RE: Children exposed to religion have difficulty distinguishing fact from fiction

RE: Children exposed to religion have difficulty distinguishing fact from fiction (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

FieryOpal -> RE: Children exposed to religion have difficulty distinguishing fact from fiction (7/21/2014 2:24:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: eulero83 Maybe I'm not understanding correctly what you meant, but using the peasant example was to say a language based on images that for them was cristal clear to me the only mening is just a nice drawing unless someone don't explain to me the message or I read it on a book (that means I'm accepting the author word). So what I meant is martin luther was an ignorant and created an army of hepless disciples that really believe what's in the bible are facts as they are wrote, so they reject science, and it's kind of a portestant's peculiarity. If I caused you any confusion, it certainly wasn't intentional. This isn't about Catholicism vs. Protestantism, and no way do I want to open that can of worms. We can agree to disagree and to disregard any remarks that are not personally meaningful to either of us. I respect what you had to say in your earlier post as another perspective on the difficulty of how any given individual can interpret theological tenets based on ancient Scriptures, much less find relevancy in their adult lives for whatever religious beliefs they were taught as children.

eulero83 -> RE: Children exposed to religion have difficulty distinguishing fact from fiction (7/21/2014 3:42:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FieryOpal quote: ORIGINAL: eulero83 Maybe I'm not understanding correctly what you meant, but using the peasant example was to say a language based on images that for them was cristal clear to me the only mening is just a nice drawing unless someone don't explain to me the message or I read it on a book (that means I'm accepting the author word). So what I meant is martin luther was an ignorant and created an army of hepless disciples that really believe what's in the bible are facts as they are wrote, so they reject science, and it's kind of a portestant's peculiarity. If I caused you any confusion, it certainly wasn't intentional. This isn't about Catholicism vs. Protestantism, and no way do I want to open that can of worms. We can agree to disagree and to disregard any remarks that are not personally meaningful to either of us. I respect what you had to say in your earlier post as another perspective on the difficulty of how any given individual can interpret theological tenets based on ancient Scriptures, much less find relevancy in their adult lives for whatever religious beliefs they were taught as children. ok, it's just that on a forum communication is somehow impaired. Anyway I neither wanted to make it catholicism vs. protestantism, I personally have more issues with catholicism as it's the one that affects my society with it's nonsense, protestantism is just something I see on TV or read about on books. I was just pointing out that the lack of structure is not always an improvement, but can be very dangerous and lead to fundamentalism leveraging some psicological bias.

eulero83 -> RE: Children exposed to religion have difficulty distinguishing fact from fiction (7/21/2014 4:01:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady There seemss to be a great deal of talk among atheists about "scientific fact" regarding religion. All claim to be brirght individuals yet it appears they are quite incapable of what makes anything "scientific fact" versus the "legal/historical" fact or truth. In science to prove a theory, one creates a hypothesis, then by controlled exeriment tests their hypothesis. Only wwhen they are able to get repeated results consistently cann something be a "scientific fact., On the other hand, we have and hold as truth many "legal/historical" facts, yet we can't conduct any experiments to prove those truths. We rely on testimony, whether written or consistently retold, and evidence. Essentially, the laws of reasonable doubt. For instance, it is accepted to be a historical fact that the United States fought against the British, beating them to gain freedom as a separate country. Yet, no experiments can be done to prove this. We this truth from written documents and artifacts. We accept as truth the idea of gladiators fighting in the collesium in Rome and of the Chariot races nearby. We can't do any experiments, but through written documentation and archeological artifacts, we accept this as likely being true. But do either of those things qualify as "scientific fact?" Nope. Historical fact? Myself, along with about a trillion or so people around the world say these things are facts. If you don't know the difference, then you really can't talk about your ability to separate fact from fiction. Not totally correct, what you are calling "legal/historical facts" are those theories or hypothesis in archeology field, for example the idea of gladiators fighting in amphitheaters around the roman empire is not only supported by latin litterature or art, but you can find bones with specific wounds that can be studied and with logic prove or disprove the written testimony, but also comparing different sources to validate one hypothesis is actually conducting an experiment. Using the same example we now are aware latin litterature exagerated the violence and the casualities during gladiators fights.

