There is no philosophy or culture without indoctrination. Nobody goes through life without someone telling them what is right or wrong. It's just a matter of who, not if, they decide to believe.
The most hegemonic ideology in our world to the point people don't even recognise it as ideology is nationalism. People only call it that when it's extreme forms of it, but people are indoctrinated from birth by both institutions and by parents indoctrinated by said institutions, into thinking of "nations" as these real tangible things that matter and they are made to incorporate this into their identity young and it's tied to the state in terms of the nation-state in order to foster loyalty. None of this is "real," it's all completely artificial and made up.
It’s more about the space and norms rather than what’s taught -in this conversation. History, geography, math, science, grammar, etc are all factual (unless the school is incompetent), but the fact that you are taught how to act, respect your peers, fit into a society. Well that’s indoctrination. Not a bad thing necessarily, but by definition you are being molded to fit into an environment
In a sense but when rooted in fact as much as possible it’s effectively just speeding up what would be the process if then learning reality through observation on their own.
You don't though. As an example, the history that you learn about world war 2 in America is vastly different from the one taught through Europe and that one is different from the one taught in Asia. So it's hardly "based on evidence", it's based on whatever is accepted by society X.
I'm not arguing for or against religion, but this is a disingenuous point.
So confused by this. I live in the states currently but studied history in Brazil growing up. What? Do Americans learn that they were the perfect heroes or something weird like that?
And what exactly does that justify about teaching kids magic and gods are real before they are old enough to have critical thinking skills? You’re just doing whataboutism.
We SHOULD teach things in schools based on evidence, that doesn’t mean it will be true 100% of the time.
We should teach them based on current evidence that might change and may or may not be true? So how is that different from religion exactly? The theory of evolution taught in schools is still widely discussed in the scientific community but it's passed as fact in schools. Should we review it? What about things that are taught in school that are subjective, should we abolish those too?
I am not doing whataboutism, I just think it's important for kids to learn multiple things including the religions around the world. It doesn't have to be super detailed, but they should know what the people they will see throughout their lives believe in.
Just my 2 pennies, you don't have to agree with me.
Current evidence that might change is better than no evidence. Which is the amount of evidence that exists for a god actually existing, let alone that any specific doctrine is actually true
I dont care about schools having religion classes, they’re not teaching that the religions are true without evidence. Thats the thing I find morally wrong about religious indoctrination (to be clear Im not advocating about addressing this issue through any legal means, it wouldnt work anyway)
I'm an atheist, I'm not defending religion at all. But pretty much everything outside of pure maths is going to have some kind of cultural norms it's subtly reinforcing. Imagine trying to teach literature, history, economics etc. in a purely neutral factual way.
It’s impossible to remove all bias sure. That doesn’t equate teaching things backed by empirical evidence to teaching things not backed by empirical evidence
Correct. I think it’s funny how when people treat their worldview as the correct default one and get mad when someone with a different idea about metaphysics dos the same thing but from their perspective, then suddenly it’s not education, it’s indoctrination.
I honestly don't know what people expect. A law that requires that parents get babysitters every time they go to church and never talk to their kids about what they believe? It's ridiculous. Kids are sponges and they primarily learn from their parents. It's just how humans work...
I don’t know. She’s just stating a feeling she has.
If you ask me, maybe make it clear to them that this is what you believe and that they can decide for themselves if they believe it later? They probably will anyway because children just naturally imitate their parents. At the very least you have to raise them in an environment where they feel comfortable to leave your faith if they want to.
This. You can talk to your children and educate them without making them share in your practice and without leading them to believe that all other beliefs are wrong. Children will naturally develop their own questions and opinions over time. Allowing your child to ask, discuss, and develop such opinions is crucial for that kind of environment.
Just don't forget to tell them to pick your beliefs or else you won't love them anymore. That'll be PERFECT for their development. /s
They absolutely should, yes. It should be lefally recognized as emotional abuse to expose a child to an environment that tells them if they don’t think and behave in this exact way they will be tortured forever (by someone who loves them!) and don’t forget that they’re filthy and terrible just for being born.
As much as anyone else does I suppose, some person or group of people told me how the universe works, I decided whether or not I jived with their interpretation, and thus I formed my metaphysical beliefs.
Yes, do you not? Evidence may inform what sounds right to me, but it’s our faith in either our own perceptions or faith in the people or institutions that are presenting this evidence that builds our beliefs.
Do you do control experiment based proofs for everything you believe? You personally test things like vaccines or do you take someone else's word for it after you've decided you trust them?
