|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: Religious Indoctrination of Children
|
Yorick
Infinite Jester
# 12169
|
Posted
[I originally wrote this as an OP for one-on-one discussion in MAAN, so I apologise for its great length. I'm not sure it will work here in Purgatory, but I have been told it's the only place for it. I remain interested in reaching some understanding of the opposing viewpoints on the issues. Please note: the original UBB text formatting (italics and bold type) is not imported, so the original OP may perhaps make better sense.]
Firstly, on definitions of terms. The word ‘indoctrination’ has obviously negative connotations. If you’d prefer me not to use the term, I respectfully request a suitable substitute. By ‘religious indoctrination’, I mean the inculcation or imbuement of religious doctrine and ideas with the deliberate intention that the child shall come to share the beliefs. This deliberate intent is critical to my challenge. By ‘child’ I mean a person who is, because of their immaturity, incapable of critical examination and questioning of what they have learned, and who is therefore incapable of the proper and adequate understanding necessary to make in any reasonable sense a valid and meaningful acceptance (or rejection) of that doctrine as a basis for authentic religious belief.
I should draw the distinction here between ‘indoctrination’ as I’ve described it, and ‘indoctrination’ as in the teaching or education of religious doctrine. In the former, the goal is to inculcate an acceptance of the religious beliefs in question. In the latter, the primary intention is to inform the child about the doctrine, without deliberately influencing them to believe in it. Clearly, it’s possible to teach children about Christianity and other religions without any deliberate intention of influencing them to become Christians, as we generally see in schools for example; that is not the sort of ‘indoctrination’ I am talking about here. In fact, most Christian parents surely do both, but it is strictly exclusively the element of intentding to inculcate an acceptance of belief that I’m questioning.
In order to discuss the issue I shall need to make certain generalisations, chief amongst which is that Christian parents very much want their children become lifelong Christians, and that it’s their determined intention to ensure they do. Their motives may be good- indeed believing that their child’s eternal soul depends on it. This, however, does not pertain to the issue: in and of itself, the indoctrination is either morally correct or not, regardless of motive, and even regardless of whether it later turns out that it was in the child’s best interest to be indoctrinated. I realise what an academic argument this is, and agree that we’re talking here about fairly abstract philosophical principle, rather than real-life practicality. However, I feel very strongly that this abstract principle is incredibly important. It is, for me, the single most burning issue in the vast forest fire of religion and morality- hence my sincere and great concern.
It’s safe to assume that parental indoctrination of children into religion is both commonly widespread and also highly effective in terms of outcome. The demographic distribution of world religions demonstrates this very graphically. A child born in Israel is likely to become a Jew, and one born half a mile away in Gaza is likely to become a Moslem. Indeed, take a newborn baby from his mother in Israel and give him to a Moslem couple in Gaza, and he shall almost certainly become a Moslem man. Conversely, take a newborn baby from his mother in Gaza and give him to a Jewish couple in Israel, and he'll become a Jewish man. What is the mechanism by which this happens? Evidently, it is a mixture of socio-cultural influence and parenting.
The fact that children are extensively socialised in all kinds of ways outside of their families is not relevant to the question here. The socio-cultural influence of their wider environment will certainly play an important part in the formation of their worldview, influencing their choices in their adoption of religion, but that is irrelevant to this discussion. I believe parental influence is overwhelmingly primary. In the Middle East (where the broader socio-cultural religious influence is surely much stronger than it is in the West), there are Christian families in Palestine, albeit not very many, which exception to the rule indicates how much parental influence is stronger than the broader socialisation. In any case, it cannot be doubted that our family upbringing strongly tends to determine our religion, despite the significant number of individual exceptions and apostasy, and so on.
The intention of parents to ensure their children develop according to their own wishes inevitably informs every aspect of the way they teach and influence their children as they bring them up, and they use this power to further that cause both knowingly and unconsciously. This is, quite rightly, the natural order of things, and in itself it is absolutely not the question here. I’m solely concerned with their deliberate intentional use of that influence to inculcate religious belief, and my challenge is whether this is morally correct. Thus, the fact that parents may have precisely the same intention to use their influence to indoctrinate their children in any other respect is of no relevance to this discussion.
Also, it is no defence of the immorality of intentional indoctrination that it just so happens to be extremely difficult for parents not to inculcate their worldviews in their children unintentionally. The fact that parents may unwittingly indoctrinate their children is irrelevant. Again, I'm only questioning the intention, regardless of the fact that it occurs very commonly, and regardless of how hard it is not to indoctrinate one’s beliefs unintentionally. As I have pointed out, it is actually possible to teach children about religion without indoctrinating them into believing it.
The fact that atheists may also indoctrinate their children into believing their worldview is no defence in the question of the immorality of theists doing so. In my opinion, it is equally immoral if, say, Richard Dawkins through his parental influence deliberately indoctrinates his young children into accepting his version of atheism. (Likewise, with any other religion, and even other non-religious ‘worldviews’, like politics, vegetarianism, football fanaticism and so on. That's all irrelevant, and does not speak to the issue here.)
This moral question centres on the issue of freedom of choice. I believe all human beings should have the absolute right to choose their religion (or atheism) freely for themselves. I therefore feel it is an immoral breach of that right for a parent to influence their child in such a way that they're deprived of the complete freedom to choose their religious belief before they develop sufficient maturity to make this decision freely, because, once the child is indoctrinated, their complete freedom to make that choice is drastically compromised.
