Why making your children follow your religion truly is brainwashing

[LuisDantas]

I have a different take on the issue. It's because I think the issue of belief is so important that I don't think we should indoctrinate our kids to believe in a particular belief system... and this applies especially for parents with strong religious convictions.

If a parent is very devout themselves, then they probably place great value on their freedom to believe and practice according to the dictates of their conscience without coercion. If they try to force their children to follow the same religion, then they deny this freedom to their children.

... and the more the parent considers their beliefs important, the more hypocritical it is for him to do this.

This. So very much this.

 

[dantech]

I have a different take on the issue. It's because I think the issue of belief is so important that I don't think we should indoctrinate our kids to believe in a particular belief system... and this applies especially for parents with strong religious convictions.

If a parent is very devout themselves, then they probably place great value on their freedom to believe and practice according to the dictates of their conscience without coercion. If they try to force their children to follow the same religion, then they deny this freedom to their children.

... and the more the parent considers their beliefs important, the more hypocritical it is for him to do this.

By that logic, an Atheist should teach his kids about religion, to give it a fair advantage, right?

 

[LuisDantas]

By that logic, an Atheist should teach his kids about religion, to give it a fair advantage, right?

Of course we should teach about religion, but I'm not following the "fair advantage" part.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

By that logic, an Atheist should teach his kids about religion, to give it a fair advantage, right?

I'm not sure I follow.

He shouldn't try to steer them to atheism as a foregone conclusion, IMO, and I think it's a good idea for him to teach them tools like critical thinking and curiosity. Beyond that, though, I'm not sure that a parent has a responsibility to expose a child to every religion any more than they have to make sure he meets every possible potential spouse.

 

[Koldo]

You are getting confused. I am saying a lack of understanding about the sincerity of belief in one's culture.

An Atheist knows that religion is false while a religious person will say otherwise. As a Deist I will assert both are wrong and do so with great sincerity.

Both parties "know" that the other party is wrong. So a parent raising her child in a religion is deemed a justifiable act to that parent.

I don't think there is any lack of understanding about the sincerity of belief on one's culture.

I don't think anyone here doubts that parents, who teach their children to blindly follow a religion, blindly follow that religion themselves. They really do believe that is for the best.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Of course we should teach about religion, but I'm not following the "fair advantage" part.

I think he's suggesting that a child won't end up religious just by learning about the world in a general way, so if a parent ignores the issue of religion, he'll be raising an atheist... which dantech considers unfair to religion.

It seems strange to me that a devout religious person would think that the world as it is implies atheism, but here we are.

 

[Koldo]

We cant really know what do we truly know.

Maybe something you saw today was an hallucination, but you havent noticed. Something you think you know.

You still make a distinction between things you regard as 'believing' and those you regard as 'knowing'. What parameters do you use?

Have you never spoken to a very religious man? It's not belief, it's knowledge. One's beliefs can be equal to one's knowledge.

This is the very root of the problem: to regard your belief as knowledge even when there is a major disagreement ( by experts ) on it.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Have you never spoken to a very religious man? It's not belief, it's knowledge. One's beliefs can be equal to one's knowledge.

Certitude is not the same thing as knowledge.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

We cant really know what do we truly know.

Maybe something you saw today was an hallucination, but you havent noticed. Something you think you know.

One conventional definition of knowledge is "justified true belief". The "true" part can often be beyond us (or always beyond us, depending on your view of the problem of hard solipsism), but the "justified" part can always be investigated.

 

[Koldo]

By that logic, an Atheist should teach his kids about religion, to give it a fair advantage, right?

Actually, i think it would be great if everyone was taught about all the main religions with an open mind. This would allow people to know how there are so many different ways to view this world.

 

[dantech]

I think he's suggesting that a child won't end up religious just by learning about the world in a general way, so if a parent ignores the issue of religion, he'll be raising an atheist... which dantech considers unfair to religion.

It seems strange to me that a devout religious person would think that the world as it is implies atheism, but here we are.

What I mean is this...
a case has been made that a religious parent shouldn't instill within his kids his religion because it will steer the child towards said religion as he grows up rather than letting him finding out on his own what he likes or doesn't like, and therefore end up deciding on which, if any, religion the kid decides to follow.
If you believe this to be true, then by that logic, an Atheist who didn't teach his kids about religion would be teaching his kid about the "Atheistic Religion" (If you can call it that). A Child who doesn't grow with a knowledge of what God is, is growing as an Atheist, which is what religious people have been accused of doing.