GotSteel -> RE: Children exposed to religion have difficulty distinguishing fact from fiction (7/21/2014 5:09:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FieryOpal Sneer all you want to. I'm in much better company with Sir Isaac Newton, the physician Nostradamus, and Einstein than with the likes of you. Just so you know, you aren't team Einstein. quote: ORIGINAL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_views_of_Albert_Einstein#Personal_God_and_the_afterlife The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this. These subtilised interpretations are highly manifold according to their nature and have almost nothing to do with the original text.

Kirata -> RE: Children exposed to religion have difficulty distinguishing fact from fiction (7/21/2014 5:32:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel Just so you know, you aren't team Einstein. quote: ORIGINAL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_views_of_Albert_Einstein#Personal_God_and_the_afterlife The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this. These subtilised interpretations are highly manifold according to their nature and have almost nothing to do with the original text. Just so you know, there's more on that page... "This firm belief, a belief bound up with a deep feeling, in a superior mind* that reveals itself in the world of experience, represents my conception of God."* K.

Musicmystery -> RE: Children exposed to religion have difficulty distinguishing fact from fiction (7/21/2014 7:32:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel quote: ORIGINAL: FieryOpal Sneer all you want to. I'm in much better company with Sir Isaac Newton, the physician Nostradamus, and Einstein than with the likes of you. Just so you know, you aren't team Einstein. Nor you. You seem to believe, because you were raised to question (no problem there), that this makes your thoughts a priori correct. Whether that brainwashing is upbringing or your own ego is the question there. What you need now is for someone to teach you (you clearly aren't going to learn it on your own -- you already think you know everything) to question your own thoughts -- THIS is what critical thinkers do. You're confusing cynicism with critical analysis. Anyone can be cynical--just look at the news.

FieryOpal -> RE: Children exposed to religion have difficulty distinguishing fact from fiction (7/21/2014 7:53:03 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel Just so you know, you aren't team Einstein. Just so you know, there's more on that page... "This firm belief, a belief bound up with a deep feeling, in a superior mind* that reveals itself in the world of experience, represents my conception of God."* Thanks, K. GS, how about team Voltaire? (generally speaking): "I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: O Lord make my enemies ridiculous. And God granted it." [:D]

DomKen -> RE: Children exposed to religion have difficulty distinguishing fact from fiction (7/21/2014 11:17:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady There seemss to be a great deal of talk among atheists about "scientific fact" regarding religion. All claim to be brirght individuals yet it appears they are quite incapable of what makes anything "scientific fact" versus the "legal/historical" fact or truth. In science to prove a theory, one creates a hypothesis, then by controlled exeriment tests their hypothesis. Only wwhen they are able to get repeated results consistently cann something be a "scientific fact., On the other hand, we have and hold as truth many "legal/historical" facts, yet we can't conduct any experiments to prove those truths. We rely on testimony, whether written or consistently retold, and evidence. Essentially, the laws of reasonable doubt. For instance, it is accepted to be a historical fact that the United States fought against the British, beating them to gain freedom as a separate country. Yet, no experiments can be done to prove this. We this truth from written documents and artifacts. We accept as truth the idea of gladiators fighting in the collesium in Rome and of the Chariot races nearby. We can't do any experiments, but through written documentation and archeological artifacts, we accept this as likely being true. But do either of those things qualify as "scientific fact?" Nope. Historical fact? Myself, along with about a trillion or so people around the world say these things are facts. If you don't know the difference, then you really can't talk about your ability to separate fact from fiction. Wow. You really just went there. You must read creationists an awful lot that nonsense is straight out of the creationist blather. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Historical_and_operational_science