[Incidentally, according to my very limited understanding of theology, I believe it is a basic tenet of Christianity itself that people must willingly choose, compos mentis, to become Christian, and that this must be an decision informed by personal understanding. Even by Christianity’s own morals, nobody must be influenced against their entirely free will to become Christian. This would hypothetically apply to persons unable to exercise their choice through any limitation to their capacity for willing and informed consent- for example, mental illness, intoxication, brainwashing, hypnotism, and so on. I believe a young child- by virtue of their immaturity- is similarly incapable of making such a decision with anything approaching informed consent, however willing they may be in all their innocence.]
Children under the age of, perhaps, eight years, are extremely susceptible to influence by their parents. They’re very impressionable and credulous, and therefore prone to believe anything they’re told by an adult they trust, and even their peers. Furthermore, there are other factors that augment a parent’s natural influence- from the interrelational obligations of love and loyalty, to total material dependency. For these and other reasons, young children are extremely vulnerable to indoctrination by their parents. Of course, this vulnerability diminishes as the child matures and develops their own independence and the capacity to think critically, in parallel with the natural diminution of parental influence in general terms. I’d guess the period of greatest vulnerability to indoctrination is very approximately from the age of two or three, to about six or seven.
Because these very young children are so vulnerable to indoctrination, because they are incapable of informed consent, because informed consent is a prerequisite of free choice, because completely free choice and informed consent depends on authentic personal knowledge and understanding based on critical thought, I submit that it is immoral intentionally to indoctrinate them into accepting religious beliefs.
[ 10. November 2014, 18:45: Message edited by: Belisarius ]
--------------------
این نیز بگذرد
Posts: 7574 | From: Natural Sources | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Garden Hermit
Shipmate
# 109
|
Posted
'Give me achild until he's 7 and I will show you the man'..is a statement attributed the Jesuits.
But surely children need something solid to start building or questioning on.
For example History at school is taught 'your country' were the good guys, but fails to mention when they were bad.
This comes later on when you study the subject in depth.
Pax et Bonum
Posts: 1413 | From: Reading UK | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
BroJames
Shipmate
# 9636
|
Posted
OK. I'll bite.
Why single out religious beliefs? What makes them a category on their own? It is only if religious beliefs are somehow a unique category of belief that it is appropriate to bracket out of the discussion quote:
the fact that parents may have precisely the same intention to use their influence to indoctrinate their children in any other respect
Incidentally, if you are looking for a non-loaded synonym for 'indoctrinate' you might try "inculcate" or "imbue".
Posts: 3374 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Reuben
Shipmate
# 11361
|
Posted
A great topic!
I find it interesting that amongst Christian families I know there is a higher degree of non-belief amongst children in those families than in Jewish, Muslim or Sikh families I know.
Christianity would argue that it is not a religion that generationally 'enslaves' each subsequent generation of families, like some other world faiths but like, as you say, that there is a freedom of choice and an individual decision to follow Christ or not.
Is this perhaps the difference between a religion which is a cultural and familial expectation and a religion (or personal faith) that is indeed a personal decision.
So maybe Christianity for all its faults can claim to be less immoral as it does less family indoctrination (just my personal observation on this point anyway).
As a separate but related question, it is very hard to sit there as an impartial parent and observe your 5 year old child and not wish to inculcate your own values and beliefs into him.
As Malcolm Knox, an avowed atheist stated in this recent newspaper article:
quote:
There is no such thing as no decision. In matters of belief, there is no halfway. Like Dawkins, I don't buy agnosticism. If you're unsure whether there's a God or not, it means either you are not living with belief in God, which means you are an atheist, or that you fear that there might be a God and want to leave that option open, in which case what you really are is a believer. There's no neutral position.
In his 1995 open letter to his 10-year-old daughter Juliet, Dawkins counselled her against belief based on ''tradition, authority or revelation''. Because children, he writes, are ''suckers for traditional information, they are likely to believe anything the grown-ups tell them''. If this is true, surely it applies to atheism as much as to belief. To keep my children out of church would be to impose my unbelief upon them by the exact mechanism that Dawkins warns against. The real question, then, is what should be the default position that better allows children to develop their own spiritual thinking? Church or no church?
Knox goes onto argue for some education from each of the main faith (and non-faith) positions so that his kids have equal opportunity to experience all value sets.
But for me? As a Christian who wants to see my kids experience life to the full in this world and the next, I feel I have no choice but to tell them about the great God I have personal faith in so they too can experience this joy. If I thought my faith was just one path of many to God or if I thought that my faith was a nice little hobby then I probably wouldn't be so bold in expressing it.
But to NOT communicate the truth as you believe and know to be true, is not that immoral?
--------------------
"I got nothing." Barrie Unsworth
Posts: 227 | From: New South Wales | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Niteowl
Hopeless Insomniac
# 15841
|
Posted
Most parents "indoctrinate" their children with their entire value system, politics and historical world view as well as religion. And no matter how well they do the job, there is no guarantee the adult child will believe as the parents do politically, religiously or in any other respect once they become an adult. Beginning in puberty, said children begin to think for themselves, much to the chagrin of many parents. If the parents have done their job properly, they aren't threatened by the fact the maturing child can think for themselves - no matter whether the adult child shares their religion or world view or not. I'm a good example of this - I don't share the politics my parents had and raised us with, had a brief period of agnosticism, then moved to a branch of Christianity they didn't approve of at first. My father would be spinning in his grave if he weren't cremated. (maybe having a dust storm??)
--------------------
"love all, trust few, do wrong to no one"
Wm. Shakespeare
Posts: 2437 | From: U.S. | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Yorick
Infinite Jester
# 12169
|
Posted
BroJames and Niteowl2, I think I addressed your questions in the OP.
quote:
Originally posted by Reuben:
But to NOT communicate the truth as you believe and know to be true, is not that immoral?
I think it is immoral if your intention in communicating that ‘truth’ is to influence them in such a way that they’re deprived of the complete freedom to choose whether or not to believe it.
