Latest Fundy Fear mongering: Universities make kids atheists

[Skeptic Ginger]

OK, so Santorum made another outrageous fundamentalist claim: Colleges are turning theists into atheists: Rick Santorum Sounds 'Indoctrination' Warning Over Obama College Plan

Santorum told Beck that “62 percent of kids who go into college with a faith commitment leave without it,” but failed to say where he found that figure.

So I figured this was not his original idea and it was likely to be bouncing around Evangelical and other fundamentalist Christian circles as the latest persecution fear mongering claim. The more people figure out they've been indoctrinated into a religion, the more that religion's minions fight to silence science education and whatever else they perceive the anti-indoctrination to be coming from.

Why God Isn’t Doing Well

The first is that increasingly large numbers of men and women attend university, and Western universities have become essentially secular (and leftist) seminaries. Just as the agenda of traditional Christian and Jewish seminaries is to produce religious Christians and religious Jews, the agenda of Western universities is to produce (left-wing) secularists. The difference is that Christian and Jewish seminaries are honest about their agenda, while the universities still claim they have neither a secularist nor a political agenda.

This goes along with David Horowitz's dangerous attacks on all university professors that don't have Horowitz's political beliefs.

Here's an alternative hypothesis: Does College Make You Less Religious?

The Atlantic‘s Conor Friedersdorf, who for some reason believes Prager is “as thoughtful a voice as you’ll find on talk radio,” manages to offer an alternative explanation:

To me, there are better explanations for the fact that “the more university education a person receives, the more likely he is to hold secular and left-wing views.” One is that people who attend college leave home. That is to say, they leave their church, the community incentives to attend it, and the watchful eye of parents who get angry or make them feel guilty when they don’t go to services or stray in their faith. Suddenly they’re surrounded by dorm mates of different faiths or no faith at all. For many of these students, it turns out that their religious behavior was driven more by desire for community, or social and parental pressure, than by deeply held beliefs. Another reason education correlates with secularism is that secularists are more likely to seek advanced degrees, partly because they’re more focused than their religious counterparts on career.

I favor the third hypothesis:

There’s also the possibility that when you realize how much we really know about biology and zoology and anthropology and chemistry and genetics and astrophysics, the stories in the Bible just become silly and antiquated.

Anytime these people start attacking institutions of higher learning with what seems like a goal of turning secular institutions into dogma mills propagating their own beliefs, I get concerned.


Edited to add this link to Conor Friedersdorf's comments in the Atlantic quoted in the blog I cited.



This is another one of those topics that could have gone into 3 different forums: politics, religion or current events. I thought current events was the most appropriate compromise.

 

[Lanzy]

But...university is exactly where I was exposed to enough facts to turn my back on my church.

I assume there is indeed a high number atheists that became so the same way.

I still think santorum is nuts and makes up facts but he is successful because there is a grain of truth to college helping atheists along the path.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

But...university is exactly where I was exposed to enough facts to turn my back on my church.

I assume there is indeed a high number atheists that became so the same way.

I still think santorum is nuts and makes up facts but he is successful because there is a grain of truth to college helping atheists along the path.

There is truth in the claim. Your kids grow up and make their own choices. There are more and more secular organizations in universities in the US than a few years ago. And then there is that reality based science education.

That doesn't make this particular fear mongering any less worrisome.

 

[AvalonXQ]

I agree with Santorum. Many college professors are atheists and liberals that really do have an anti-conservative, anti-Christian agenda and really do use tactics other than sound reason (rhetoric, ridicule, and the power imbalance of the classroom -- basically all the weapons of authority) to try to groom students to their way of thinking.

I encountered these professors at college. I also encountered rational atheist professors who had excellent patience in dealing with logical fallacies and bringing up real, rational arguments to accept a different point of view. But just because the latter sort exists, doesn't mean we should ignore the alarmingly high frequency of students encountering the former sort.

So the danger is real. Fortunately students in many places fight it, and create cultures that are supportive to their views and call out professors behaving in this way.

But the danger Santorum brings up is very real.

 

[NewtonTrino]

I agree with Santorum. Many college professors are atheists and liberals that really do have an anti-conservative, anti-Christian agenda and really do use tactics other than sound reason (rhetoric, ridicule, and the power imbalance of the classroom -- basically all the weapons of authority) to try to groom students to their way of thinking.

I encountered these professors at college. I also encountered rational atheist professors who had excellent patience in dealing with logical fallacies and bringing up real, rational arguments to accept a different point of view. But just because the latter sort exists, doesn't mean we should ignore the alarmingly high frequency of students encountering the former sort.

So the danger is real. Fortunately students in many places fight it, and create cultures that are supportive to their views and call out professors behaving in this way.

But the danger Santorum brings up is very real.

Well this can easily be fixed by keeping your kids locked up in the basement.

Anyway good on profs for trying to break some of these religious kids out of their insane beliefs. A little bit of ridicule can go a long way. Besides of the kids faith is strong they are going to get continually tested anyway.

