authorityresearch.com

The Affective Domain.

by
Dean Gotcher

"The affective domain is, in retrospect, a virtual 'Pandora's box .'" (David Krathwohl, Benjamin S. Bloom, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Book 2: Affective Domain) "Pandora's box," i.e., the affective domain is a "box" full of evils, which once opened, can not be closed. "Pandora's box" is the child's "feelings" of the 'moment,' i.e., the child's desire for the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' (dopamine emancipation) which the world stimulates and his dissatisfaction with restraint, i.e., his resentment (hatred) toward the father/Father and his authority when it gets in his way.

"The heart is deceitful above all things [thinking pleasure is the standard for "good" instead of doing the father's/Father's will], and desperately wicked [hating whoever prevents, i.e., inhibits or blocks it from enjoying the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' it desires]: who can know it?" Jeremiah 17:9 The child can not see his hate of restraint (and the restrainer) as being wicked with his "self," i.e., his love of pleasure standing in the way, 'justifying' his hate of restraint (and the restrainer), i.e., his hate of the father/Father and his/His authority.

All I have to do as a "teacher" (as a facilitator of 'change')—which I had to repent of after earning my teaching degree—is 1) "encourage" the students in my classroom to share their opinions, i.e., their "feelings" and "thoughts" of the 'moment' (in the "light"' of the current classroom situation, regarding personal-social issues), 2) create a "safe zone/space/place," i.e., an open ended, non-directed, "positive" environment, where they are 'liberated' from the fear ("negativity") of being judged and punished for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning (the same kind of environment the Serpent gave the women in the garden, i.e., "you will not die"), making their "feelings" of the 'moment' (including their desire for "group approval," i.e., affirmation) a part of (the 'driving' force in) the curriculum, and I will turn them against their parents, i.e., their parent's authority. I do not have to tell the students to question, challenge, disregard, defy, attack their parent's authority when the get home, they will do that automatically (naturally) after participating in my "group grade," dialoguing opinions to a consensus, "positive," "relationship building" classroomresulting in them, fearing missing out on the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which they desire, which the classroom environment (dialoguing opinions to a consensus process) 'justified,' "blowing up" when confronted with their parent's restraint. "There are many stories of the conflict and tension that these new practices are producing between parents and children." "What we call 'good teaching' is the teacher's ability to attain affective objectives [through dialogue, 'justifying' the students desire for ("lusting" after) the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' which the world stimulates, and their hate of restraint] through challenging the student's fixed beliefs [challenging their parent's established commands, rules, facts, and truth that interfere with, i.e., prevent, i.e., inhibit or block them having their heart's desire] and getting them to discuss issues [openly share their "feelings," i.e., their "self interest," i.e., their love of pleasure and hate of restraint, in the "light" of the current situation, i.e., in the "light" of group affirmation (fear of rejection), learning to question, challenging, defy, disregard, attack the parent's authority, i.e., the father's/Father's authority in the process—which is the basis of enlightenment]." (David Krathwohl, Benjamin S. Bloom, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives Book 2: Affective Domain) "The individual accepts the new system of values and beliefs ['liberation' from the father's/Father's authority—'liberated' to be one's "self" again, i.e., carnal, i.e., of the world only, as he or she was before the father's/Father's first command, rule, fact, or truth came into his or her life] by accepting belongingness to the group." (Kurt Lewin in Kenneth Benne, Human Relations in Curriculum Change)

All teachers are certified and schools accredited by what are called "Bloom's Taxonomies," 'changing' how teachers (and students) communicate with one another, making teachers therapists, i.e., counselors, i.e., social-ist engineers, i.e., facilitators of 'change,' i.e., 'change' agents, 'changing' traditional minded students into 'liberal's, i.e., socialists, 'justifying' their carnal desires and dissatisfactions (heart's desires), establishing their "self" over and therefore against their parent's authority. By starting with the child's "feelings," i.e., the affective domain, i.e., the child's "sense experience," i.e., "sensuous needs" and "sense perception," making it the foundation for 'learning,' the parent's authority is affectively negated.  (Karl Marx, MEGA I/3)

Georg Hegel wrote: "The child, contrary to appearance, is the absolute, the rationality of the relationship; he is what is enduring and everlasting, the totality which produces itself once again as such [once he is (his "feelings" are) 'liberated' from the father's/Father's authority so that he can be his "self," i.e., as he was before the father's/Father's first command, rule, fact, or truth came into his life, i.e., carnal, i.e., of the world only]." (Georg Hegel, System of Ethical Life)

Karl Marx wrote: "The life which he [the child] has given to the object [to the parent or God—when the child humbles, denies, dies to, disciplines, controls his "self" in order (as in "old" world order) to obeying his parent's or God's commands and rules as given, accepting their or His facts and truth as given, by faith ] sets itself against him [his "feelings," i.e., his carnal desires of the 'moment'] as an alien and hostile force." (Karl Marx, MEGA I/3)

Karl Marx wrote: "Once the earthly family [with the children submitting to the father's authority] is discovered to be the secret of the heavenly [Holy] family [with the Son and those following Him submitting to His Heavenly Father's authority], the former [the earthly family] must be destroyed [Vernunft, annihilated] in theory and in practice [in the children's thoughts and actions]." (Karl Marx, Feuerbach Thesis # 4)

