How do you teach children a healthy cynicism

nationalgeo

Hi all, I have a couple of young nieces and nephews. They are attending RC schools in the midlands area. Eldest is making communion in 2010. They get these bibles from school and are taught religion as a real subject.

How do you teach children to have a healthy cynicism.

Joe1919

nationalgeo wrote: »

.....healthy cynicism.

http://www.google.ie/search?q=cynicism+is+bad+for+your+health&hl=en&source=hp&ie=ISO-8859-1&btnG=Search

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

axer

nationalgeo wrote: »

Hi all, I have a couple of young nieces and nephews. They are attending RC schools in the midlands area. Eldest is making communion in 2010. They get these bibles from school and are taught religion as a real subject.

How do you teach children to have a healthy cynicism.

It is none of your business. If they are your kids then that would be your business but they're not so butt out.

philologos

nationalgeo wrote: »

Hi all, I have a couple of young nieces and nephews. They are attending RC schools in the midlands area. Eldest is making communion in 2010. They get these bibles from school and are taught religion as a real subject.

How do you teach children to have a healthy cynicism.

Do you really mean just a healthy cynicism, or do you mean to teach them to reject Catholicism?

Be entirely honest here, both aren't mutually exclusive.

Daftendirekt

nationalgeo wrote: »

Hi all, I have a couple of young nieces and nephews. They are attending RC schools in the midlands area. Eldest is making communion in 2010. They get these bibles from school and are taught religion as a real subject.

How do you teach children to have a healthy cynicism.

Are you raising them yourself? If not, then you don't. You leave it up to the parents.

I think you mean a healithy skepticism, by the way.

Teferi

nationalgeo wrote: »

Hi all, I have a couple of young nieces and nephews. They are attending RC schools in the midlands area. Eldest is making communion in 2010. They get these bibles from school and are taught religion as a real subject.

How do you teach children to have a healthy cynicism.

This isn't up to you.

Nobrow

Yeah, religion is a subject, but at that age they are not taught religion, they are taught the RC faith :mad:

I understand totally, as I have some lovely but zealot relations and their now grown children have been quite brainwashed, but its none of my business (except when they are preaching or throwing holy water at me).

Alls you can do is not hide your beliefs or lack thereof, and let the kids see that there is an alternative (try not to cause a family fued though).

robindch

nationalgeo wrote: »

They get these bibles from school and are taught religion as a real subject. How do you teach children to have a healthy cynicism.

As others have said, it's not really any of your business what your siblings do with their children.

If you're asked, you're perfectly within your rights to give, say, your opinion of the catholic church and its lamentable record of childcare in this country and ask whether they're really the best people to have running the schools. Alternatively, you can raise the topic of religion with your own siblings, when the kids are present, and vent away, but that's a quick way to damage your relationship with your family (unless you have kids yourself and your family is attempting to indoctrinate them against your will; a bit of reciprocity might be tolerated).

But basically, there's nothing much you can really do. Religion has simply evolved these nasty, divisive social techniques for no other reason than they really do help it propagate.

Antbert

Unfortunately I don't think there's much you can do, without looking like you're trying to 'save' someone else's children. I can see the difference between that and religious indoctrination, but their parents probably can't.

That said, if the subject comes up, go nuts.

OP let me put it this way: if i was atheist and bringing up my children that way, and a well meaning but interfering relative showed up trying to give them "healthy faith in god" I'd be likely to tell them to shove off and mind their own business at least until the kids were older. Wouldn't you?

philologos

Antbert wrote: »

Unfortunately I don't think there's much you can do, without looking like you're trying to 'save' someone else's children. I can see the difference between that and religious indoctrination, but their parents probably can't.

That said, if the subject comes up, go nuts.

There isn't a difference, and it isn't indoctrination to teach ones child about your beliefs and values. That's where using the term "indoctrination" is incredibly inaccurate.

Every parent passes on beliefs, and viewpoints to their children irrespective of whether or not they believe in God. The atheist is "indoctrinating" their children as much as the Christian is.

Antbert

Jakkass wrote: »

There isn't a difference, and it isn't indoctrination to teach ones child about your beliefs and values. That's where using the term "indoctrination" is incredibly inaccurate.

Every parent passes on beliefs, and viewpoints to their children irrespective of whether or not they believe in God. The atheist is "indoctrinating" their children as much as the Christian is.

