
Bertrand Russell’s 10 Commandments for Teachers - mhb
http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2012/05/bertrand-russells-10-commandments-for-teachers.html
======
blahedo
I have one additional commandment, which I try to follow, and which is either
a corollary to or a summary of several of Russell's:

 _Always keep in mind that at least some of your students will be smarter than
you. Give them what they need and don't treat them as a threat._

They may not yet be as knowledgeable as you (presumably not, at least in your
area of expertise), and if you're particularly smart there may not be very
many of them, but they'll show up someday and from time to time. This
commandment manifests in various ways, from something as simple as a
willingness to say "I don't know" on up to giving students an alternate,
challenging path through an assignment when they're bored with the default.

IME, the best teachers all (possibly subconsciously) followed this rule, and
it was violations of this rule that made the worst teachers so bad.

~~~
epo
This is a needless restatement of things Russell said so much more elegantly.
Your addition conveys no useful advice and yet manages to be both vague and
vacuous, possibly you are a teacher.

~~~
Confusion
I downvoted you. Here is why:

\- that last parenthetical 'possibly you are a teacher'. It is clear from his
post he is a teacher. That comment is an attempt to lend credence to your
assertions by making yourself seem insightful and semi-clairvoyant, by
'guessing' he is a teacher. We all understand he is a teacher. I hate it when
people use sneaky fallacies like that.

\- You accuse someone of 'not giving useful advice' and 'managing to be vague
and vacuous', when you yourself do not offer any useful advice and fail to
explain _why_ the statements you are responding to would be 'vague and
vacuous', making your own statement 'vague and vacuous'. When harshly
criticizing someone, always make sure the criticism doesn't apply to your own
argument or yourself. It prevents you from looking like a hypocrite.

\- It is completely unclear what you intend to achieve with your criticism. Do
you honestly believe someone will respond like 'oh jeez, you're right, how
could I be so silly?'. Your post is abrasive and will not achieve its goal.
Did it even have a purpose other than 'throwing your thoughts out there'? If
not: please stew on them a bit longer next time and explain _why_ you are
telling us this.

\- In fact, the post you respond to makes a very practical point, much more
practical than the more 'vague' general rules Russell provides. It is not a
'needless restatement': it is a much needed explication of what practical
behavior these rules lead to. It provides an example of an application of
Russell's principles, that makes those principles concrete.

------
skept
Titling this Russel's "10 commandments for teachers" is very misleading. He
included these under the title "A Liberal Decalogue" [ * ] in his
autobiography and as far as I can tell there's nothing to suggest that he was
addressing them to teachers in particular.

* <http://www.panarchy.org/russell/decalogue.1951.html>

~~~
why-el
He did identify himself as a teacher, saying "The Ten Commandments that, as a
teacher, I should wish to promulgate..". So he clearly wants to see those
commandments followed by teachers.

~~~
thisrod
I think the parent is right. Russell was presenting the ten commandments that
he would teach, in constrast to those taught at sunday school.

There's also the legendary section of his C.V.:

Awards and honours

1950: Nobel prize for literature

193?: Pronounced morally unfit to teach at university by the supreme court of
New York state

~~~
vacri
_"When you meet with opposition, even if it should be from your husband or
your children"_

He is clearly speaking to what he perceives as being an adult female
demographic.

------
Michiel
What a coincidence, just this morning I read an account of "How Bertrand
Russell was prevented from teaching at the College of of the City of New York"
[1]. The judge deemed him to be a dangerous influence on students because he
would undermine their morals. Therefor he should not be allowed to teach
there.

Reading his 10 commandmends affirms for me that he was the wiser man. He
taught later at Harvard and received a Nobel Prize for Literature.

[1]:
[http://www.skeptic.ca/Russell_&_CUNY.pdf](http://www.skeptic.ca/Russell_&_CUNY.pdf)

~~~
thefreshteapot
Firstly, reading the 10 Commandments, I didnt feel an instant connection to
Teachers, rather a loose set of values for all. So I came back to Hackernews
to read the comments, thanks to Michiel throwing the titbit of information
about his rejection from New York, I went on to discover a fascinating
individual, via wikipedia lead me down the rabbit hole of self-learning of a
few other interesting folks who were closely or loosely linked to Bertrand.
All this whilst sat on a boat, via 3G. (The world we live in is amazing!)