GotSteel -> RE: Children exposed to religion have difficulty distinguishing fact from fiction (7/21/2014 3:55:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FieryOpal You are making the assumption that all religious teachings are tantamount to brainwashing, and that simply isn't correct. quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel No I'm not making that assumption. I'm just making the assumption that all religious brainwashing is brainwashing. Hahaha...clever. I would have thought the word was obvious. I never used "all" you were the first one to contribute that claim to my position in any sense. Consider for a moment that among the Unitarian Universalists atheists feel so at home they outnumber the theists, Sam Harris is a Buddhist, when I visited Kyoto I spent several days attending a monastery there and meditating six hours a day with the zen buddhist monks, I found it quite peaceful, and the list goes on. I find that theists would frequently benefit in understanding if they would do a little more asking the atheist what the atheist means instead of misinforming the atheist as to what the atheist means. quote: ORIGINAL: FieryOpal Also, I was influenced by my upbringing, but I honestly can't relate to brainwashing. My father was a free thinker, an armchair liberal, who practiced what he preached. He taught me, by example, to think for myself, and to question his own beliefs and philosophies. What do you mean by free thinker, was your father an atheist? quote: ORIGINAL: FieryOpal I can't imagine being raised in a regimented atmosphere of guilt and shame. Following the rules and having respect for authority is one thing. Not being able to question why these rules are in place or to question authority is a relatively foreign concept to me. Well I'm glad that nuns didn't beat with a ruler for asking questions or some such but also keep in mind that there exists a good deal in the way of indoctrination which is subtle and insidious the sort of thing people often can't even recognize until well after they've deconverted.

FieryOpal -> RE: Children exposed to religion have difficulty distinguishing fact from fiction (7/21/2014 4:27:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel I would have thought the word was obvious. I never used "all" you were the first one to contribute that claim to my position in any sense. Consider for a moment that among the Unitarian Universalists atheists feel so at home they outnumber the theists, Sam Harris is a Buddhist, when I visited Kyoto I spent several days attending a monastery there and meditating six hours a day with the zen buddhist monks, I found it quite peaceful, and the list goes on. I find that theists would frequently benefit in understanding if they would do a little more asking the atheist what the atheist means instead of misinforming the atheist as to what the atheist means. So what you're saying is that you take exception to Christian fundamentalist teachings? Whether you realize it or not, you kinda gave the impression that you were in fact against all religious indoctrination. I have more to ask of you, but I don't want to make any other assumptions at this point about your personal beliefs. If you don't mind my asking, would you consider yourself an atheist, an atheist open to Buddhism, an agnostic, an agnostic open to Buddhism, something else, or else not wishing to be labelled? I personally believe that one can be a spiritual person without being religious. quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel What do you mean by free thinker, was your father an atheist? No, he wasn't an atheist or an agnostic. He wasn't religious either. He was a combination of being spiritual and a humanitarian, but he respected all religions, had studied them and took whatever was of value from each one. Had he not originally been an engineer by profession, I think he would have been a poet-philosopher of sorts, and he was very much a Renaissance man. Three of his technical manuals were taught at MIT at one point in his life, from the practical side of applications. He had designed fish ladders for use in hydro-electric dams as part of wildlife conservation to protect the ecosystem. quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel Well I'm glad that nuns didn't beat with a ruler for asking questions or some such but also keep in mind that there exists a good deal in the way of indoctrination which is subtle and insidious the sort of thing people often can't even recognize until well after they've deconverted. The funny-odd thing about it is that while we were overseas, my brother went to a private Catholic school because that's where the foreigners put their kids. By the time I was born, my father (for reasons unbeknownst to me) had decided that military base schools were good enough and was against the idea of enrolling me in a private school. We didn't go regularly to chapel, but I'm grateful for the military chaplains who gave us communion. I didn't attend (non-denominational) Sunday School until I was 8. What you see as "subtle and insidious" I see as inspirational.