I mean seriously if some kid comes into your biology class claiming that the earth is 10k years old, that fossiles are from the great floods and other nonsense they need to be smacked down hard.

In other words... GO PZ!

 

[AvalonXQ]

Anyway good on profs for trying to break some of these religious kids out of their insane beliefs. A little bit of ridicule can go a long way.

That's not the job of an educator -- but it also proves my point. Santorum's got it right. This is a real problem.

I mean seriously if some kid comes into your biology class claiming that the earth is 10k years old, that fossiles are from the great floods and other nonsense they need to be smacked down hard.

No; they need to be educated.
If you can't get your point across using reason and facts, you have no business teaching classes at an institution of higher learning.

 

[Resume]

I agree with Santorum. Many college professors are atheists and liberals that really do have an anti-conservative, anti-Christian agenda and really do use tactics other than sound reason (rhetoric, ridicule, and the power imbalance of the classroom -- basically all the weapons of authority) to try to groom students to their way of thinking.

I encountered these professors at college. I also encountered rational atheist professors who had excellent patience in dealing with logical fallacies and bringing up real, rational arguments to accept a different point of view. But just because the latter sort exists, doesn't mean we should ignore the alarmingly high frequency of students encountering the former sort.

So the danger is real. Fortunately students in many places fight it, and create cultures that are supportive to their views and call out professors behaving in this way.

But the danger Santorum brings up is very real.

What's dangerous about critical thinking?

 

[Complexity]

What's dangerous about critical thinking?

It puts superstition and ignorance at risk.

Sheeple must not be allowed to think.

 

[AvalonXQ]

What's dangerous about critical thinking?

Nothing. But as I said...

Many college professors are atheists and liberals that really do have an anti-conservative, anti-Christian agenda and really do use tactics other than sound reason (rhetoric, ridicule, and the power imbalance of the classroom -- basically all the weapons of authority) to try to groom students to their way of thinking.

University professors teaching kids to think critically is not a problem. University professors using their authority to indoctrinate kids to spout atheist dogma is the problem. The embarrassing frequency of the latter, rather than the former, is the reason Santorum is correct.

 

[332nd]

That's not the job of an educator -- but it also proves my point. Santorum's got it right. This is a real problem.

Why is it a problem?

No; they need to be educated.
If you can't get your point across using reason and facts, you have no business teaching classes at an institution of higher learning.

Why can't using reason & facts equate a "smack down"?

 

[AvalonXQ]

Why can't using reason & facts equate a "smack down"?

Exactly.

 

[332nd]

Exactly.

And your evidence that this isn't what the professors are doing is... What?

 

[Resume]

University professors teaching kids to think critically is not a problem. University professors using their authority to indoctrinate kids to spout atheist dogma is the problem. The embarrassing frequency of the latter, rather than the former, is the reason Santorum is correct.

Who's indoctrinating? I think your ox is being gored and you don't like it. In my college experience, the only professors that espoused atheism were those who were specifically asked about it in discussions with students. Now the nitwits in the campus crusade for christ could be counted on to interrupt uninvited rather constantly. We could have used a few militant atheist profs to balance things out.

One particular professor in philosophy was asked about his religous views during a q and a in logic class and his reply he was atheist drew rather more doctrinaire in opposite from christian students. Vitriolically so.

Anecdotes I know, just like your own and Santorum's.

 

[NewtonTrino]

That's not the job of an educator -- but it also proves my point. Santorum's got it right. This is a real problem.


No; they need to be educated.
If you can't get your point across using reason and facts, you have no business teaching classes at an institution of higher learning.

Some of the best teachers I ever had in my life where the ones who could break through peoples barriers by letting things get a bit heated. I think strong argumentative discussion has a large place in classrooms. If someone has unsupportable beliefs that they bring to a science class I don't see any problem with a bit of ridicule.

BTW this is exactly the same argument that the religious make in general. Any criticism of their absurd position is considered to be "persecution". We atheists are supposed to just keep our mouths shut so that everyone can live in their own fantasy land. If they say anything at all against religion it makes them "strident" and "shrill". Sorry, I ain't buying it.

Another way of looking at it is that these kids are going to school to learn. If you have no interest in actually learning then GTFO and let kids who want to learn take your place... after all most universities have to reject people.

 

[AvalonXQ]

Some of the best teachers I ever had in my life where the ones who could break through peoples barriers by letting things get a bit heated. I think strong argumentative discussion has a large place in classrooms. If someone has unsupportable beliefs that they bring to a science class I don't see any problem with a bit of ridicule.

You don't; I do -- as do most students, who nowadays can and will fight back when professors pull this crap. Then the professors whine. It's a common refrain.

BTW this is exactly the same argument that the religious make in general. Any criticism of their absurd position is considered to be "persecution".

Wait, seriously? You just said up above that you condone ridicule of students, and now you refuse to acknowledge that any criticism of such students (including ridicule) should reasonably considered off-the-table?
In my very first post I made a clear distinction between reasoned arguments and rhetorical attacks. Now you're claiming that I can't see any difference. Are you actually reading my posts?