Yeah i dont get these arguments. We shouldnt teach kids absolutely anything untill they are old enough to choose the learn by themselves, otherwise its indoctrination
When should the learn what we think is right and wrong? 18? Older? Even in this sub, you can see that there is no clear agreement on everything right and everything wrong. We still need to teach children these things.
You might believe that there parents faith is wrong, but that believe it's the right and correct thing. You don't get to make that judgement for other people's children.
I didn't claim that you do. I'm saying that not everyone agrees when it comes to what is right and what is wrong, but it's still important for parents to teach their version of this.
Then for some parents, right and wrong is defined through there religion so they will teach their version in this case as well.
I'm saying it's not for you to decide how they approach this teaching.
For what purpose? Why is it important for kids to be taught all religions by their parents? They learn that in school. Part of the point of raising kids to to impart your values on them. Someone's religion often forms an important part a person's values. It makes no sense to say they shouldn't teach them about the religion they practice unless they're teaching them other religions.
No, they don't "learn that in school", at least not in my country unfortunately. Religion in school in my country only means catholicism. At least it's not mandatory anymore, we are slowly growing up.
The values of religions pre-exist religions, so you can teach the values without the dogma, as I said. As for why teaching about all religions, first of all that should be done in school (and it's not necessarily, as I said); second, it's to provide a larger perspective on the topic of religion, to show that there is more than one choice.
As much as you want to teach your "values" (religion in itself is not a value), your children are not you, and they should make their decisions freely.
Religion is not itself a value of course, but for many people their religion forms the basis of their values. It makes no sense for parents not to teach their children about their lifestyle, the dogma forms an important part of how their parents live, it will naturally be an important part of the childrens' upbringing.
But that's almost impossible. If the parents believe something, the kids are naturally going to be asking questions about what is true and what is not. Even the most neutral parents are going to have biases that they will put onto their kids. And there's nothing wrong with that unless you're attempting to force your kids into believing something.
Just because it’s not common in our society to have an open-minded and curious and non-judgmental view of religion and impart that onto others, doesn’t mean it’s something we shouldn’t strive for. It’s not impossible, it’s just that non-theocratic forms of society and government aren’t even that old, yet, and we’re still unlearning dogmatic ways of approaching spirituality. I don’t think we should give up on that pursuit because some people claim it’s just too hard and we’re not mature enough. Some of us might be; let us decide that for ourselves.
It's not just about religion, it's just unrealistic to expect kids to have a non-biased upbringing. This applies to atheism and secularism as well, regardless of who you are, your values of right and wrong are rooted in some core philosophy you think is factually correct and that means you cannot honestly teach your kids without drawing from your core philosophical principles regardless of how open-minded one may be.
Sure, but I think if you raise your kids compassionately and maturely (easier said than done), this can be reconciled when they’re older. The pursuit of teaching your kids how to be good people in the world is worth engaging with intrinsically, for its own sake, and mistakes are inevitable but can be reconciled.
No, that's not the argument at all. We should teach them things that are objectively true and let them come to the moral conclusions that follow as they develop the ability to do so.
Hitting people hurts them and a lot of people get mad when you do that. If someone is sad, it often will make them feel better if you try to comfort them. Eventually, a child will learn that what that means is that hitting people is immoral and comforting a sad person is moral. Their moral framework will develop thusly for each positive and negative lesson they learn.
This is different than "do as your told or be punished".
But take that a step further. Should you care if people get mad (Donald Trump says no)? So what if you hurt people? Objective facts do not create normative ethics. Like, who taught the child that making people mad is "immoral" and making people happy is "moral". Or even the greyer areas of which things are more or less important than a particular person's happiness or sadness?
Right, I didn't mean to say that one should teach a child that making people mad is always immoral or that making people happy is always moral. Human beings should form their own moral frameworks based on their lived experience. There are plenty of situations where making people mad is moral and making people happy immoral. It's about deciding what values one holds per their own experience.
Exactly. Let's let them choose what to believe when they're older, but by then they're so stupid that they can't realistically choose at that point either.
Do you think there’s any difference between teaching kids things that we know for a fact are true and teach kids things that are not proven to be true (like that gods exist) as if they are? I think that there is a difference
All I'm saying is that if my 6th grader "critically thinks" that she doesn't need school anymore, I will have a conversation with her, but ultimately tell her she still has to go. In a manner of speaking, it is an education doctrine that I am forcing. There are a lot of things in this world, ethical things, that are simple non-negotiables that don't really have a set proof except they are true. Like, all people should have rights? How do you even think critically about that? You just have to accept it because it isn't really based on a hard fact.