GotSteel -> RE: Children exposed to religion have difficulty distinguishing fact from fiction (7/21/2014 7:56:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FieryOpal So what you're saying is that you take exception to Christian fundamentalist teachings? A couple of things, one as much as people like to use the fundies as a scapegoat it's not just the fundies that are doing some serious brainwashing. Two I don't consider the words teach and indoctrinate to be interchangeable. Typically there's considered to be an important distinction between the two terms: quote: ORIGINAL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indoctrination Indoctrination is the process of inculcating ideas, attitudes, cognitive strategies or a professional methodology (see doctrine).[1] It is often distinguished from education by the fact that the indoctrinated person is expected not to question or critically examine the doctrine they have learned.[2] As such the term may be used pejoratively, often in the context of education, political opinions, theology or religious dogma. The term is closely linked to socialization; in common discourse, indoctrination is often associated with negative connotations, while socialization refers to cultural or educational learning. So I'm not against the existence of religious teachings, there are some I even share. Well here's an article on atheists favorite Bible verses to make my point: http://www.alternet.org/belief/bible-verses-atheists-love?page=0%2C1 I'm also not universally against religious education, I actually think teaching middle schoolers comparative religion would be a meaningful addition to school curriculum. It's when we start talking indoctrination that I start twitching. quote: ORIGINAL: FieryOpal Whether you realize it or not, you kinda gave the impression that you were in fact against all religious indoctrination. I'm against indoctrination in general as it's synonymous with brainwashing, so yes that would include religious indoctrination.

Kirata -> RE: Children exposed to religion have difficulty distinguishing fact from fiction (7/21/2014 11:52:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel Typically there's considered to be an important distinction between the two terms: quote: ORIGINAL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indoctrination Indoctrination is the process of inculcating ideas, attitudes, cognitive strategies or a professional methodology (see doctrine).[1] It is often distinguished from education by the fact that the indoctrinated person is expected not to question or critically examine the doctrine they have learned.[2] As such the term may be used pejoratively, often in the context of education, political opinions, theology or religious dogma. The term is closely linked to socialization; in common discourse, indoctrination is often associated with negative connotations, while socialization refers to cultural or educational learning. The difference between indoctrination and education is not being clearly drawn in that snippet, because education also expects students to accept without question a great deal of what they are taught. Arithmetic, for example. The difference between indoctrination and education lies in the truth value of what is being imparted, in the difference between doctrine and fact. The measure we use to distinguish education from indoctrination is our assessment of its truth value. K.

eulero83 -> RE: Children exposed to religion have difficulty distinguishing fact from fiction (7/22/2014 12:17:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel Typically there's considered to be an important distinction between the two terms: quote: ORIGINAL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indoctrination Indoctrination is the process of inculcating ideas, attitudes, cognitive strategies or a professional methodology (see doctrine).[1] It is often distinguished from education by the fact that the indoctrinated person is expected not to question or critically examine the doctrine they have learned.[2] As such the term may be used pejoratively, often in the context of education, political opinions, theology or religious dogma. The term is closely linked to socialization; in common discourse, indoctrination is often associated with negative connotations, while socialization refers to cultural or educational learning. The difference between indoctrination and education is not being clearly drawn in that snippet, because education also expects students to accept without question a great deal of what they are taught. Arithmetic, for example. The difference between indoctrination and education lies in the truth value of what is being imparted, in the difference between doctrine and fact. The measure we use to distinguish indoctrination from education is our assessment of its truth value. K. Arithmetic has to be accepted without question????? IT HAS TO BE UNDERSTOOD!!!! There are two possibilities, or you had only crappy math teachers or you are very stupid. There has been a clear logical path that brought humans to logically devellop math from counting as: single, couple, many to arithmetic that needed no dogmas. I can't imagine what you think about differential calculus... probably that's a devil invention...