--------------------
این نیز بگذرد
Posts: 7574 | From: Natural Sources | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
tomsk
Shipmate
# 15370
|
Posted
Indoctrination sounds a bit like brainwashing, so I'm not sure it is a helpful term. Being sold time-share is brainwashing, you're not let out until you buy. Christianity requires assent, and, eventually, most will question whether that should be given.
In spite of what you say about other forms of value passing being irrelevant, I would say that they are. Indoctrination in the sense that you describe is passing on values. We want our children to share them, or to surpass them or whatever. That's what bringing up children is about. Whether a special case should be made for religion may well depend on whether or not you think it's harmful/wrong or whatever.
Posts: 372 | From: UK | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anselmina
Ship's barmaid
# 3032
|
Posted
I 'indoctrinated' some children this morning in the belief that 'Gossip is sharp as a sword, but wise words heal' from Proverbs in the Bible. I'll try not to feel too 'immoral' about that.
With regard to explicit indoctrination - I grew up in a church-going family, attended an evangelical Sunday School from the age of 3 to about 12; and went to the Scripture Union clubs in both primary and secondary schools; both schools espousing a generally if not at times very Christian ethos.
Nevertheless, I found it irresistable when I reached my teens until my early twenties to go off on several spiritual and secular explorations of my own which had nothing to do with Christianity - a religion I genuinelly despised for many years as a young person.
Pre-programmed to believe? Pre-programmed to a knowledge of a particular faith perhaps, but not to believe. I was 21 when I made a (tentative) decision to have a go at adult Christian belief. I was perfectly able to reject my indoctrination as a kid; in fact I did.
Nevertheless, when one watches certain reports on extremist or cultist style indoctrination I can understand why the word is a hot button and used almost without exception perjoratively. I see it as giving young, forming minds options and a basis on which to make their own decisions.
BTW, good topic, Yorick. Very interesting.
[ 17. November 2010, 11:22: Message edited by: Anselmina ]
Posts: 10002 | From: Scotland the Brave | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
sharkshooter
Not your average shark
# 1589
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by tomsk:
Indoctrination sounds a bit like brainwashing, so I'm not sure it is a helpful term. ...
That is precisely why Yorick uses it - on this thread and all of the other threads where he has raised this same issue.
Failing to teach your children your faith, with the intention that they understand fully the wonder that is belief in a risen Lord, is not only immoral and irresponsible, but, I would argue, it is impossible, if Jesus is really central to your life.
However, to expect Yorick to understand this would be like expecting a camel to pass through the eye of a needle.
--------------------
Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, be acceptable in thy sight, O LORD, my strength, and my redeemer. [Psalm 19:14]
Posts: 7772 | From: Canada; Washington DC; Phoenix; it's complicated | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Yorick
Infinite Jester
# 12169
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by tomsk:
Indoctrination sounds a bit like brainwashing, so I'm not sure it is a helpful term. Being sold time-share is brainwashing, you're not let out until you buy. Christianity requires assent, and, eventually, most will question whether that should be given.
In spite of what you say about other forms of value passing being irrelevant, I would say that they are. Indoctrination in the sense that you describe is passing on values. We want our children to share them, or to surpass them or whatever. That's what bringing up children is about. Whether a special case should be made for religion may well depend on whether or not you think it's harmful/wrong or whatever.
It's a shame the term idoctrination is so emotive, since it's the best descriptive tool for the job. I'm happy to call it 'inculcation' if that spares any unnecessary antagonism of peoples' sensibilities.
When I say other forms of inculcation are irrelevant, I simply mean that they're no mitigation in the inculcation of religious belief in the terms I've described it in the OP, and they have no immediate bearing on the issue. A thousand wrongs do not make a single right.
--------------------
این نیز بگذرد
Posts: 7574 | From: Natural Sources | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Yorick
Infinite Jester
# 12169
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by sharkshooter:
Failing to teach your children your faith, with the intention that they understand fully the wonder that is belief in a risen Lord, is not only immoral and irresponsible, but, I would argue, it is impossible, if Jesus is really central to your life.
However, to expect Yorick to understand this would be like expecting a camel to pass through the eye of a needle.
Rubbish. I understand it alright. I even sympathise with it to a great degree.
I am simply asking whether it is morally correct.
--------------------
این نیز بگذرد
Posts: 7574 | From: Natural Sources | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
BroJames
Shipmate
# 9636
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
BroJames and Niteowl2, I think I addressed your questions in the OP.
Well we shall clearly have to agree to disagree about that. My question quote:
Why single out religious beliefs? What makes them a category on their own? It is only if religious beliefs are somehow a unique category of belief that it is appropriate to bracket out of the discussion.
was posed having read the OP. If I thought the OP addressed the question I wouldn't have asked it. If I have missed something perhaps you can point me to the part of the OP which addresses my question.
Posts: 3374 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Yorick
Infinite Jester
# 12169
|
Posted
BroJames:
quote:
The intention of parents to ensure their children develop according to their own wishes inevitably informs every aspect of the way they teach and influence their children as they bring them up, and they use this power to further that cause both knowingly and unconsciously. This is, quite rightly, the natural order of things, and in itself it is absolutely not the question here. I’m solely concerned with their deliberate intentional use of that influence to inculcate religious belief, and my challenge is whether this is morally correct. Thus, the fact that parents may have precisely the same intention to use their influence to indoctrinate their children in any other respect is of no relevance to this discussion.
Also, it is no defence of the immorality of intentional indoctrination that it just so happens to be extremely difficult for parents not to inculcate their worldviews in their children unintentionally. The fact that parents may unwittingly indoctrinate their children is irrelevant. Again, I'm only questioning the intention, regardless of the fact that it occurs very commonly, and regardless of how hard it is not to indoctrinate one’s beliefs unintentionally. As I have pointed out, it is actually possible to teach children about religion without indoctrinating them into believing it.