I think telling someone 'believe this' is different to telling them 'believe whatever you want'.

If the OP genuinely wants to teach children to be free thinkers, that is very different to teaching them to follow a religion. If he wants to teach them to be atheists, we run into a bit of a dilemma.

Helix

Jakkass wrote: »

There isn't a difference, and it isn't indoctrination to teach ones child about your beliefs and values. That's where using the term "indoctrination" is incredibly inaccurate.

Every parent passes on beliefs, and viewpoints to their children irrespective of whether or not they believe in God. The atheist is "indoctrinating" their children as much as the Christian is.

however in school kids are taught that god is real and true, and not to be questioned at all

philologos

Helix wrote: »

however in school kids are taught that god is real and true, and not to be questioned at all

They are taught about God and then when they are older they can assess the idea for themselves. If their parents want their child to be raised in the best religious and moral way possible (according to them) that's fair enough by me. People will think about it for themselves anyway.

Tim Robbins

nationalgeo wrote: »

Hi all, I have a couple of young nieces and nephews. They are attending RC schools in the midlands area. Eldest is making communion in 2010. They get these bibles from school and are taught religion as a real subject.

How do you teach children to have a healthy cynicism.

Buy them books on puzzles, chess or computer programming. Every time you meet them hit them with a riddle.

Leave religion / atheism etc out of it. Shoving your belief system on kids is the kind of thing religious people (with the exception of Stalin, Pol Pol et al) do.

axer

Jakkass wrote: »

They are taught about God and then when they are older they can assess the idea for themselves.

They are thought the world was created by God just like 2+2=4.

This is completely wrong but it has nothing to do with the OP how his nieces and nephews parents want to raise their children.

Sam Vimes

Jakkass wrote: »

They are taught about God and then when they are older they can assess the idea for themselves.

You mean they're taught that one particular interpretation of the christian god is real and all others are wrong and that they can't be good kids unless they believe and will be punished unless they believe (unless they leave bits out to sugarcoat) but that it's entirely up to them

Antbert

How did I forsee this would happen...

philologos

Antbert wrote: »

I think telling someone 'believe this' is different to telling them 'believe whatever you want'.

If I had a child I wouldn't tell them to "believe whatever they want" either. That in itself is promoting a certain ideology. It effectively is saying that everything is just as valid as each other so go ahead and dive in. That's entirely fallacious reasoning.

I would however tell a child that I believe in God, and I believe that He created the world and that He has a plan for each and every one of us. I would also teach about the ethical standards of God, and about the Bible without any fear whatsoever. I would also teach my child about objective moral standards and how it is most reasonable to believe that these exist because of God rather than as a result of mankind.

It's better to tell your child about what you believe, and why you believe it than saying either:
1) You must believe X.
2) Believe whatever you want, they are all as good as each other anyways.
Telling your child what you believe and why is more convincing than saying you must believe this.

Antbert wrote: »

If the OP genuinely wants to teach children to be free thinkers, that is very different to teaching them to follow a religion. If he wants to teach them to be atheists, we run into a bit of a dilemma.

Teaching a child that your religion is reasonable and teaching them about your religion, and explaining why also facilitates free thought.

Sam Vimes

Jakkass wrote: »

Teaching a child that your religion is reasonable and teaching them about your religion, and explaining why also facilitates free thought.

But teaching your child that your religion is the one true faith and that they can't be good and will burn for eternity if they don't believe it doesn't so much

Antbert

Irrelevant to the OP. I'm not getting dragged into this.

Argh **** it.

OK, believe whatever you want was a silly thing for me to say. I didn't mean that. I meant... Encourage someone to think about things, and question things, that's entirely different to encouraging someone to think about ONE thing and never question it.

philologos

Sam Vimes wrote: »

But teaching your child that your religion is the one true faith and that they can't be good and will burn for eternity if they don't believe it doesn't so much

If people are to retain belief they will need to find these things reasonable. I don't see anything wrong with teaching your child about Christian belief, including about eternal punishment, and giving them the reasons why you find these things reasonable. There's nothing immoral in the slightest about that in my view, that's merely Christian education.

Sam Vimes

Jakkass wrote: »

If people are to retain belief they will need to find these things reasonable. I don't see anything wrong with teaching your child about Christian belief, including about eternal punishment, and giving them the reasons why you find these things reasonable.

