Critical Thinking & General Religious Studies

[Skwim]

Americans consume an enormous proportion per capita of the world's wealth. The downside is that they must put up with fundamentalism.

Not at all. Many of their attempts to impregnate society with their beliefs is met with concerted opposition. The attempt to get creationism into public schools has been vigorously opposed.

But that is some fundies, not all. Many of them oppose theocratization because
they know that it will likely be some other religion or denomination to rule over them.
It makes sense to me.

Of course.

 

[kejos]

Not at all. Many of their attempts to impregnate society with their beliefs is met with concerted opposition. The attempt to get creationism into public schools has been vigorously opposed.

But it needed vigorous opposition.

Of course.

 

[M O N S T E R]

ok so let me get this striaght if my friends says ohhh Matt you should try coffee its real good then I go and try coffee like it and become a coffee drink, he indoctirnated me?

No. He'd be introducing you to a beverage that you might like. He wouldn't be cramming it down your throat on a daily basis forcing you to drink. If you didn't like it, he'd care less. He wouldn't continually influence you to become a regular coffee drinker.

this sounds absurd..... if some says for me to go along ot something I do then i believe it of my own accord Im not being indoctrinated..... if that were teh case everything that we decided would be indoctrination...

That's not indoctrination. This is:

1 : to instruct especially in fundamentals or rudiments : teach
2 : to imbue with a usually partisan or sectarian opinion, point of view, or principle

im·bue (ĭm-byōō')
tr.v. im·bued , im·bu·ing , im·bues
To inspire or influence thoroughly; pervade: work imbued with the revolutionary spirit. See Synonyms at charge.

To permeate or saturate.

To stain or dye deeply.

people do seek God you are aware of that right? and this may disturb you a bit but some people actually do think out their faith......

We are talking children here, tarasan. Not adults. You got any objective evidence that suggests children seek god without influence from adults with an agenda?

forgive me I was talking about it with a northern Ireland view all they do is recite a prayer really fast at the end thats all the God in our scouts.... the rest is making stuff, swearing, and if your in venturers drinking alot on summer camps.

And this is your definition of a secular organization? Because it's a "really fast" prayer, it still qualifies as a secular institution? How long does the prayer have to be before an entity such as the scouts is to be considered religion-based?

M O N S T E R

 

[tarasan]

No. He'd be introducing you to a beverage that you might like. He wouldn't be cramming it down your throat on a daily basis forcing you to drink. If you didn't like it, he'd care less. He wouldn't continually influence you to become a regular coffee drinker.



That's not indoctrination. This is:

1 : to instruct especially in fundamentals or rudiments : teach
2 : to imbue with a usually partisan or sectarian opinion, point of view, or principle

im·bue (ĭm-byōō')
tr.v. im·bued , im·bu·ing , im·bues
To inspire or influence thoroughly; pervade: work imbued with the revolutionary spirit. See Synonyms at charge.

To permeate or saturate.

To stain or dye deeply.





We are talking children here, tarasan. Not adults. You got any objective evidence that suggests children seek god without influence from adults with an agenda?

when did I say they were forced to do anything? when did I say that? they decide there own way to go to faith, the majority of these kids are asked along by their friends to go to youth groups, they choose to come they choose to stay and learn and they choose to convert.... and what do you mean by children? i was assuming teenagers thats what middle school is to you guys right? do you have any objective evidence that we are indoctrinating those converts? cause you were the one that made the accusation so your the one who has to prove it.

And this is your definition of a secular organization? Because it's a "really fast" prayer, it still qualifies as a secular institution? How long does the prayer have to be before an entity such as the scouts is to be considered religion-based?

M O N S T E R

im stating that religion isnt taught there its more givne a nod to so I wouldnt consider it a religious based organisation, they dont teach Christianity the prayer is more traditional than anything else.

 

[Riverwolf]

Critical thinking would be a fine thing to teach. but combining it with religion
would never fly, since the first would be seen as a major threat to the other.

Wrong. Though I'm religious, I believe that critical thinking is essential, and I'm not alone in that.

 

[Riverwolf]

U americans dont do religious studies in Schools?

Not really. My Social Studies classes (which were usually history classes) talked a bit about religion in Middle School but not in-depth, and there's an elective psychology/world religion at my high school (though due to budget cuts I suspect it's not available any more), but according to my girlfriend, religion isn't brought up at all at her old schools.

 

[Riverwolf]

Sounds absurd to me. Are you suggesting that kids become Christians without outside influences? That they seek it (Christianity) out and make an informed decision to become a BELIEVER all by themselves? Please. How exactly do kids "show signs of indoctrination"? Also, are you not aware that the scouts are one of the least secular organizations available to kids? Boy Scouts of America

M O N S T E R

I became a Hindu of my own free will. Heck, I became religious of my own free will; I lived in a secular, agnostic household that never talked about God. (Heck, based on a misunderstanding of something my dad said, I thought "God" was a bad word.)

