Is it possible, in this age that is (or at least seems to be) more relativistic than ever, for an educator to hold convictions based on absolutes – and use those convictions to guide the way he/she instructs or advises a group of learners?

My current composition textbook, The Curious Writer by Bruce Ballenger, presents a reformed approach to the subject, encouraging students to constantly write not from what they already know but from what they don’t yet know and want to learn. It is called writing from a basis of inquiry – and is said to yield much better final results.

In the chapter about writing an argumentative essay, Ballenger presents three different approaches for the students to consider – the classical approach of Aristotle, the truth-questioning approach of philosopher Stephen Toulmin, and the therapeutic approach of Carl Rogers. In summary, Ballenger says that the old school style which appeals from ethos (the writer’s credibility), pathos (emotion), and logos (reason) is too formulaic and leaves no room for “truth” to be questioned and modified.

While I indeed want my learners to approach things with an open mind, I also believe there’s a point where questioning things without a firm and sure guiding light to come back to can be dangerous. Even after we have searched, questioned, and explored, when we finally draw our conclusions, what is to ground them if not some aspect of Aristotle’s reasoning?

Ultimately, each instructor must answer that question for him/herself.

As for me, though many things are not completely black and white, a Spirit-empowered sense of credibility, a heart compass that points heavenward, and a wisdom-tuned sense of reason will remain the key stones in my foundation for centering my position in all types of teaching and instruction.