Take a moment to read his wiki entry and then ponder quietly to yourself, what
sort of activities, Bertrand Russell would have championed today.

~~~
EvilTerran
If you've got the time to spare, even a passing interest in philosophy, and
haven't read it already, I can't recommend his History of Western Philosophy
highly enough. It's delivered with a tone that really imparts a sense of
Russell's enthusiasm both for the subject and for teaching; I've never found
900 pages easier to read or more informative :)

~~~
gjm11
Russell's "History of Western Philosophy" is a wonderful book, but I am told
by people more expert in the history of philosophy than I am that it's not
terribly accurate. I don't think that's much reason not to read it, but treat
knowledge acquired from it with caution.

(Allegedly Anthony Kenny's big single-volume history of philosophy is more
accurate and also enjoyable to read. I have it on my shelves but haven't
opened it yet, so can't confirm or deny that.)

~~~
EvilTerran
Yeah, I was advised to bear in mind that it was very much coloured by
Russell's take on things.

In some ways, I treat it like a wikipedia article -- a mostly-good overview,
which can be used as a guide to look up more rigorous accounts of any
particular topics that interest you, but is kinda biased. But it's better
written than wikipedia, and I'm more interested in Russell's bias than a
random netizen's ;)

------
jianshen
For those who who are curious, he's also a famous logician, mathematician and
pacifist in addition to being a philosopher [1].

My first introduction to mathematical logic, set theory and axiomatics [2] was
thru his work because he made everything so accessible as a writer and a
thinker. What a remarkable mind.

[1] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertrand_Russell> [2]
<http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/russell-paradox/>

~~~
adrianwaj
I think he was also into eugenics and forced sterilization.

~~~
pbhjpbhj
You appear to oppose those things¹ - I'd certainly be interested in your
reasoning. Is/Should reproduction be a basic right of _all_ people that can
not be withdrawn (despite many states in the world advocating death
sentences).

Is there something wrong generally with wanting to improve the genetic make up
of the world's human population - most of us practice a mild [innate] form of
eugenics in our mate selection don't we?

Or is it specifics of what Russell advocates that are most clearly wrong in
your view?

Probably this is going too far OT ...?

~~~
adrianwaj
Eugenics is mass murder and and forced sterilization is the murder of the
unborn. There's plenty of resources and goodwill to make up for unwanted
groups by a certain few. You take your mate selection and keep it to yourself.

I haven't looked deeply into Russells reasonings and theories in this area,
nor do I want to.

~~~
pbhjpbhj
Eugenics can be practised without premature death of any person. So I'm afraid
you need to do better on that argument.

Sterilisation, eg vasectomy, can be done without any loss of life; so ditto on
that argument.

~~~
adrianwaj
Well, let's hope useless eaters like yourself get vasectomies or just
euthanize yourselves for the Sake of Humanity, in which you are having great
trouble assimilating. That's why you're just a figment of the imagination and
should remain that way.

~~~
pbhjpbhj
> _useless eaters_ //

Not an insult I'm familiar with - can you explain.

~~~
adrianwaj
For you.. nup.

------
nnnnni
#6 Do not use power to suppress opinions you think pernicious, for if you do
the opinions will suppress you.

Who is this guy, The Sphinx? If you do not learn to master your rage, your
rage will become your master!

------
jedberg
Most of these apply to politicians too.

~~~
wr1472
Most of these SHOULD apply to politicians too.

------
aufreak3
This is from the "Brain Pickings weekly" curated newsletter -
<http://www.brainpickings.org/> (see the "hat tip" in that post). The topics
featured in that newsletter would appeal to HNers I think and I recommend it.

------
mckoss
A good reminder that scientific thought and "authority" are often at odds. I
try to keep this in mind when I hear statements that x% of scientists are
purported to "believe" in anthropogenic global warming.

~~~
MaysonL
As opposed to looking at all the varieties of evidence which point to (almost
certainly largely anthropogenic) global warming?

~~~
MaysonL
For example: <http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/early-bloom.html>