--------------------
این نیز بگذرد
Posts: 7574 | From: Natural Sources | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
dyfrig
Blue Scarfed Menace
# 15
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
I think it is immoral if your intention in communicating that ‘truth’ is to influence them in such a way that they’re deprived of the complete freedom to choose whether or not to believe it.
Would you have the same moral objection to a staunch Marxist who inculcated their children in such a way that they were deprived of the complete freedom to choose to follow a religion? Or what about a devout Capitalist who raised their children in such a way that they were incapable of freely choosing to be Socialists?
I'm struggling to see why the question has to be so limited to religion, though I think you may be on to something regarding the way people do/don't allow other people to make their own decisions.
--------------------
"He was wrong in the long run, but then, who isn't?" - Tony Judt
Posts: 6917 | From: pob dydd Iau, am hanner dydd | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Uncle Pete
Loyaute me lie
# 10422
|
Posted
That's what parents do, if they are on the job. We indoctrinate our children.
Do you not indoctrinate your children in agnostic/atheistic thought? I rather think that you do. Is that more moral than the rest of us? I think not.
What any parent does, I hope, is to show his/her child what is out there in the world and to give them the tools with which to make informed decisions, as they grow older.
Most of the time, they'll retain the content we give them, but toss out the framework. That's life.
{This was in response to Yorick's question as to whether it is morally correct... Obviously crossposted]
[ 17. November 2010, 11:45: Message edited by: PeteC ]
--------------------
Even more so than I was before
Posts: 20466 | From: No longer where I was | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Yorick
Infinite Jester
# 12169
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by dyfrig:
I'm struggling to see why the question has to be so limited to religion, though I think you may be on to something regarding the way people do/don't allow other people to make their own decisions.
I’m not interested in discussing the indoctrination of children into the belief that Manchester United Football Club is the greatest. I’m not interested in discussing the indoctrination of children into the belief that eating meat is wrong. I’m not interested in discussing the indoctrination of children into the belief that Conservative politics are evil. I’m solely interested in this business of religion, and I’m asking the question here because someone once sent me a Secret PM to tell me this is a Christian website.
They know who they are.
[BTW, yes, of course, I believe all those other indoctrinations are also, equally wrong, as I said in the OP about atheism/Dawkins in particular.)
--------------------
این نیز بگذرد
Posts: 7574 | From: Natural Sources | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Niteowl
Hopeless Insomniac
# 15841
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
BroJames and Niteowl2, I think I addressed your questions in the OP.
Not really. As for me, I was just posting that "indoctrination" is not limited to religion and that it isn't the slam dunk guarantee that you seem to think it is that the child will follow the parent's beliefs because of the way things may or may not have been presented. In short, your prejudice against religion shows and your premise that "indoctrination" of religion means the child has no choice in the matter - which is patently false.
BTW, ever hear of PK's? Preacher's kids who turn out to be rebellious, anything but Christians?
--------------------
"love all, trust few, do wrong to no one"
Wm. Shakespeare
Posts: 2437 | From: U.S. | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Yorick
Infinite Jester
# 12169
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PeteC:
That's what parents do, if they are on the job. We indoctrinate our children.
Do you not indoctrinate your children in agnostic/atheistic thought? I rather think that you do. Is that more moral than the rest of us? I think not.
Ah, yes, they may very well do it, but should they, strictly morally? THAT is the question.
Incidentally, I would refute the accusation that everyone is as 'bad' as each other about this. I know it's possible to teach children about religion without indoctrinating them into it (or out of it), because that is what I have done. It's hard, but possible.
--------------------
این نیز بگذرد
Posts: 7574 | From: Natural Sources | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
ianjmatt
Shipmate
# 5683
|
Posted
Simples really.
Yes - all parents indoctrinate their children, so Christians will.
No - it is not morally wrong, it is the nature of things.
(to be more long-winded: if you are convinced that your belief system contains at least some truth (which I assume you would, otherwise why bother?) then you should be confident enough to inculcate it to your children whilst also showing them the wider world, that other people believe different things, and that we respect that).
--------------------
You might want to visit my blog:
http://lostintheheartofsomewhere.blogspot.com
But maybe not
Posts: 676 | From: Shropshire | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
dyfrig
Blue Scarfed Menace
# 15
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
I’m asking the question here because someone once sent me a Secret PM to tell me this is a Christian website.
I think the traditional response to such a claim is ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif) and then get on with your life, but YMMV.
--------------------
"He was wrong in the long run, but then, who isn't?" - Tony Judt
Posts: 6917 | From: pob dydd Iau, am hanner dydd | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Yorick
Infinite Jester
# 12169
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Niteowl2:
"indoctrination" is not limited to religion and that it isn't the slam dunk guarantee that you seem to think it is that the child will follow the parent's beliefs
Agreed.
So what?
--------------------
این نیز بگذرد
Posts: 7574 | From: Natural Sources | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Niteowl
Hopeless Insomniac
# 15841
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
quote:
Originally posted by PeteC:
That's what parents do, if they are on the job. We indoctrinate our children.
Do you not indoctrinate your children in agnostic/atheistic thought? I rather think that you do. Is that more moral than the rest of us? I think not.
Ah, yes, they may very well do it, but should they, strictly morally? THAT is the question.
Incidentally, I would refute the accusation that everyone is as 'bad' as each other about this. I know it's possible to teach children about religion without indoctrinating them into it (or out of it), because that is what I have done. It's hard, but possible.
