Evolution to be compulsory subject in UK primary schools

[Darat]

You can understand, and pass tests in, material with which you entirely disagree.
Most of us took classic myths, did we not?

Not sure what your point is?

 

[AvalonXQ]

Not sure what your point is?

I know many people who gained the curricular understanding of the Theory of Evolution without believing it, so they could pass tests on the material. Heck, I know people who have done that in a lot of areas -- such as when you have a really liberal professor in a history or political science class. You can understand the material well enough to regurgitate it without ever actually embracing it.

Less than a month ago I had a conversation with a teen in church who said she was in advanced biology and they were getting into Evolution. She made some noise about refusing to take the test on it. I told her, no; she needs to learn the material and perform beautifully on that test. Only when she genuinely understands the concepts behind Evolution can she make an intelligent decision to agree with or reject it. And disagreeing with a concept is no excuse not to learn about it.
I hope she follows my advice.

 

[Rrose Selavy]

Yes. Religious indoctrination comes with other core indoctrinations like socialization, language, ethics, discipline, etc.
Science is equally important but has to come after they have the more basic skills down.

I notice you don't have the confidence in the robustness of your beliefs to introduce Adam & Eve etc as "Bible history" later when critical skills have developed.

How surprising (not)

 

[AvalonXQ]

I notice you don't have the confidence in the robustness of your beliefs to introduce Adam & Eve etc as "Bible history" later when critical skills have developed.

In other words, you don't believe that religion belongs in the indoctrination stage of a child's education. And you're entitled to; but I do. I also believe that whether or not religion is part of the indoctrination stage of a child's education is entirely up to the parents, and that the State should try to stay far away from controversial topics in contributing to this stage.

 

[Filippo Lippi]

I know exactly how you feel. I am a wife beater. The government has just announced that every school pupil in England is to be taught that domestic violence is unacceptable. I think they should leave that to the parents and schools shouldn’t teach the controversy.

I think I nominated this for something.

 

[Filippo Lippi]

Only the indoctrinated think that evolution is contrversial.

 

[AvalonXQ]

Only the indoctrinated think that evolution is contrversial.

I'll assume what you mean is that only those indoctrinated against evolution think that evolution is controversial.
Indoctrination is simply a part of child development. The question is which doctrines are included.

 

[Filippo Lippi]

I'd have thought the only indoctrination that is essential is the "don't run in the road, don't stick a srewdriver in a socket," type of deal.

 

[Rrose Selavy]

In other words, you don't believe that religion belongs in the indoctrination stage of a child's education. And you're entitled to; but I do. I also believe that whether or not religion is part of the indoctrination stage of a child's education is entirely up to the parents, and that the State should try to stay far away from controversial topics in contributing to this stage.

No. I don't believe their should be any indocrination stage of a child's life let alone education. The fact that you feel it is perfectly ok to do so speaks volumes.

 

[AvalonXQ]

I'd have thought the only indoctrination that is essential is the "don't run in the road, don't stick a srewdriver in a socket," type of deal.

Definitely not enough. You really need what I call the "interaction" stuff -- the set of beliefs that allow you to interact with others. Fairness, sympathy, compassion, obedience, respect, manners, etc for good social reflexes. Communication, cultural mores, "common sense", etc for logistical capabilities.

 

[Filippo Lippi]

You don't need to indoctrinate those things, there are other ways.

 

[AvalonXQ]

No. I don't believe their should be any indocrination stage of a child's life let alone education. The fact that you feel it is perfectly ok to do so speaks volumes.

It speaks volumes to the fact that I understand that newborn children don't have reasoning skills. At the beginning, they learn what they are taught, and accept what they are told. The very ability to discern, which makes critical thinking possible, must itself be taught as a doctrine. It's not a question of whether a child learns foundational knowledge uncritically. It's only a question of which knowledge is included.

 

[AvalonXQ]

You don't need to indoctrinate those things, there are other ways.

Until the child has the reasoning skills to discern (which must themselves be learned as part of this early process), anything they learn, whether from experience or intentional teaching, is learned as doctrine.
Again, what I'm saying is not controversial -- kids will believe things from people they trust, until they learn not to. They will pick up and emulate the beliefs and attitudes of the people around them. We can affirmatively choose what they learn (including critical thinking), but we cannot stop them from learning uncritically when they are young.

 

[Lothian]

Indoctrination is simply a part of child development. The question is which doctrines are included.

True, and I admire your bravery in putting your church before your relationship with your child.

Teaching false doctrines has a habit of coming back to bite when the student learns the truth. I understand that a lot of American university students lose religion when learning the scientific 'facts' taught by the church are so demonstratively untrue.

 

[AvalonXQ]

True, and I admire your bravery in putting your church before your relationship with your child.

It's not an either-or proposition. Every child learns that things they learned growing up were untrue. But generally, if the child realizes that their parents were honest with them (i.e., the parent was teaching the child what they themselves believe to be true), this does not negatively impact the parent child relationship.
There are a lot of parenting mistakes that will strain the relationship. Teaching a belief that a child ceases to agree with is not one of them; it's simply part of growing up.
Incidentally, children from homes where both parents regularly attend church and are consistently taught are far more likely to remain in the church than to leave it, and more likely to remain than children whose parents do not consistently teach and practice the religion.

 

[Rrose Selavy]

It speaks volumes to the fact that I understand that newborn children don't have reasoning skills. At the beginning, they learn what they are taught, and accept what they are told. The very ability to discern, which makes critical thinking possible, must itself be taught as a doctrine. It's not a question of whether a child learns foundational knowledge uncritically. It's only a question of which knowledge is included.

Self justifying sophistry.

And you don't want to include knowledge that happens to contradict your fantasy view of the universe.
There is also a vast difference between "teaching" and "learning".
I look forward to your children learning about "foundational knowledge" such as the experience of gravity uncritically so they can later later reject it as "controversial".

 

[AvalonXQ]

And you don't want to include knowledge that happens to contradict your fantasy view of the universe.

Neither do you.
Can you identify a piece of information that you want taught as fact in an elementary school classroom that you believe to be false? Quite frankly, I can't imagine any good parent would.

 

[AvalonXQ]

I look forward to your children learning about "foundational knowledge" such as the experience of gravity uncritically so they can later later reject it as "controversial".

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. You're saying that if we teach our children special creation they somehow will reject the Theory of Gravity when they learn how to reason? How do you even get there?

 

[Rrose Selavy]

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. You're saying that if we teach our children special creation they somehow will reject the Theory of Gravity when they learn how to reason? How do you even get there?

How indeed. Try thinking a bit harder.

 

[ZirconBlue]

Incidentally, children from homes where both parents regularly attend church and are consistently taught are far more likely to remain in the church than to leave it, and more likely to remain than children whose parents do not consistently teach and practice the religion.

You say that like it's a good thing.