Talk:Didacticism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Philosophy, which collaborates on articles related to philosophy. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details. | ||||||||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. | ||||||||
| ??? | This article has not yet received an importance rating on the importance scale. | ||||||||
|
|||||||||
 |
Didacticism is part of WikiProject Literature, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Literature on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary on the talk page to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. |
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Education, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of education and education-related topics. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to featured and 1.0 standards, or visit the WikiProject page for more details. |
| Portal | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. |
"types of art that are instructional or informative. It does not merely entertain."
Everything under the sun is instructional or informative, and nothing "merely entertains". Didacticism is simply a term applied to types of instruction or information that is not commonly held.
Can I amend that? Obviously texts can contain information and instruction that is commonly held. The use of preceived wisdom in texts is normally not described as being didactic. This term is usually used to highlight the negative aspects of a text, information or instructions that diverge from commonly held views.
This article is pretty slim.
Personally I find this article very wordy, to the point where it obscures the meaning. It needs to be written in more simple encyclopedic language, Wikipedia is meant to explain topics to a layman, not to be a forum for experts.--Evilbred 13:25, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
This article looses credibility by virtue of the biblical reference. Future authors should be wary of using non-secular references to make intellectual points, for the two topics are mutually exclusive.
I agree that the specific reference to the Christian Bible as the leading example sets a non-factual tone. If one were to re-order the first and second examples and delete the portion of the Bible reference which speaks of defying God's will, I believe the tone and objectivity of this article would be restored.
- I don't think that objectivity has been restored yet. "the Bible is didactic because it offers guidance in moral, religious, and ethical matters." is not a NPOV phrase. With few exceptions, the Bible rarely spells the morals of its myths--that's why there are so many fundementally different factions of Christians that all use (basically) the same text. With few exceptions (e.g. the ten commandments), the Old Testament simply doesn't use didacticism--it uses example and allegory. I suppose Jesus probably used didacticism, but he used parable and aphorism more frequently.
- This is ignoring the fact that the majority of the Bible doesn't have any discernible moral message whatsoever, just a "historical" account of events--which is admittedly still didactism, but it's dishonest to characterize the entire Bible as "moral, religious, and ethical" didactism. If it were, it would read like: "And doing X is bad, because of Y and Z" without a lot of irrelevant back-story.
- Though one could make the case for the Bible being using "historical" didactic, I think that there is too much subjective bias regarding its true "intent." There are better, much more clear-cut examples out there. --Lode Runner 17:52, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
- Ya bu didactic ne tam bilen yok mu?
[edit] Music
A good example of didactism in music is the chant Ut queant laxis, which was used by Guido of Arezzo to teach solfege syllables: "Ut" (modern-day "Do") through "La". Shall I include it?
[edit] Merge
This should be merged with didactics.
- I disagree! I think it's just fine having this article on didacticism in literature and art. It should certainly be expanded though. --Midnightdreary 23:47, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Examples
It seems the examples given for this article are not broad enough to be useful to every reader. Perhaps adding references from a more varied sample of pop culture (e.g. The Matrix films) would prove beneficial to a wider audience.
Is this correct, that "The Raven" is considered didactic literature, albeit not intentional on the part of Poe?Sea Wolf (talk) 03:33, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
- I can't really see how "The Raven" would be considered didactic by anybody, especially given Poe's distaste for didacticism. Jeff Silvers (talk) 01:51, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