Yes, they should. It's their job and it is moral. If I truly believe my religion is truth, I'm going to teach it to them as truth as well as live it - anything less makes my faith a mockery. Parents also have the responsibility as the child gets older to teach critical thinking skills so the child knows why he/she believes what they do and can make alterations in their beliefs if necessary.
--------------------
"love all, trust few, do wrong to no one"
Wm. Shakespeare
Posts: 2437 | From: U.S. | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
BroJames
Shipmate
# 9636
|
Posted
Yorick, you are not responding to my question. I asked why religious belief is in a category of its own such that the inculcation of religious belief should be treated differently from the inculcation of any other belief. Your reply simply reasserts the position of your OP that religious belief can somehow be treated as a separate class of belief without offering any evidence or justification for so treating it. If religious belief is not different in kind from other beliefs that parents impart to their children, then parents who impart religious beliefs to their children are no more (or less) immoral in imparting religious beliefs than they are in imparting any other kind of belief.
Of course "indoctrinating" any belief might be immoral because, of the overriding of the individual human will that the term "indoctrination" connotes. However good the belief, indoctrination is an immoral means of inculcating it, so one could argue that all indoctrination is immoral.
Posts: 3374 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Niteowl
Hopeless Insomniac
# 15841
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
quote:
Originally posted by Niteowl2:
"indoctrination" is not limited to religion and that it isn't the slam dunk guarantee that you seem to think it is that the child will follow the parent's beliefs
Agreed.
So what?
So what makes "indoctrinating" religion so horrible over any of the others? You've just agreed it isn't a slam dunk that the child will follow that religion when they become of age. Do we not teach our children anything as being true?
--------------------
"love all, trust few, do wrong to no one"
Wm. Shakespeare
Posts: 2437 | From: U.S. | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Yorick
Infinite Jester
# 12169
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ianjmatt:
Yes - all parents indoctrinate their children, so Christians will.
No - it is not morally wrong, it is the nature of things.
It's not so simple, actually.
What about their freedom of choice? Do you think they should have a basic right to choose religion for themselves, ideally? Is it not an important Christian principle that people should make that choice freely and authentically for themselves?
--------------------
این نیز بگذرد
Posts: 7574 | From: Natural Sources | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Yorick
Infinite Jester
# 12169
|
Posted
Okay, please be patient with me. I'm having four overlapping conversations here now. I'll try to get to each of your points, but it'll take a while and it may be a bit disjointed. Especially since I'm supposed to be doing something else for the next couple of hours.
(Hmm. If only there were some way of dealing with this 'swamping' problem).
--------------------
این نیز بگذرد
Posts: 7574 | From: Natural Sources | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Niteowl
Hopeless Insomniac
# 15841
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
quote:
Originally posted by ianjmatt:
Yes - all parents indoctrinate their children, so Christians will.
No - it is not morally wrong, it is the nature of things.
It's not so simple, actually.
What about their freedom of choice? Do you think they should have a basic right to choose religion for themselves, ideally? Is it not an important Christian principle that people should make that choice freely and authentically for themselves?
What makes teaching children religion so horrific? Don't children have freedom of choice once they come of age to make that decision for themselves? You've admitted yourself that it's not a slam dunk that they will follow the parent's beleifs. What is about religion that so yanks your chain? One would think parents were teaching their children serial murder 101.
--------------------
"love all, trust few, do wrong to no one"
Wm. Shakespeare
Posts: 2437 | From: U.S. | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
dyfrig
Blue Scarfed Menace
# 15
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
(Hmm. If only there were some way of dealing with this 'swamping' problem).
Here's something I've learned - if you start a thread, don't sit there waiting for responses and answer them as they come. Go away for a while, hours even days, come back, mull over what's been said, and then respond to the most interesting/intriguing/challenging thing. Don't try and answer everyone - you'll just get yourself stgressed and find yourself stuck on the internet for 3 hours, talking in 5 directions at once, to no-one's benefit.
--------------------
"He was wrong in the long run, but then, who isn't?" - Tony Judt
Posts: 6917 | From: pob dydd Iau, am hanner dydd | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
ianjmatt
Shipmate
# 5683
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
quote:
Originally posted by ianjmatt:
Yes - all parents indoctrinate their children, so Christians will.
No - it is not morally wrong, it is the nature of things.
It's not so simple, actually.
What about their freedom of choice? Do you think they should have a basic right to choose religion for themselves, ideally? Is it not an important Christian principle that people should make that choice freely and authentically for themselves?
Yes - of course. Of course they have the right to choose. But the idea you can create a 'neutral' ground upon which to teach kids is a secularist fantasy that I have never seen. Have you?
If you believe something to be true (materialism, the Trinity, Flying Spaghetti Monster) you are going to tell your children it is true. Anything else is intellectual dishonesty. If you equip them with the skills of reasoning then when they hit their teens they will question it. If it is true, they will return. If they find it to be false you have done your job as a parent.
Trust me, I know. My daughter is right there.
--------------------
You might want to visit my blog:
http://lostintheheartofsomewhere.blogspot.com
But maybe not
Posts: 676 | From: Shropshire | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Yorick
Infinite Jester
# 12169
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Niteowl2:
What makes teaching children religion so horrific? Don't children have freedom of choice once they come of age to make that decision for themselves? You've admitted yourself that it's not a slam dunk that they will follow the parent's beleifs. What is about religion that so yanks your chain? One would think parents were teaching their children serial murder 101.
1. Nothing. It's just that I'm especially interested in that subject here.
2. Yes, they can reject the indoctrination, and many do. But the overall effect is that they will probably adopt whatever religion their parents inculcate them to believe.
