These may sound like naive questions, but they are genuine:
- Is it important to teach in such a way that the content of what you teach is internally consistent? In other words, does it matter if one part of what you teach contradicts other parts? For example, does it matter that many English language teachers tell their students that linking verbs are stative verbs?
- Is it important to teach in such a way that the content of what you teach is consistent with available evidence?
- Is it important to teach in such a way that the content of what you teach is consistent with the truth, irrespective of the available evidence?
- Do the answers to these questions depend on what you teach? In particular, would teaching an exceedingly complex system, such as a natural language, lead to different answers than teaching a less complex system, such as a programming language?
- Finally, why did you answer the way you did?