Another way of looking at it is that these kids are going to school to learn. If you have no interest in actually learning then GTFO and let kids who want to learn take your place...

I agree. While we're at it, the profs who have no interest in actually teaching can GTFO out, too.
Oh, and by the way, unlike you (who apparently would consider any religious student a candidate for ridicule and your GTFO), my criteria would be based on professor conduct, not religious belief. As I said in my first post, atheist professors teaching critical thinking is valuable for students. Atheists professors using their authority to shame students into shedding their beliefs is not.

 

[NewtonTrino]

You don't; I do -- as do most students, who nowadays can and will fight back when professors pull this crap. Then the professors whine. It's a common refrain.

The professors aren't pulling any crap. I think we just disagree on this.

Wait, seriously? You just said up above that you condone ridicule of students, and now you refuse to acknowledge that any criticism of such students (including ridicule) should reasonably considered off-the-table?
In my very first post I made a clear distinction between reasoned arguments and rhetorical attacks. Now you're claiming that I can't see any difference. Are you actually reading my posts?

I condone ridicule of anyone bring unscientific ideas into a science class. Ridicule has a place in human relations. It's a powerful tactic that shouldn't be off the table, especially in a university classroom. I fully support telling kids who bring dumb ideas to class that their ideas are dumb.

Rhetorical attacks are completely ok IMHO.

I agree. While we're at it, the profs who have no interest in actually teaching can GTFO out, too.
Oh, and by the way, unlike you (who apparently would consider any religious student a candidate for ridicule and your GTFO), my criteria would be based on professor conduct, not religious belief. As I said in my first post, atheist professors teaching critical thinking is valuable for students. Atheists professors using their authority to shame students into shedding their beliefs is not.

I also agree that profs who can't teach well shouldn't be teaching.

But to me shame is a completely acceptable tactic. Again if you bring a 10k earth into a science classroom you need a hard smack down.

 

[sadhatter]

You know, to me, if when one goes to a place that is designed to give one more knowledge, and the result of that, frequently is the giving up of a point of view, if you are the people who hold this point of view, you probably don't want to go around advertising this.

It would be like if i ran a martial arts school, and tried to say that there was something evil about the gun industry, because once someone buys one they generally have no more use for the knowledge they gained from me.

I would love for this guy to promote the hell of out this statement, i mean really, if he was a mechanic he would essentially be saying " Once people know how to fix cars, i can't charge them to replace the headlight fluid anymore, those evil mechanic schools, i tell ya.".

 

[332nd]

Hmmm.... maybe some examples of these students being ridiculed?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

We've heard the claims, Avalon, where's your evidence?

From the National Review article I linked to in the OP, here's that author's evidence:

A radio talk-show host for 29 years, I long ago began asking callers who made foolish comments what graduate school they had attended....

Everything else in this piece is some unsubstantiated conclusion. And they are some mind boggling claims.

...A third reason God is not doing well is that most of the men and women who are products of this secular left-wing education (meaning a large majority of Western men and women) are theologically, intellectually, and emotionally ill-prepared to deal with all the unjust suffering in the world. I will never forget a Swedish pastor’s reaction to the 1994 sinking of the Estonia, ... leaving 852 passengers and crew dead. He said he could not believe in a God who allowed such injustice to take place.

... The existence of so much unjust suffering in the world has strongly contributed to their rejecting belief in God. And undoubtedly the devastation caused by the Japanese earthquake and tsunami has further reinforced many individuals’ rejection of God....

...most of the brilliant minds in history retained their faith in God despite all the unjust suffering they saw.

The difference today is that life has been so good for most Westerners that suffering is no longer regarded as part of life, but as an aberration that can be done away with.

And there is this jewel:

The moral, intellectual, artistic, and demographic decline in Western Europe (people in secular countries don’t even have the will to reproduce themselves) is only gaining momentum. And the consequences of that decline will be far more devastating than all the tsunamis and all the earthquakes that may come our way.

Other than a rare student complaining about some individual professor demeaning the student's god beliefs, where is the evidence of any kind of systematic university goal of deprogramming right wingers and/or theists?

 

[stilicho]

....

I favor the third hypothesis:


Anytime these people start attacking institutions of higher learning with what seems like a goal of turning secular institutions into dogma mills propagating their own beliefs, I get concerned.


....

In other words, you agree with Santorum that US colleges are transforming students into atheists but you want that to happen. I think you're right then on both counts.

The other guy you cited talks about universities producing "secular" (by which he means "atheist") and "left-wing" views. He's partly right but he also ignores the impact of rising, or potentially rising, income.

There is an arguably negative correlation between religion and wealth (cf OSU sociology studies). Wealthier individuals also indulge more frequently in coffee-house socialism and other boutique ideologies. With wealth, too, comes the opportunity to act more selectively as consumers, leading to more time on the links and less time in the pew.