3. Religion is a particular interest of mine. So what?
4. I never said religion is wrong (that's quite another matter). I said indoctrinating it in children is morally incorrect. I'm keeping my personal views about the rights and wrongs of religion in itself out of this, and request you do the same so that we can concentrate on this particular issue.
--------------------
این نیز بگذرد
Posts: 7574 | From: Natural Sources | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
dyfrig
Blue Scarfed Menace
# 15
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
I'm keeping my personal views about the rights and wrongs of religion in itself out of this, and request you do the same so that we can concentrate on this particular issue.
Handy tip #2: don't be so controlling. Pisses people off no end.
--------------------
"He was wrong in the long run, but then, who isn't?" - Tony Judt
Posts: 6917 | From: pob dydd Iau, am hanner dydd | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Snags
Utterly socially unrealistic
# 15351
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
I think it is immoral if your intention in communicating that ‘truth’ is to influence them in such a way that they’re deprived of the complete freedom to choose whether or not to believe it.
It may be that I'm missing some subtlety, but I'm not convinced that "the complete freedom to choose" as you appear to be defining it actually exists, in any context.
As you point out at some length, all parents will indoctrincate/inculcate beliefs they hold to be true and of value in their offspring. You can't really avoid doing it (and you'd probably be quite odd if you did, and produce some fairly odd proto-adults).
There also seems to be an undercurrent of equating "indoctrinate" (in the 'pure' form you're seeking to sress) with "brainwash", at least in terms of outcome and inappropriateness, which I don't believe is justified in a general discussion about abstract concepts, rather than specific situations. Although again, that may be a mis-reading on my part (or scars from too many similar discussions in Other Places).
ISTM that the critical issue isn't so much that parents pass on (actively or passively) their beliefs, understanding and worldview to their children, but in how those same parents allow for and handle questions and (potential) rejections of those views as the children grow and develop. I know a great many people who were brought up in a 'Christian' (whatever that means) and/or church setting who have freely chosen not to accept it as truth - and from varying ages. Their parental and Sunday School education in no way blocked them off from questioning, probing, researching, and making up their own minds, but it's equally indisputable that their parents brought them up in the hope and desire that they would come to faith for themselves, and were open about the way they believe the world works.
Or is it that you're talking about something different here? Are you particularly looking at the individuals/sects/cults/religious variants that simply don't brook argument, debate, or rejection, who therefore fall closer to the 'brainwash' or at least high walled scenario? And are those of us with a faith responding to a proposition which isn't as broad as it appears, because we're assuming that you're talking about anyone ever telling a child point-blank that "Jesus is Lord" as a matter of fact?
I used to have this debate long and hard with one of my best friends and erstwhile business parter (now-departed). His position used to be that you shouldn't be allowed to take kids to church, Sunday School, or talk to them about religion until they were in their teens and could make their own minds up, because otherwise you were unduly and irresponsibly influencing them. He couldn't see my argument, that by deliberately denying all of that you'd be influencing them just as strongly in the other direction, and thus tainting and corrupting the freedom of choice he was allegedly seeking to preserve (which actually amounted to "all kids should be brought up in accordance with my world view, which is Clearly Right, not yours, which is Clearly Misguided".
Unless you can hermetically seal kids against any kind of influence, they can't have pure freedom of choice. If you succeed in sealing them, they won't have any information, or any tools, with which to make a choice.
--------------------
Vain witterings :-: Vain pretentions :-: The Dog's Blog(locks)
Posts: 1399 | From: just north of That London | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Yorick
Infinite Jester
# 12169
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ianjmatt:
Yes - of course. Of course they have the right to choose. But the idea you can create a 'neutral' ground upon which to teach kids is a secularist fantasy that I have never seen. Have you?
If you believe something to be true (materialism, the Trinity, Flying Spaghetti Monster) you are going to tell your children it is true. Anything else is intellectual dishonesty. If you equip them with the skills of reasoning then when they hit their teens they will question it. If it is true, they will return. If they find it to be false you have done your job as a parent.
Trust me, I know. My daughter is right there.
I'm talking about intention, Ian.
I deteminedly intended to bring up my daughter without indoctrinating her into my atheism. She is now a good Christian, to my great pride. But whether or not she became an evil slavering Dawkinsist atheist or a good Christian, it would still have been my intention not to indoctrinate her in any direction, and thereby deprive her of free choice.
What was your intention?
--------------------
این نیز بگذرد
Posts: 7574 | From: Natural Sources | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Niteowl
Hopeless Insomniac
# 15841
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
quote:
Originally posted by Niteowl2:
What makes teaching children religion so horrific? Don't children have freedom of choice once they come of age to make that decision for themselves? You've admitted yourself that it's not a slam dunk that they will follow the parent's beleifs. What is about religion that so yanks your chain? One would think parents were teaching their children serial murder 101.
1. Nothing. It's just that I'm especially interested in that subject here.
2. Yes, they can reject the indoctrination, and many do. But the overall effect is that they will probably adopt whatever religion their parents inculcate them to believe.
3. Religion is a particular interest of mine. So what?
4. I never said religion is wrong (that's quite another matter). I said indoctrinating it in children is morally incorrect. I'm keeping my personal views about the rights and wrongs of religion in itself out of this, and request you do the same so that we can concentrate on this particular issue.
So can we assume that you feel the same way about "indoctrination" of atheism or political viewpoints or views on history or any other topic that others might not agree with?
Parents are supposed to impart values and beliefs to children that they believe will best equip them for adulthood. Religion for many is part of that equipping. And as you admitted, the child still has free choice and is not necessarily pre-disposed to retaining the "indoctrinated" beliefs, no matter what they are. So why does it matter so much to you? Your personal opinion does indeed have a bearing on the discussion.
