Voit lisätä twiitteihisi sijainnin, esimerkiksi kaupungin tai tarkemman paikan, verkosta ja kolmannen osapuolen sovellusten kautta. Halutessasi voit poistaa twiittisi sijaintihistorian myöhemmin. Lue lisää
Eash. Don't do that. My pedagogy on this point isn't by any means perfect, but my method has been to focus on the experience of slavery for the enslaved people - use the sources to talk about varying conditions, norms, etc. I treat 'slavery is bad' as a self-evident premise.https://twitter.com/nicohhhlette/status/1348377420810825733 …
Of course we also talk about ancient attitudes towards slavery, how it was generally treated as normal and even how it was justified - but from the premise that we, possessed of greater understanding, know that slavery is, in fact, bad.
Which, to be honest, if you take an enslaved-person-centric approach to ancient slavery and just give the students sources (e.g. https://www.amazon.com/Greek-Slavery-Routledge-Sourcebooks-Ancient/dp/0415029724 …), the premise really is self-evident, given how awful a lot of the treatment is.
Instead of asking students to 'justify' slavery, I ask them to *describe* it using the evidence they read. In my experience it does not require much or indeed any teaching intervention for them to draw their own conclusions (typically some form of horrified 'oh s***').
Understanding the ease with which the human mind can rationalize evil is a useful thing.
I, too, am far from perfect here but I state repeatedly in any discussion of slavery that *owning a human is bad* regardless of place, time, race, etc. It amazes me how many former HS Latin students still have the “but Roman slavery...” mindset, in the 21st century. NOPE.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.