Hope I made that clearer.

 

[dantech]

Certitude is not the same thing as knowledge.

Your certitude isn't necessarily mine.

 

[LuisDantas]

If you believe this to be true,

I don't really, not in the general case.

But let's roll with that anyway, perhaps as a study of the aberrant cases.

then by that logic, an Atheist who didn't teach his kids about religion would be teaching his kid about the "Atheistic Religion" (If you can call it that).

I don't know that this is even possible in practice. Perhaps in very authoritarian environments such as Stalin's Russia?

A Child who doesn't grow with a knowledge of what God is, is growing as an Atheist, which is what religious people have been accused of doing.

Hope I made that clearer.

Just to be clear, are we talking about a hypothetical atheistic parent that goes out of his way to actually supress knowledge of the very concept of God?

 

[sojourner]

I don't have the foggiest idea why you would think that someone saying "I believe X" is mutually exclusive with making a factual claim that X is true.

A great testament as to probably why you're irreligious. If you don't "get" what it means to believe, then you're not going to "get" religion, and it's going to be seen as largely unimportant.

 

[LuisDantas]

Now for what I actually believe to be true:

(...) an Atheist who didn't teach his kids about religion would be teaching his kid about the "Atheistic Religion" (If you can call it that).

In practice, an Atheist parent would teach skepticism, which is not necessarily incompatible with religion. Heck, it is not even a bad thing for religion to actively nurture.

A Child who doesn't grow with a knowledge of what God is, is growing as an Atheist, which is what religious people have been accused of doing.

If it did happen that way, it would say a lot about how valid religion is, and not in a favorable way. It would evidence that Theistic religion is a relic with little reason for being.

Of course, it is nearly impossible even for the most hardcore atheists to raise chlidren who never learn of God at all.

Also, there are significant differences between Theism and Atheism when it comes to the potential for harmful indoctrination of children. For one thing, Atheism does not threaten children with hellfire.

 

[LuisDantas]

A great testament as to probably why you're irreligious. If you don't "get" what it means to believe, then you're not going to "get" religion, and it's going to be seen as largely unimportant.

Is that a bad thing? For Penguim, I don't think it is.

Doesn't it point towards a weakness of religion as it exists now? Yes, I think it does. Religion should not rely on belief to such an extent.

 

[sojourner]

If your proclamation from on high depended on some sort of nuance in the term "religion", then wasn't it misleading for you to issue it without explaining that nuance?

Get over yourself, Penguin. "Religion" is a nuanced term.

Wrong. Religion is an expression of values. Other non-religious things (secular humanism, for instance) are also expressions of values.

Wrong. Religion is values. Other "non-religious" things (secular humanism, for instance) are also forms of spiritual expression, whether they are termed as such or not.

 

[sojourner]

Sharing your beliefs with children as BELIEFS was clearly not the concern, rather teaching beliefs as facts.

Xy (with the obvious exception of the overzealous, who ignore the nuances of theology) does not teach belief as fact.

 

[Koldo]

Get over yourself, Penguin. "Religion" is a nuanced term.

Wrong. Religion is values. Other "non-religious" things (secular humanism, for instance) are also forms of spiritual expression, whether they are termed as such or not.

And there you go again shoving nonstandard definitions down people' throats.

 

[sojourner]

This is a non-distinction. Faith claims are factual claims- it isn't the content of the claim that makes them any different, its the basis for holding them (i.e. faith, as opposed to evidence).

<YAWN>
Come back when you have a better grasp of belief.

This may be true- to an extent- for a handful of religious folks, but is not, in general, true about religion, least of all Christianity in America, which is what I imagine most posters have in mind here.

It is true of what religion is -- not of what some, or even many, choose to make of it. I can't help it if there are a lot of wackos in 'Murrika who don't know the difference between belief and fantasy.

If it truly is the actions of those wackos that the OP is taking a stance against, then the OP needs to be clear that that's the case. But it's simply irresponsible to make a blanket statement that teaching a certain mythic system to a child is "brainwashing." Clearly, it isn't "brainwashing."

Is this really rocket-science to figure out?

No, it isn't. But to say that there's some mythic "age of accountability" that's necessary in order for religion to not be "brainwashing" is making a complicated mountain out of a simple molehill.