--------------------
"love all, trust few, do wrong to no one"
Wm. Shakespeare
Posts: 2437 | From: U.S. | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Yorick
Infinite Jester
# 12169
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by dyfrig:
Handy tip #2: don't be so controlling. Pisses people off no end.
I'm sure, but it's jolly hard to keep this thing on song, singlehandedly.
--------------------
این نیز بگذرد
Posts: 7574 | From: Natural Sources | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Niteowl
Hopeless Insomniac
# 15841
|
Posted
I should have added to my last post that I am not being flippant. If I understand where your angst on this issue came from, it would make for a better discussion.
--------------------
"love all, trust few, do wrong to no one"
Wm. Shakespeare
Posts: 2437 | From: U.S. | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Yorick
Infinite Jester
# 12169
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Niteowl2:
So can we assume that you feel the same way about "indoctrination" of atheism or political viewpoints or views on history or any other topic that others might not agree with?
Parents are supposed to impart values and beliefs to children that they believe will best equip them for adulthood. Religion for many is part of that equipping. And as you admitted, the child still has free choice and is not necessarily pre-disposed to retaining the "indoctrinated" beliefs, no matter what they are. So why does it matter so much to you? Your personal opinion does indeed have a bearing on the discussion.
If you can show me why the reason this matters to me has any direct objective relevance to the question in hand, I will try to be be forthcoming. I just don't think it matters- I'm not being evasive.
--------------------
این نیز بگذرد
Posts: 7574 | From: Natural Sources | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Yorick
Infinite Jester
# 12169
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Niteowl2:
I should have added to my last post that I am not being flippant. If I understand where your angst on this issue came from, it would make for a better discussion.
It's not angst. Really, honestly. It's the principle.
But even if it were angst, and I was just reacting to my parents fucking my head up as a PK or something, well, what difference would that make? Would you then be able to say, 'Oh, well that explains it! It was never a proper question about morality at all, just experiential neurosis.' The question stands regardless.
--------------------
این نیز بگذرد
Posts: 7574 | From: Natural Sources | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
IntellectByProxy
Larger than you think
# 3185
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ianjmatt:
Yes - all parents indoctrinate their children, so Christians will.
No - it is not morally wrong, it is the nature of things.
Many things in our nature are morally wrong. For example my persistent and overwhelming desire to punch my colleague in the head for being an insufferable ass.
It's an interesting question, and one which I am struggling with at the moment, since I have managed to acquire a toddler (God knows how).
I was brought up by a nominally atheist humanist father, and a Christian mother. As such, I suspect I was taught rather more of a free-thinking attitude than many kids. However, in my teens I found a personal relationship with God, which is the moment I became, as I am now, Christian.
Now to me Christian means "in a personal relationship with Christ", and there is a lot about the religion of christianity which man has created that I dislike and disagree with.
Unfortunately, for a number of rational reasons and some wholely irrational ones, I do believe a God in some form exists, and moreover that Christ was approximately what Paul, and later the gospel writers, said He said he was. It is therefore behooven on me to live my life as a Christian.
I desperately want my kid to grow up to be a free-thinker. And I'd far rather he made a positive decision to be an atheist than a passive one to be a Christian. However I so firmly believe in Christ, that I can't not tell my kid about him. That creates a dichotomy which I don't know how to solve.
Now as to all the accoutrements of religion, well when we're reading Noah's Ark, or the creation myth I tell him that there are some issues that we'll fix up as we go along. When we're reading his kids' bible I give a commentary on how likely things are to be literally true, or the product of poetic licence, or the product of chinese whispers, or of wishful thinking.
My hope is that he grows up to critically examine his faith (whatever it is in).
So, short answer: it would be hypocritical for me not to teach my child something I believe to be true. However it would be amoral of me not to equip my child with the ability to critically think for himself.
--------------------
www.zambiadiaries.blogspot.com
Posts: 3482 | From: The opposite | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
To me, values and beliefs are two different things.
My husband and I are both Christians and my sons are both atheists.
But we all have the same values. We are all pacifist, left wing in politics, animal lovers, green and keen that people treat each other with respect and kindness. I find myself really pleased that they have grown up into (what I call) fine young men.
These values are, imo, far more important than the particular beliefs we have - which change over time anyway.
<oh - and we are not low in self esteem or slow to show off either! lol>
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Snags
Utterly socially unrealistic
# 15351
|
Posted
[quote]Originally posted by Yorick:
I'm talking about intention, Ian[/qoute]
Ah, that x-posted with mine. That sort of helps, although I suspect there's a whole big fat mess of issues over how you define intention, and who gets to define it.
I would expect that most good parents basically intend for their kids to grow up as nice, well-adjusted, well-rounded adults, and may hope that they'll adopt a similar belief-set (if belief is a matter of importance to them). Otherwise, "intention" seems to be able to carry different weights for different contexts, verging on being an irregular verb.
--------------------
Vain witterings :-: Vain pretentions :-: The Dog's Blog(locks)
Posts: 1399 | From: just north of That London | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
What about their freedom of choice?
I'm having difficulty seeing where you're coming from, because you seem to be simultaneously saying:
a.) children have the right to freedom of choice, therefore "indoctrination" of religion is wrong;
b.) children don't have the faculty of freedom of choice, therefore they are susceptible to indoctrination.
You seem to want to have your cake and eat it.
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Niteowl
Hopeless Insomniac
# 15841
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
quote:
Originally posted by Niteowl2:
I should have added to my last post that I am not being flippant. If I understand where your angst on this issue came from, it would make for a better discussion.
It's not angst. Really, honestly. It's the principle.
But even if it were angst, and I was just reacting to my parents fucking my head up as a PK or something, well, what difference would that make? Would you then be able to say, 'Oh, well that explains it! It was never a proper question about morality at all, just experiential neurosis.' The question stands regardless.