I'm not necessarily saying there's something wrong with it, just that teaching a child that he will be punished if he doesn't believe something does not facilitate free thought. You can't deny that.

I've seen creationists say that they don't care how much evidence there is for evolution because if you believe in it you're going to hell. That's a crazy position but when you're taught that the only thing that will save you from torture is belief it's a reasonable position

Antbert

He's saying that teaching a child what you believe, and giving them your reasoning behind it, is different to telling them something is true.

The problem lies in the fact that... It isn't really.

philologos

Telling people that you believe that this is the case and explaining why is a better tool ultimately.

It is up to your child to reason upon this material, and this education. That encourages free thought about religion while still giving your child an education in your own belief systems concerning morality and religion as all parents really do, including atheists.

Turtwig

Jakkass wrote: »

If people are to retain belief they will need to find these things reasonable. I don't see anything wrong with teaching your child about Christian belief, including about eternal punishment, and giving them the reasons why you find these things reasonable. There's nothing immoral in the slightest about that in my view, that's merely Christian education.

Here's what's wrong : human beings are conditioned for the familiar.

If you teach a child rigorously about Christianity then when that child grows up s/he is most likely to resort to the Christianity they are most familiar with, even though they have now been introduced to the world's vast supply of variety among religious dogmas.
It's the same principle as showing someone a subliminal message (maybe a picture of a charolaois cow (sp?)) and then asking them to pick their "favourite" or most "pleasing" object from a disordered variety of objects. Nearly everytime the subliminal message is chosen over all the other items. As creature of habit, we nearly always prefer something that we're familiar with to something new.

I think the correct way would be to teach the child about ALL religions with no emphasis on any particular one.

Sam Vimes

Jakkass wrote: »

Telling people that you believe that this is the case and explaining why is a better tool utimately.

It is up to your child to reason upon this material, and this education.

Telling someone what you believe is not wrong in itself but unfortunately your religion uses a tactic most commonly found in cults where punishment is threatened for apostasy. Your belief system incorporates an element of coercion so you can't properly tell your child about your beliefs without including this coercive element

I can honestly tell my child that he is free to believe what he wants but you must tell him that you believe he will be punished if he doesn't believe what you believe

Antbert

Jakkass wrote: »

Telling people that you believe that this is the case and explaining why is a better tool utimately.

It is up to your child to reason upon this material, and this education.

Except children have this ingrained idea that what adults tell them is the truth. They aren't arguing on forums, so the whole 'in my opinion' thing doesn't really matter.

I also agree with Sam's point about coercion.

Edit: What I said before was a bit muddled.

philologos

Sam Vimes wrote: »

Telling someone what you believe is not wrong in itself but unfortunately your religion uses a tactic most commonly found in cults where punishment is threatened for apostasy. Your belief system incorporates an element of coercion so you can't properly tell your child about your beliefs without including this coercive element

I've given you how I would deal with it. If you want to debate how other people deal with it that's an entirely different issue. I personally do believe that there are universal moral norms, and that people will be brought to account for them unless they accept the mercy given. I would explain that I do believe this and give reasoning why. It's a more effective approach than saying believe this now. That's great, but most of us don't know how to defend these beliefs afterwards or why we are told to believe them.

Sam Vimes wrote: »

I can honestly tell my child that he is free to believe what he wants but you must tell him that you believe he will be punished if he doesn't believe what you believe

What? You're making absolutely no sense now. I've made clear my approach is to tell my children, what I believe, and teach them about what I believe and explain why. That's different than what you are saying.

Sam Vimes

Jakkass wrote: »

What? You're making absolutely no sense now. I've made clear my approach is to tell my children, what I believe, and teach them about what I believe and explain why. That's different than what you are saying.

Do you believe that if your child does not believe in christianity he will be punished by your god?

And will you tell your child this?

opinion guy

I'm in agreement with alot of the others - its not really your place to question or interfere with their education if that is what their parents want to learn.

But, I do think you could teach them other things. Teach them about the scientific method, evolution, logic, logical fallacies (circular logic, strawman arguemnts etc etc), physics, chemistry, biology. I guess what I'm saying is don't put yourself in the position of clashing directly with what they or their parents believe, but give them knowledge of other ways of looking at the world.

philologos

Sam Vimes wrote: »

Do you believe that if your child does not believe in christianity he will be punished by your god?

