![](\"https:\/\/glossynews.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2009\/09\/grilled-cheezy-mcsammy1.jpg\")
<\/a><\/div>\nOne reason I didn\u2019t try to get the conversation back onto something more academic was that the discussion was providing students a chance to get to know one another \u2013 they discovered that students they sat in class with were from the same town as them, or from a whole other country (even if one within driving distance).<\/p>\n
But the main thing that made the discussion so delightful was that the topic of subjectivity had already been raised, and this conversation actually provided a fascinating illustration and exploration of that subject. Students\u00a0over the years have shown a wide range of views on religion and subjectivity. Some have considered it rude to talk about the subject in a way that seeks to change another person\u2019s mind. Some have been dogmatic but far more have expressed that pop-postmodern apathy that maintains that everyone is entitled to their\u00a0opinion,\u00a0so that\u00a0different, conflicting views may be \u201cright for you but not for me.\u201d<\/p>\n
And so\u00a0it was striking to discover that when it comes to the subject of grilled cheese sandwiches, there was no such apathy, but instead a willingness to dive into the discussion and take a stand for the \u201ctruth\u201d of their belief system, their worldview.<\/p>\n
When it came to the matter of how to settle such issues, things became even more interesting. That people who speak other languages have totally different words was set aside, focusing only on how one says things in English \u2013\u00a0much as those who share a religious tradition\u00a0or label such as \u201cChristianity\u201d might debate some aspect of the Trinity, ignoring for the time being the fact that there were other traditions that would dispute the assumptions of such a discussion and not just the details. The question of which language or spelling was earlier<\/em> was proposed as a way of settling disputes. And of course, the dictionary \u2013 the canon of scripture \u2013 was appealed to. And that provided a wonderful opportunity to talk about how words get into the dictionary, what makes grammar correct or incorrect, and the most important point, which is that matters such as these are not \u201cmerely subjective\u201d or \u201cpurely objective\u201d but somewhere in between and a combination of both simultaneously.<\/p>\n So I feel like this conversation has provided some insight into today\u2019s students. But I\u2019m still puzzling over precisely what. But one thing seems clear: when today\u2019s students refrain from engaging one another directly about matters of religious disagreement, it isn\u2019t because of a general apathy. They care deeply about some things, including ones as And so if you find students reluctant to debate and discuss religious ideas, maybe you should consider asking them about cheese toasties. Once the dust settles, you can ask them why they engage a subject like that differently than they do matters of philosophy, religion and ethics. <\/p>\nnon<\/strike>trivial as whether to say \u201cpop\u201d or \u201csoda\u201d or just call everything \u201cCoke.\u201d<\/p>\n