DaddySatyr -> RE: Children exposed to religion have difficulty distinguishing fact from fiction (7/22/2014 12:34:37 AM)
There's a really good episode of a "sciency" show called: "Through The Wormhole with Morgan Freeman". The episode is called: "Did We 'Invent' God?" I tried to find it for y'all on Youtube. It's there but you have to pay to watch it (That must be something knew, there). I found it to be very relevant to this discussion. The long-and-short of it is that young children are prone to believe in some form of higher power but unless they are reinforced with religious training, they tend to grow out of such belief. Screen captures *still* RULE! Ya feel me?

Kirata -> RE: Children exposed to religion have difficulty distinguishing fact from fiction (7/22/2014 12:40:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: eulero83 I can't imagine what you think about differential calculus... probably that's a devil invention I can't imagine how long you must have had to stay off your meds to come up with that one. K.

Kirata -> RE: Children exposed to religion have difficulty distinguishing fact from fiction (7/22/2014 1:06:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr The long-and-short of it is that young children are prone to believe in some form of higher power but unless they are reinforced with religious training, they tend to grow out of such belief. Apparently having a brain wired that way was such an improvement that today nearly all human beings do. K.

DaddySatyr -> RE: Children exposed to religion have difficulty distinguishing fact from fiction (7/22/2014 1:34:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata Apparently having a brain wired that way was such an improvement that today nearly all human beings do. K. I can't disagree with you. I do take some exception to the episode concluding that the belief "fades away". When I was a teen-ager, I became a dyed-in-the-wool, gun-hating, nuke protesting, atheist, liberal. I went so far as to say things like: "I am my own God. There is no God." That might have been okay for a 14-year-old mess but, it didn't serve me well, as an adult. I don't believe that age made me "grow out of my belief". I believe that social conditioning and a natural desire (for adolescents) to "fit in" had me saying things that I didn't truly believe. The only "evidence" I can give for this is that even at my height of "disbelief", I couldn't get on board with abortion. Something deep within me just screamed that it was wrong to kill a human being. It had nothing to do with religious belief (I had none, at the time). It was just something ingrained into me. That's just my personal experience and I won't necessarily ascribe it to anyone else but I also don't think I'm all that different from many people of my generation. Screen captures *still* RULE! Ya feel me?

GotSteel -> RE: Children exposed to religion have difficulty distinguishing fact from fiction (7/22/2014 4:12:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr The long-and-short of it is that young children are prone to believe in some form of higher power but unless they are reinforced with religious training, they tend to grow out of such belief. From the article in the OP: quote: This conclusion contradicts previous studies in which children were said to be “born believers,” i.e. that they possessed “a natural credulity toward extraordinary beings with superhuman powers. Indeed, secular children responded to religious stories in much the same way as they responded to fantastical stories — they judged the protagonist to be pretend.”

Kirata -> RE: Children exposed to religion have difficulty distinguishing fact from fiction (7/22/2014 5:56:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel quote: ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr The long-and-short of it is that young children are prone to believe in some form of higher power but unless they are reinforced with religious training, they tend to grow out of such belief. From the article in the OP: quote: This conclusion contradicts previous studies in which children were said to be “born believers,” i.e. that they possessed “a natural credulity toward extraordinary beings with superhuman powers. Indeed, secular children responded to religious stories in much the same way as they responded to fantastical stories — they judged the protagonist to be pretend.” That may be what the authors wanted to prove, and obviously they think they have, but their data offers no basis for such a conclusion. It sheds no light whatsoever on whether these children did or did not have an initial natural proneness to believe magical things. All it reports is the marvelously unsurprising fact that those who had been taught to accept magical stories as true tended to do so and those taught the opposite did not. K.

deathtothepixies -> RE: Children exposed to religion have difficulty distinguishing fact from fiction (7/22/2014 4:33:29 PM)
natural proneness to believe magical things. K. [/font][/size] [/quote] what's the downside of not believing in the tooth fairy? or father Christmas? what's the downside of not believing in god? I can see a difference and I can see brainwashing. Can you?

Page: << < prev 5 6 [7] 8 9 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625