I believe so.

Sam Vimes wrote: »

And will you tell your child this?

That I believe it? I'll tell my (hypothetical) child that I believe that those who reject Jesus' salvation are liable to judgement, and explain why. The same approach as I've been discussing all along. An approach that isn't closed to questioning either.

Sam Vimes

Jakkass wrote: »

I believe so.



That I believe it? I'll tell my (hypothetical) child that I believe that those who reject Jesus' salvation are liable to judgement, and explain why. The same approach as I've been discussing all along. An approach that isn't closed to questioning either.

I fail to see how it's different except that you've added an explanation for why not accepting your beliefs will result in divine punishment. No matter what way you look at it, telling your child that you believe he will be punished if he doesn't accept what you're saying does not encourage questioning. You can say they're allowed question anyway but threats of punishment for non belief do not encourage it.

Goduznt Xzst

OP, my advice would be to drop any ideas of trying to directly influence your young relatives to shield them against any form of religious indoctrination.

Instead, you can help to broaden their perspective. Encourage a free thinking nature, with their parents knowledge. Nature shows narrated by David Attenborough, anything with Carl Sagans name on it, Neil deGrasse Tyson is also good. Looking at your name this present would be perfect for them also (will probably get it myself)

Anything that engages the mind really and adds to their overall world view, it's about as far as you should go really as a non-parent to these children.

philologos

It encourages people to think about it more for themselves than saying that you must believe this without question.

On the other hand, I'd also like to share a bit about philosophy if I had any children as I believe this is valuable.

Sam Vimes

Jakkass wrote: »

It encourages people to think about it more for themselves than saying that you must believe this without question.

How does telling your child that you believe he will be punished if he doesn't accept what you're saying encourage him to think about it for himself, even if you explain why not believing you will lead to punishment?

philologos

That's dependant on whether or not I would tell anyone that they must share my views out of compulsion. The answer is I wouldn't, but I also wouldn't tell them to "believe whatever they want".

Sam Vimes

Jakkass wrote: »

That's dependant on whether or not I would tell anyone that they must share my views out of compulsion. The answer is I wouldn't, but I also wouldn't tell them to "believe whatever they want".

What's the difference between telling your child that he must share your views and telling him you think god will punish him if he doesn't share your views? What is that if not a compulsion?

Ickle Magoo

Jakkass wrote: »

That's dependant on whether or not I would tell anyone that they must share my views out of compulsion. The answer is I wouldn't, but I also wouldn't tell them to "believe whatever they want".

If you don't do what I say I know someone who will punish you is a compulsion.

philologos

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

If you don't do what I say I know someone who will punish you is a compulsion.

That isn't what I'd ever say. Alas, the strawmen begin. Is there any chance of having a fair and coherent discussion in here?
If not we're only squandering our time.

Sam Vimes

Jakkass wrote: »

That isn't what I'd ever say. Alas, the strawmen begin. Is there any chance of having a fair and coherent discussion in here?

So you're telling us you'd leave out the core teaching of christianity, that if they don't believe they'll go to hell?

philologos

I never said I'd leave out the core teaching. I merely said I would teach is as my belief, rather than saying that it is the same as 2 + 2 = 4. Precisely because it isn't, it's something that someone needs to reason about for onesself. Mathematics is to be accepted without question.

If you want to strawman my position, please continue. Otherwise please take into account what I have said thus far.

Sam Vimes

Jakkass wrote: »

I never said I'd leave out the core teaching. I merely said I would teach is as my belief, rather than saying that it is the same as 2 + 2 = 4.

What's the difference between "teaching it as your belief" and "If you don't do what I say I know someone who will punish you"?

Jakkass wrote: »

Precisely because it isn't, it's something that someone needs to reason about for onesself. Mathematics is to be accepted without question.

No it absolutely is not. All human endeavour is to be questioned, that is unless you threaten punishment for non belief

Just because you call something a straw man doesn't make it so btw

philologos

It is a strawman, I've put across one view and you've been albeit not intentionally misinterpreting it. It makes it quite difficult to continue discussing if you can't take into account what has previously been said in the thread.

