some fundamental human values have remained constant over huge tracts of time, despite changes in what is considered normative in our society and that suggests that there is such a thing as Human Nature. Whether it is more Hobbesian than Rousseauian, I do not know.

[backs very slowly away from the loon]

Slipshod- sadly, I think your relative was the exception rather than the norm.

That seems odd, rude and stupid in pretty much equal measures, Nneoma

Been reading this and anytime I read your post Martorana you remind me of the woman this young Nigerian girl spoke about in 7:45 to 9:45

I don't believe much is innate either; sometimes I'd refer to 'human nature' as a lazy and, in my opinion inaccurate, way to indicate 'behaviour which is normative in our society', but I don't believe that human nature is really 'a thing', and certainly not that there is any innate 'morality'. Tabula rasa and materialism for me.

Ah. Now I have a close relative who earned his living coaching sport at the highest levels to people up to about 22 years old. He was very concerned with beating the opponents but would have been unimpressed by what you have witnessed. He was very fond of a strong opponent. His obituaries were testament to this.

I've been the parent of serious sportspeople for 13 years now. The times when sportsmanship has been considered by parents, players or coaches to be more important than winning I could count on the fingers of a couple of hands.