Childhood Indoctrination

[rmcdra]

Ontological Empiricism

Enculturation and indoctrination are two different animals. "Enculturation" is the process where the culture that is currently established teaches an individual the accepted norms and values of the culture or society in which the individual lives. Most importantly the individual knows and establishes a context of boundaries and accepted behavior that dictates what is acceptable and not acceptable within the framework of that society.

"Indoctrination" is the process of inculcating ideas, attitudes, cognitive strategies or a professional methodology. It's basically a "don't think, obey." type of deal. The person being indoctrinated is expected to not question or critically examine the doctrine they've learned.

You have me walking a fine line, rmcdra. But enculturation can happen consciously or unconsciously, either by observation of social constructs, or direction. Indoctrination is, if not always, consciously done by a family member (ex. parents). "We believe in this religion, and follow these practices, and you will because we do."

Is it a fine line because it's actually there or because it's based on context and perspective? Also I'm not seeing how that, "We believe in this religion, and follow these practices, and you will because we do." is not enculturation. It also sounds like the parents want to include the child in their way of life but stating in a very aggressive and aggravated way.

Quote:

In regards to world religions, it shows intolerance, and somewhat ignorance, when someone dismisses an opposing belief as "stupid" or "idiotic".

Good point and yes I do agree with you on this, but there are some world views that parents simply don't agree with and believe would hurt their child(ren). What is a parent to do in that sort of situation?

Quote:

In your examples, we know that the Earth isn't flat, and that the sun doesn't revolve around the Earth. We also know that the Earth isn't made out of cheese. The reasoning as to why someone to this day might still believe these things escapes me.

Personal experience and lack of tools to observe a complete perspective of why this view is an error of perception.

Quote:

I'm referring more to something along the lines of: "Some stupid people believe in a stupid idea of reincarnation. Some idiots like to believe there's no afterlife. Some dumbasses like to think there's a bearded man floating around in the cosmos. Some asshats like to believe there is no god at all."

And again it comes back to personal experience and lack of knowledge. You cut off the last part, where I elaborated more on this, but parents will teach what they know and what they think is best, whether it's for the best or not. This is of course excluding the case where a parent is raising a child in terms that is best for themselves but then you start getting into the realm of obvious child abuse there.

Quote:

So in your case, I don't really think you'd be wrong in teaching it as a misconception that people believe the Earth is flat, or the sun revolves around the Earth. I think you'd be wrong if you told someone their religious belief is stupid or wrong, simply because it may differ from your own.

Agreed.  

[Southern Cross Nemesis]

I have an idea, At the time of birth all parents are to hand over their child to the government. At which time the child becomes property of the government, is given a number, instead of a name, and is taught how the government wishes. End of religion, accents, Family life, and anything that is remotely free personal choice.

I don't mean this as a shot, but this is the only way I can remotely see, what is being griped about.

"8472 step forward"  

[rmcdra]

Southern Cross Nemesis

I have an idea, At the time of birth all parents are to hand over their child to the government. At which time the child becomes property of the government, is given a number, instead of a name, and is taught how the government wishes. End of religion, accents, Family life, and anything that is remotely free personal choice.

I don't mean this as a shot, but this is the only way I can remotely see, what is being griped about.

"8472 step forward"

No because governments can be biased, bigoted and racists just as individuals can. That sort of solution would make the problem worse. We're doing pretty well considering that unlike other countries, the US deals with more than just one or two ethnicities/cultures/religions and has secularization at least in paper work, if not always practiced. We're in the middle of defining what is "American", that doesn't rely on WASP definition that the 50's set for us. Once we figure that out, it will pass.  

[Southern Cross Nemesis]

rmcdra

Southern Cross Nemesis

I have an idea, At the time of birth all parents are to hand over their child to the government. At which time the child becomes property of the government, is given a number, instead of a name, and is taught how the government wishes. End of religion, accents, Family life, and anything that is remotely free personal choice.

I don't mean this as a shot, but this is the only way I can remotely see, what is being griped about.

"8472 step forward"

No because governments can be biased, bigoted and racists just as individuals can. That sort of solution would make the problem worse. We're doing pretty well considering that unlike other countries, the US deals with more than just one or two ethnicities/cultures/religions and has secularization at least in paper work, if not always practiced. We're in the middle of defining what is "American", that doesn't rely on WASP definition that the 50's set for us. Once we figure that out, it will pass.

Even so, it would remove the problem of teaching the child multiple religions/ways of life/etc, there would only be one... The Government. The Government will provide, if we listen...  

[rmcdra]

Southern Cross Nemesis

rmcdra

Southern Cross Nemesis

I have an idea, At the time of birth all parents are to hand over their child to the government. At which time the child becomes property of the government, is given a number, instead of a name, and is taught how the government wishes. End of religion, accents, Family life, and anything that is remotely free personal choice.

I don't mean this as a shot, but this is the only way I can remotely see, what is being griped about.

"8472 step forward"

No because governments can be biased, bigoted and racists just as individuals can. That sort of solution would make the problem worse. We're doing pretty well considering that unlike other countries, the US deals with more than just one or two ethnicities/cultures/religions and has secularization at least in paper work, if not always practiced. We're in the middle of defining what is "American", that doesn't rely on WASP definition that the 50's set for us. Once we figure that out, it will pass.

Even so, it would remove the problem of teaching the child multiple religions/ways of life/etc, there would only be one... The Government. The Government will provide, if we listen...