No, wouldn't have explained it completely, but it would have provided perhaps a glimpse into the basis of your viewpoint - after all if you've experience damage or seen a child damaged by religion you'd want to prevent it from happening to others. Most parents - and I think we all agree there are huge screw ups as well - seek to raise their children up to be productive members of society who are able to deftly navigate life's challenges as well. It is the moral responsibility of parents to do this. For true believers of any religion this includes raising up your child in your faith along with your other values and world view. Parents should also be teaching critical thinking skills as well along the way or their child is going to have troubles of one sort or another. In the end the child is free to retain whatever the parents have taught or reject it all wholesale as they make their own way in the world. Honestly, I don't see an issue with parents being able to teach their children religion or politics or whatever their values may be as they try to prepare their child to live on their own in society. Morally - it's what's required of parents and has been from day one.
--------------------
"love all, trust few, do wrong to no one"
Wm. Shakespeare
Posts: 2437 | From: U.S. | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
There's another side to this - 'religious expectation'.
I know a really fine young man who is hardworking and loyal, with a lovely young family. He's a real credit to his Mum.
She is constantly disappointed in him, and says so to all and sundry.
Why? Because he's not married and, in her eyes, 'living in sin'. I really feel for him and his family.
![[Tear]](graemlins/tear.gif)
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Yorick
Infinite Jester
# 12169
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ricardus:
quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
What about their freedom of choice?
I'm having difficulty seeing where you're coming from, because you seem to be simultaneously saying:
a.) children have the right to freedom of choice, therefore "indoctrination" of religion is wrong;
b.) children don't have the faculty of freedom of choice, therefore they are susceptible to indoctrination.
You seem to want to have your cake and eat it.
No, that’s not quite what I’m trying to say, which is that, people have the right to freedom of choice, therefore "indoctrination" of religion in very young children is wrong because they don't have the faculty of freedom of choice and they’re very susceptible to indoctrination.
I don't know if that's having and eating cake.
--------------------
این نیز بگذرد
Posts: 7574 | From: Natural Sources | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
ianjmatt
Shipmate
# 5683
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
I'm talking about intention, Ian.
I deteminedly intended to bring up my daughter without indoctrinating her into my atheism. She is now a good Christian, to my great pride. But whether or not she became an evil slavering Dawkinsist atheist or a good Christian, it would still have been my intention not to indoctrinate her in any direction, and thereby deprive her of free choice.
What was your intention?
My intention is my children to grow up Christians. Why? Because I believe it to be true. If I believed it to be true and didn't intend that then I would not be wanting the best for my child. However, I want them to grow up with the ability to make that decision for themselves and I fully respect that - but I would be lying if I said that I didn't want them to believe what I am sure is true. My son made a profession of faith and was given permission by the Bishop to take communion at 9.. My daughter is 13 and does not yet know what she believes. I am fine with that - but want to to come to a faith in Christ at some point on her own.
Are you saying that you are proud that (according to your view) your child is believing in made-up stuff? Surely as a good parent you wouldn't her to be so delusional?
--------------------
You might want to visit my blog:
http://lostintheheartofsomewhere.blogspot.com
But maybe not
Posts: 676 | From: Shropshire | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Niteowl
Hopeless Insomniac
# 15841
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
No, that’s not quite what I’m trying to say, which is that, people have the right to freedom of choice, therefore "indoctrination" of religion in very young children is wrong because they don't have the faculty of freedom of choice and they’re very susceptible to indoctrination.
I don't know if that's having and eating cake.
Children don't have a lot of choice about anything when they're young. Their parents are entrusted with making those choices for them and hopefully equipping them to make choices for themselves when they reach an age when they can do so. It's what parenting is all about. Not to mention, children are exposed to other beliefs, opinions, lifestyles either in school or through media. Parents should then be equipping their children with critical thinking skills.
--------------------
"love all, trust few, do wrong to no one"
Wm. Shakespeare
Posts: 2437 | From: U.S. | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anselmina
Ship's barmaid
# 3032
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
No, that’s not quite what I’m trying to say, which is that, people have the right to freedom of choice, therefore "indoctrination" of religion in very young children is wrong because they don't have the faculty of freedom of choice and they’re very susceptible to indoctrination.
I don't know if that's having and eating cake.
Indoctrination - as in the older influential people in authority exercising formative control over young unformed minds - is inevitable. If the indoctrination they receive, whether secular or sacred, ensures their safety and a reasonable moral and psychological development, it's not a bad thing.
I myself don't believe that religious belief is of itself a sign of a faulty psychology, so I can't see that the religious guidance and leading children might receive from parents, and others, leads automatically to harm or retardation of the person.
Children grow into older children and teenagers who - I believe - are still as capable as they were in my day of rejecting the mores of the older set, and finding their own. From there on making decisions for themselves as to what they will believe in either secular or religious terms seems to follow pretty well.
IMO, parents who include religious guidance as part of the 'indoctrination' of their children, along with the good social behaviour etc, are doing no worse than parents who impart no religious belief with their indoctrination. That is, of course, by itself a powerful 'indoctrinizing' statement of belief. But I like the idea that parents of no religion are free to indoctrinate their children in their belief, as religious parents are.
Posts: 10002 | From: Scotland the Brave | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
No, that’s not quite what I’m trying to say, which is that, people have the right to freedom of choice, therefore "indoctrination" of religion in very young children is wrong because they don't have the faculty of freedom of choice and they’re very susceptible to indoctrination.
But I don't see how you can meaningfully have the right to freedom of choice if you don't have the faculty of freedom of choice. It's like saying I should have the right to walk through walls, unless I'm misreading you.
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