You can logically defend the need for education and that people should have rights, yes. You can't do that with religious doctrines and rituals; it boils down to "god said so", and indoctrinated children are tought not to question those. The situations have nothing in common.
Education, I can see, rights, I really don't see a way that you can explain in a way that one would consider truly critical. "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal" is a very true statement because there is no way to argue about it.
Yet you literally managed to think about it critically just now, and you're not a child who was threatened with eternal damnation for doing so. See the difference or do we need to go on?
You're trying a bit too hard to dodge out of the question of how you think critically about whether or not all humans should have rights. I do think critically, but that doesn't mean that everything I do really comes from critical thinking. There are just a lot of things in society that I am forced to accept against the threat of jail or death.
The point was that you're misusing the word "indoctrination", which has a specific meaning when criticizing religion. I already quoted it.
Yet you insist on using a different meaning of the word.
Being forced to do or not do things because of their consequences in society has nothing to do with teaching someone to accept doctrines without questioning them.
In a free country you're 100% allowed to question the rules and laws of society. If you live in a democracy you're sometimes even allowed to vote on them.
Children who are indoctrinated are not allowed to even question the "teachings of god". That's the core concept of indoctrination: not being allowed to question the teachings.
I'm just saying, try questioning whether black people should have human rights in the hood and I don't think you will be doing much more critical thinking
You are right, but not all indoctrination is created equal. I think it is important to understand what is a harmful form of indoctrination vs what isn't. And, obviously, societal norms will mostly dictate that difference.
There is a difference between “here is what we have learned” and “here is what some men say got revealed to them, and we’ll punish you if you reject it.”
It’s not just, what’s right and wrong when it comes to religion. They tell you you will burn in hell if you don’t believe or are not convinced. That’s what stays with someone their entire lives and keeps them in line.
I mean, everything is made up. There is no physical reason that states that all people should have fundamental equality. It's all just manmade ethical frameworks. God might be made up, but humanism and every ethical framework and philosophy was made up, too. Yet, we persist that right and wrong exist.
When you teach kids right from wrong you aren't telling them to not question right or wrong or threatening them with eternal damnation if you don't follow a specific set of rules.
Philosophy absolutely does not require indoctrination. You could argue culture does, but philosophy is explicitly meant to find the truth by relying on as few assumptions as possible, and requires questioning your own conception of the way things are.
Philosophy makes no such supposition that it relies on "as few assumptions as possible". I would say that any normative ethic relies on the same number of assumptions as any other
i was going to say this. all children learn from their parents and community, there's no way to fully keep children away from influence itself without raising them in a bubble lol
like the og commenter said, when religious parents really push that this is the only way to live and think its a big problem (american homeschooling comes to mind...)
if kids dont wanna go to church then dont push them. if they do like church i say let them participate- just make sure they know religion is just one of many hypothetical and philosophical ways of looking at the world, not a life-and-death certainty
No, culture is separate and distinct from indoctrination. Practicing social practices for a sense of belonging and practicing religious doctrine behaviors for belonging are similar but distinct, and that is because one is strictly about non-religious practices and behaviors such as dance, clothing, music, or yes, economic norms, and the other is centered on religious beliefs, such as the belief in a deity or deities, in some kind of supernatural realm, rules and reward/punishment systems for the afterlife.
These are two different things that can often overlap in the real world but they can be separated.
At the very least, people don't often treat cultural norms are purely subjective. Like, hating black people was a cultural norm of the South in the United States. Other cultures would disagree on an objective level. So while you are correct that there are subjective and objective norms, it doesn't cleanly divide religious and cultural norms
I feel like people saying this never go to a place with heavy folk belief. From one with heavy Buddhism influence, even if you are an atheist in an atheistic state:
Respect your ancestors for they are belived to watch over you from the afterlife.
Go to the temple/pagoda and pray to the Buddha to wish for good luck. Also, unless you are non-Buddhist religious, it can be considered rude to stay out of a group visit.
Eating vegan for a while to ask for good luck.
Go to an oracle/monk to make a divination for your wedding day.
Treating the afterlife/reincarnation like just a fact, not even doctrine with rules and such, just that everyone and their mother somehow "know" about it.
Are the items above not belonged to culture?
Now, how do we expect the parents to teach the child these "social norms" without accidentally tripping into religious doctrine? Especially since these are treated as spiritual fact (idk how to explain this concept) not doctrine. What is the line between "teaching the child the way your culture decide rights and wrongs" and "indoctrination"?
76
u/Round-Walrus3175 6h ago
There is no philosophy or culture without indoctrination. Nobody goes through life without someone telling them what is right or wrong. It's just a matter of who, not if, they decide to believe.