 

[Riverwolf]

We are talking children here, tarasan. Not adults. You got any objective evidence that suggests children seek god without influence from adults with an agenda?

Children? I thought we were talking about teenagers.

 

[M O N S T E R]

Children? I thought we were talking about teenagers.

Maybe "kids" is a better descriptor.

 

[justbehappy]

How do believers and non-believers of this forum feel about the introduction of mandatory Critical Thinking and General Religious Studies courses for middle school and high school students in the USofA? What is your opinion on how these courses would (if at all) impact the average student's general receptiveness for organized religion? Would the introduction of these courses strengthen its progression or would they tend to stifle the proliferation of organized religion?

Thanks in advance for your thoughtful replies.

M O N S T E R

I don't think it's necessary but I'm kind of neutral on it. The problem is, teachers are bias and that bias can affect the teaching and the learning. That is why I don't think religion should be covered at all in schools. It is a good idea, though, other than that.

 

[justbehappy]

General Religious Studies courses would not only introduce students to the religions that are popular today but also to what is understood about the religions of the past that have died off. General Religious Studies courses would also introduce students to the differences, similarities and origins of organized religion. When these General Religious Studies courses are supported by instruction in critical thinking, what overall impact do you feel these courses would have upon the proliferation of organized religion in this country? Would organized religion prosper or continue to decline at an even more rapid rate than it is currently?

M O N S T E R

I think that Christian parents would have a big problem with this

 

[Riverwolf]

Maybe "kids" is a better descriptor.

The slang term for child, often applied incorrectly to teenagers and sometimes childish adults.

Really, what's wrong with young adults? They can make their own choices and think for themselves.

 

[M O N S T E R]

The slang term for child, often applied incorrectly to teenagers and sometimes childish adults.

Really, what's wrong with young adults? They can make their own choices and think for themselves.

Fine. "Young adults" it is. They can make choices and think for themselves but I would suggest that the choices they make are often poor in comparison to how they'd choose as a well-informed adult who's been around the block more than just a few times.

 

[Riverwolf]

Fine. "Young adults" it is. They can make choices and think for themselves but I would suggest that the choices they make are often poor in comparison to how they'd choose as a well-informed adult who's been around the block more than just a few times.

True. But their decision-making shouldn't be compared to children, as you did earlier. Children aren't supposed to make their own choices, so they don't. Their choices are supposed to be dependent on what adults say.

The only reason they make poor choices is because they were never taught how to make good ones. Besides, when you start talking about the poor choices that teenagers make, the least of your worries (and it's not worrisome to me at all) is whether or not they convert to or adapt a religion.

The point is, because most teenagers convert of their own free will, the idea that most religious people nowadays have been indoctrinated as children is nullified. I propose to you that indoctrination isn't what's going on with these young adults who convert to a religion: what's going on is the desire laden in most people of this age to belong to a group. (Thank the gods I didn't develop this desire until my Senior year in high school.) They're starting to develop an identity of their own, and for some of them, converting to a religion will help that. (Just like for others, leaving a childhood religion will do the opposite.)

Religion is also one of those things you have complete freedom about. If a teenager converts to a religion, and at a later date decides that it's not for him, he'll most likely leave at no cost or risk whatsoever. It may take some time and some strength to leave, but it will happen eventually. It's not like joining a gang or starting to do drugs.

Oh, and by the way, in all honesty, if you play the experience card, the only ones who can make good, informed decisions are elders who have done a little bit of everything. I work with children and young adults; I can tell you that some of them are more experienced than I am.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

How do believers and non-believers of this forum feel about the introduction of mandatory Critical Thinking and General Religious Studies courses for middle school and high school students in the USofA?

I'm not sure about making religious studies mandatory.

As for critical thinking, though, I haven't seen anything yet that works better than getting kids to play with robots.

 

[ThereIsNoSpoon]

How do believers and non-believers of this forum feel about the introduction of mandatory Critical Thinking and General Religious Studies courses for middle school and high school students in the USofA? What is your opinion on how these courses would (if at all) impact the average student's general receptiveness for organized religion? Would the introduction of these courses strengthen its progression or would they tend to stifle the proliferation of organized religion?

Thanks in advance for your thoughtful replies.

M O N S T E R

First course: good (add at least 1 or 2 years formal logic)
Second course: i am not sure what exactly that course should include. You mean some kind of historic overview and comparisson of religions?
Generally i do not think that religious studies are required to educate people.

As for effects of such courses: generally i think the more and the better people are educated the less superstitious they tend to be.
And of course religious groups will run storm against any good education that results in less religious people.