Karl Marx wrote: "It is not individualism [the child subject to the father's/Father's authority, humbling, denying, die to his "self" in order to do the father's/Father's will—instead of his own] that fulfills the individual, on the contrary it destroys him. Society ["human relationship based upon self interest," i.e., the child finding his identity in what he has in common with "the group," i.e., in society, i.e., the affective domain, i.e., his love of pleasure and hate of restraint] is the necessary framework through which freedom [from the father's/Father's authority] and individuality [to be "of and for self" and the world only] are made realities." (Karl Marx, in John Lewis, The Life and Teachings of Karl Marx)

Karl Marx wrote: "To enjoy the present reconciles us to the actual." (Karl Marx, Critique of Hegel's 'Philosophy of Right')

"Self-actualizing people [people who make "feelings," i.e., the affective domain, instead of established commands, rules, facts, and truth as the foundation from which to know right and wrong, i.e., good and evil] have to a large extent transcended the values of their culture. They are not so much merely Americans as they are world citizens, members of the human species first and foremost." (Abraham Maslow, The Farther Reaches of Human Nature)

"In the dialogic relation of recognizing oneself [one's "self," i.e., one's love of pleasure and hate of restraint] in the other, they [i.e., the students, teachers, etc.,] experience the common ground of their existence." (Jürgen Habermas, Knowledge & Human Interest, Chapter Three: The Idea of the Theory of Knowledge as Social Theory)

Sigmund Freud wrote: "'It is not really a decisive matter whether one has killed one's father or abstained from the deed,' if the function of the conflict and its consequences are the same [the father no longer exercises his authority over the family]." (Sigmund Freud in Herbert Marcuse, Eros and Civilization)

"The transgression of the wicked saith within my heart, that there is no fear of God before his eyes. For he flattereth himself in his own eyes, until his iniquity be found to be hateful. The words of his mouth are iniquity and deceit: he hath left off to be wise, and to do good. He deviseth mischief upon his bed; he setteth himself in a way that is not good; he abhorreth not evil." Psalms 36:1-4

György Lukács wrote: "a scientifically acceptable solution does exist [Georg Hegel's formula] … For to accept that solution [where all citizens, including parents, must participate in the dialoguing of their opinions to a consensus where everyone's "feelings" of the 'moment,' their "affective domain" is being manipulated by a facilitator of 'change' who is manipulating the situation, "guide" them in making decisions], even in theory, would be tantamount to observing society from a class standpoint [from the child's perspective, i.e., from the child's carnal nature, i.e., from the child's "feelings" of the 'moment'] other than that of the bourgeoisie [from the parent's authority]. And no class can do that-unless it is willing to abdicate its power [its authority to chasten for disobedience or cast out for rebellion] freely. ' '... the ideological history of the bourgeoisie was nothing but a desperate resistance to every insight into the true nature of the society it had created and thus to a real understanding of its class situation.… the Communist Manifesto makes the point that the bourgeoisie produces its own grave-diggers [when the children's love of pleasure and hate of parental restraint, i.e., the "affective domain" is 'liberated' from parental restraint (in their mind), the children will turn and kill the parents, negating their authority structure in society, 'creating' a world of unrighteousness and abomination instead, with no "guilty conscience" to bother them].'" (György Lukács, History & Class Consciousness: What is Orthodox Marxism?)

Warren Bennis wrote: ". . . any intervention between parent and child tend to produce familial democracy [liberation of the child's "feelings" of the 'moment' from the parent's authority] regardless of its intent." "The consequences of family democratization take a long time to make themselves felt—but it would be difficult to reverse the process once begun. … once the parent can in any way imagine his own orientation to be a possible liability to the child in the world approaching." "… Once uncertainty is created in the parent how best to prepare the child for the future, the authoritarian family is moribund, regardless of whatever countermeasures may be taken." (Warren Bennis, The Temporary Society)

When children rule the people are oppressed—the affective domain making all subject to their carnal desires of the 'moment,' negating everyone's right of private convictions, property, and business, i.e., making decisions based upon the father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth (as Christ Jesus did). As Hegel explained it: "On account of the absolute and natural oneness of the husband, the wife, and the child [their common "lusting" after the carnal pleasures of the world, including (and especially) their desire for approval from others (affirmation)], where there is no antithesis [no "top-down," "right-wrong, "Mine, not yours" way of thinking and acting] of person to person or of subject to object, the surplus is not the property of one of them, since their indifference is not a formal or a legal one." (Georg Hegel, System of Ethical Life)

When you make "higher order thinking skills" subject to the child's carnal "feelings" of the 'moment,' i.e., subject to his affective domain, all you end up with is materialism, i.e., the "new" world order where all can do wrong, disobey, sin with impunity—until judgment day.

"For this cause [because they "did not like to retain God in their knowledge"] God gave them up unto vile affections [let them have what they wanted, i.e., the carnal pleasures of the 'moment' they "lusted" after, to their own demise]:" Romans 1:21, 25

"And for this cause [because men, as "children of disobedience," 'justify' themselves, i.e., their love of "self" and the world, i.e., their love of the pleasures of the 'moment' over and therefore against the Father's authority] God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie [that pleasure is the standard for "good" instead of doing the Father's will]: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth [in the Father and in His Son, Jesus Christ], but had pleasure in unrighteousness [in their "self" and the pleasures of the 'moment,' which the world stimulates]." 2 Thessalonians 2:11, 12

© Institution for Authority Research, Dean Gotcher 2017, 2018