Sam Vimes wrote:

What's the difference between "teaching it as your belief" and "If you don't do what I say I know someone who will punish you"?

One leaves open the possibility of being convinced of something rather than having it shoved down their throat. This is the way that Christianity should be shared. The other tells people that they must accept something without question. That's the difference.

Sam Vimes

Jakkass wrote: »

It is a strawman, I've put across one view and you've been albeit not intentionally misinterpreting it. It makes it quite difficult to continue discussing if you can't take into account what has previously been said in the thread.

You keep saying straw man straw man straw man but you believe that if your child does not share your views your god will punish him and I fail to see the straw man

Whether you teach it "as a compulsion" or teach it as your belief you are teaching your child that you believe he will be punished if he doesn't share your views

philologos

Again, Sam if you're not going to listen to what I've been actually saying the last few posts there is very little point in continuing with this.

Yes, I believe this, and I will explain it as a belief rather than something akin to mathematics. I will also give the reasoning as to why.

I would never tell anyone that they personally were going to hell. There is no reason to believe this due to possible future events that could happen that would lead them to Christianity. Notice I haven't even told you or anyone else in this forum that you are going to hell.

nationalgeo

Jakkass wrote: »

I believe so.



That I believe it? I'll tell my (hypothetical) child that I believe that those who reject Jesus' salvation are liable to judgement, and explain why. The same approach as I've been discussing all along. An approach that isn't closed to questioning either.

This is so wrong. You are happy for 5 year old children to be force fed this in schools, and happy saying so on an atheist forum. I really do feel that people who force that belief on children in this day and age should have compulsory evaluations.

philologos

I'm happy for people to be taught about Christianity at home and in school. How that is done is perhaps the problem. I wouldn't mind sending my (hypothetical) child to a school without religious instruction if I had to as I'd be confident enough to do this myself, but I can understand why some people would.

There's nothing wrong in the slightest about teaching your children about your values. Everyone in the world does this irrespective of whether or not they will admit it.

nationalgeo

axer wrote: »

It is none of your business. If they are your kids then that would be your business but they're not so butt out.

This is why I posted the thread. It is none of my business.

Jakkass wrote: »

Do you really mean just a healthy cynicism, or do you mean to teach them to reject Catholicism?

Be entirely honest here, both aren't mutually exclusive.

A healthy cynicism to everything they are told to believe.

robindch wrote: »

If you're asked, you're perfectly within your rights to give, say, your opinion of the catholic church and its lamentable record of childcare in this country and ask whether they're really the best people to have running the schools.

This is why I have signed up here, the discussions on this forum are excellent. There seems to be a real issue in the media now for a secular society, much more than in the past.

Jakkass wrote: »

There isn't a difference, and it isn't indoctrination to teach ones child about your beliefs and values. That's where using the term "indoctrination" is incredibly inaccurate.

5 year old kids are told to believe in the current school system. Indoctrination is the most accurate word. However, I have no issue with whatever parents do in their private lives.

Helix wrote: »

however in school kids are taught that god is real and true, and not to be questioned at all

This does happen. They have their little bibles, and it is treated as a real subject that is as fact based as Maths or English.

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Buy them books on puzzles, chess or computer programming. Every time you meet them hit them with a riddle.

Leave religion / atheism etc out of it. Shoving your belief system on kids is the kind of thing religious people (with the exception of Stalin, Pol Pol et al) do.

Brilliant idea.

Malty_T wrote: »

If you teach a child rigorously about Christianity then when that child grows up s/he is most likely to resort to the Christianity they are most familiar with, even though they have now been introduced to the world's vast supply of variety among religious dogmas.

I think you describe perfectly why 90% of Ireland is apparantly Catholic.

Sam Vimes

Jakkass wrote: »

Yes, I believe this, and I will explain it as a belief rather than something akin to mathematics. I will also give the reasoning as to why.

I would never tell anyone that they personally were going to hell.

But you will tell them that you believe that if they don't share your views they will go to hell and with a child or any suggestive person I fail to see the difference

Jakkass wrote: »

There is no reason to believe this due to possible future events that could happen that would lead them to Christianity.

So you will tell them that at some point in the future they might share your views and save themselves

Jakkass wrote: »

Notice I haven't even told you or anyone else in this forum that you are going to hell.

As long as we "repent" and share your views