Here's the kicker though, we are the government. A government cannot function if it's citizens don't agree to it's sovereignty. Civil disobedience was very popular at one point in our history. Also the US government did do that at one point, that's why American = WASP is so ingrained into us. This is why you have insane individuals going on about "Muslims/Atheists aren't American" or "America was founded to be a Christian country". The WASP definition of American is untrue and was never true from the start. Moving past this, should be our first goal if we are to unite and stand up to those that wish to oppress us.  

[Qyp]

rmcdra

Southern Cross Nemesis

I have an idea, At the time of birth all parents are to hand over their child to the government. At which time the child becomes property of the government, is given a number, instead of a name, and is taught how the government wishes. End of religion, accents, Family life, and anything that is remotely free personal choice.

I don't mean this as a shot, but this is the only way I can remotely see, what is being griped about.

"8472 step forward"

No because governments can be biased, bigoted and racists just as individuals can. That sort of solution would make the problem worse. We're doing pretty well considering that unlike other countries, the US deals with more than just one or two ethnicities/cultures/religions and has secularization at least in paper work, if not always practiced. We're in the middle of defining what is "American", that doesn't rely on WASP definition that the 50's set for us. Once we figure that out, it will pass.

New Zealand and Australia has probably every ethnicity, either as a tourist, or as a resident, or born a citizen of so many generations...

We have ethnicity diversity up the wazoo. I think we do just fine not being such douches to those other cultures, since we have kept Maori culture around, Australia with their Aboriginals, we are pretty accepting of different cultures and religions.

Yah know what I find interesting, is the fact that Islam is growing so quickly, yet you would think it would be the opposite though... with all the crap it's gone through lately.  

[Limonchiki]

This is just my perspective, based on experience:

It would not be possible for me to give an "unbiased" education in world religions to my future children. First of all, people aren't capable of being "unbiased" no matter how hard they try. But for me specifically, religion is a big part of my life. My children would see my praying several times every day. They would go with me to church at least until they are old enough to be home alone, and we would celebrate holidays and talk about religion at home. Faith isn't just something I believe in my head- it's a part of my life, and I'm not going to stop practicing my religion for 18+ years so as to not influence my children.

That said, I think it's possible to make your child feel comfortable with exploration, questions, and doubt even in an environment where one particular religion is being practiced. Using my own life as an example, my parents were religious, yet I was free to learn about different religions, to go to a church or synagogue or whatever with a friend and their family, to ask questions about other beliefs and read about them, etc. Nobody in my family ever tried to pretend that they had no preference, because that would have been absurd. Of course they have their own specific beliefs and of course they would be happiest if I went along with them, but that never meant that I wasn't free to choose.

And I think that's really the key- to make people feel that they are free to choose and will be loved regardless. I mean, my family doesn't even really like my choices, nor do they pretend to, but they still like and care about and respect me, and don't try to control me. That's what I really care about. I don't need to me made to feel as if my family approves of all of my beliefs.  

[Mrtyu-Mara]

Limonchiki

This is just my perspective, based on experience:

It would not be possible for me to give an "unbiased" education in world religions to my future children. First of all, people aren't capable of being "unbiased" no matter how hard they try. But for me specifically, religion is a big part of my life. My children would see my praying several times every day. They would go with me to church at least until they are old enough to be home alone, and we would celebrate holidays and talk about religion at home. Faith isn't just something I believe in my head- it's a part of my life, and I'm not going to stop practicing my religion for 18+ years so as to not influence my children.

That said, I think it's possible to make your child feel comfortable with exploration, questions, and doubt even in an environment where one particular religion is being practiced. Using my own life as an example, my parents were religious, yet I was free to learn about different religions, to go to a church or synagogue or whatever with a friend and their family, to ask questions about other beliefs and read about them, etc. Nobody in my family ever tried to pretend that they had no preference, because that would have been absurd. Of course they have their own specific beliefs and of course they would be happiest if I went along with them, but that never meant that I wasn't free to choose.

And I think that's really the key- to make people feel that they are free to choose and will be loved regardless. I mean, my family doesn't even really like my choices, nor do they pretend to, but they still like and care about and respect me, and don't try to control me. That's what I really care about. I don't need to me made to feel as if my family approves of all of my beliefs.

However, you could be considered lucky. When I realized my Atheism, my immediate family didn't care either way, due to being Atheist/Agnostic themselves. However, I had to endure my extended family lecturing me, telling me why I should believe in God, that I'll go to Hell if I don't believe in God, and even my Mammaw asked me "Without God, how can I love others?" due to that whole "God is love" cliché. That...actually hurt my feelings when she asked me that question; a woman whom played a very significant, important role in my life...somewhat implying that without God, I'm some sort of soulless, loveless husk.

My gripe is mostly about those who teach their children "This is what we believe, because it's the correct beliefs, all other beliefs are wrong and only heathens follow them." rather than "This is our belief, there are many others such as . We believe in this particular one because of X, Y, and Z, but it's cool to ask questions, and critical thinking is promoted. You are free to choose whichever belief that suits you most, because you are your own person, and we love you no matter what."

Sure, I'm being a little bit contemptuous because I'm a bit jaded, but from my experience, be it from extended family, acquaintances, and the like, I generally see the mindset of "The Judeo-Christian God is the one, true God. Christianity is the one, true religion. All other religions and beliefs are wrong, and I hope you find your way back onto the right path (or the more condescending 'I'll pray for you.' in this context)."

I am sure there is no such thing as true objectivity, but there is a way to keep from being a dogmatist.