Is religion a form of indoctrination?

[Jolthig]

Religion is a form of indoctrination. So is secularism. There is no null hypothesis, and no man can have no worldview.

Thread over.

Shall I lock now?

Nayyooooooo. It's an interesting discussion.

[NERVUN]

No they ain't. It'd be a LOT easier if they were, but we've yet to come up with any kind of morality that is universally accepted.

It depends on if you mean "universal" on a societal basis or on an individual basis. There are universal morals on a societal basis...but on an individual basis, well, the origin story for half the world's population is predicated on people disobeying those moral norms.

Not even on a societal basis. We simply do not agree.

Murder is wrong? Easy to say, now tell me what is murder? We have some societies that see nothing wrong with killing groups they are opposed to. We have societies where the death penalty is murder, and others where it is not. We have groups that will accept the notion of self-defense, and others that will not.

Lying is wrong? Ever get asked by your girl friend if something makes her look fat?

[Cappuccina]

And learning those secular values is equally indoctrination.

Not inherently. Religion, however, to survive any significant period of time, cannot go without.

That's quite an assumption, the same could be said of secularism.

[Kowani]

Not inherently. Religion, however, to survive any significant period of time, cannot go without.

That's quite an assumption, the same could be said of secularism.

1: You conflate secular with secularism
2: Less assumption, more historical fact.

Not the point I was making. Secular values can exist independently of indoctrination, and have so multiple times throughout history.

Unless you want to count Neo Paganism, the same cannot be said of religion.

That wasn't my point, my point is that socialization (the process by which children learn social values) is inherently indoctrinating, regardless of whether it involves religion or not.

Oh. In that case, I would ask whether indoctrination required intent.

[United Muscovite Nations]

That's quite an assumption, the same could be said of secularism.

1: You conflate secular with secularism
2: Less assumption, more historical fact.

That wasn't my point, my point is that socialization (the process by which children learn social values) is inherently indoctrinating, regardless of whether it involves religion or not.

Oh. In that case, I would ask whether indoctrination required intent.

I don't think it requires intent, but I'm not sure spreading religion necessarily does either. Many religions have no official process by which children learn about religion in a setting. Things like RCIA and Sunday School are pretty recent inventions.

[Vetalia]

Not even on a societal basis. We simply do not agree.

Murder is wrong? Easy to say, now tell me what is murder? We have some societies that see nothing wrong with killing groups they are opposed to. We have societies where the death penalty is murder, and others where it is not. We have groups that will accept the notion of self-defense, and others that will not.

Lying is wrong? Ever get asked by your girl friend if something makes her look fat?

If I recall, the only universal morality that has been found in every culture everywhere on earth is the immorality of breaking an oath sworn to another.

That being said, I'd rather err on the side of caution and assume that moral codes based upon reason are the best path forward for the human race.

[Rojava Free State]

What kind of God is such an egomaniac that he has human emissaries threaten people with hellfire just so they'll worship him?

[Kowani]

1: You conflate secular with secularism
2: Less assumption, more historical fact.





Oh. In that case, I would ask whether indoctrination required intent.

I don't think it requires intent, but I'm not sure spreading religion necessarily does either. Many religions have no official process by which children learn about religion in a setting. Things like RCIA and Sunday School are pretty recent inventions.

My knowledge on that is near-nonexistent, so I’m just gonna trust you.

[Vaerehnor]

THat's not religious morality, it's legal. Morally, if I could, I would pay for nothing and steal every item I wanted. But there are legal consequences, and I don't like paying 4X the price of an item, getting yelled at by a police officer, and banned from a store, so I don't. Hell, one of my gods-Mercury-is the patron of theives, Religiously, I could consider shoplifting a devotional act to Him. But I don't do it. Because it's illegal. And I would like to be able to do things.

That being said, I believe centralized religion with set moral ethics and codes that are seen as unaffliable and with only one interpretation and only one code could be used as indoctrination to a set of beliefs--specific examples being American Christianity, the Imperial Cult of Rome, Wahabbiism and many other ultra-traditionalist, hardliner, and anti-iconoclastic beliefs. It's the 'one truth' ideology that may sing a hymn of holiness and righteous practice but in reality it sings a silent song of giving select individuals a divine right of power that should have died out in the Middle Ages.

Let me get into specifics; In my faith, there are the Roman Virtues. Pietas, Industria, Veritas-all those, and then the public virtues like Concordia and Aequitas-now, these are open to interpretation and have no opposites-there are no sins, only virtues. There is a right, and the wrong should be easy to tell just by the better judgement you as a moral human should have. Now constrasted with, say, Catholicism, they have similar virtues-Industria, Pietas, etc., but there is the notion of 'sin'; a wrongdoing that brings about the wrath of god. This makes a very clear, specific path, and in Catholicism you are supposed to achieve as many of the virtues as you can in your life as often as you can. There is one path, one truth, and any deviation from it will result in some form of existential dread that will end in your eternal torment in the afterlife. It's entirely authoritarian and a very drastic practice. I don't mean to proselyetize, bu contrast that with my faith; The Virtues are clearly states; Industria is hard work, Dignitas is pride and acknowledging self-worth, Clementia is practicing mercy, so on so forth. You will not feel the wrath of the Gods for swatting a mosquito to death for biting you nor for being down on yourself. The virtues are something we should aim to and strive to actualize in our everyday life, but as humans, we will not. It is a simple truth. There is no sin that restricts the path. People are people, fair and square.

I finally should note that I myself am a religious person so I might just be in denial of thos. Maybe I am brainwashed. Maybe I'm nothing but a machine that spouts out praise to the Gods and prayers to the Sun and argues with Christian circlejerkers on Reddit. But, by the Gods, I am a free holy machine, free to think and practice how I wish because I know what I am capable of and how I can apply that to the will of the Gods. And that's far more than what can be said for the heresies that oppress the paths of it's adherents.

So there's what I think of that.

[Nakena]

What kind of God is such an egomaniac that he has human emissaries threaten people with hellfire just so they'll worship him?

The kind of thing i described in the post at the very top of this thread page.

[United Muscovite Nations]

I don't think it requires intent, but I'm not sure spreading religion necessarily does either. Many religions have no official process by which children learn about religion in a setting. Things like RCIA and Sunday School are pretty recent inventions.

My knowledge on that is near-nonexistent, so I’m just gonna trust you.

The whole process of catechesis and even the idea that children would have a different experience of worship than adults is a 19th century anachronism. The most religious education most people would get through history would have been the 10-15 minute (usually) homily the priest would give in the middle of liturgical worship. In large cities with famous bishops, this could be longer (John Chrysostom famously gave multi-hour long homilies), but most priests keep their homilies pretty short because they want to get on with their lives and oftentimes so do their congregations.

[NERVUN]

Not even on a societal basis. We simply do not agree.

Murder is wrong? Easy to say, now tell me what is murder? We have some societies that see nothing wrong with killing groups they are opposed to. We have societies where the death penalty is murder, and others where it is not. We have groups that will accept the notion of self-defense, and others that will not.

Lying is wrong? Ever get asked by your girl friend if something makes her look fat?

If I recall, the only universal morality that has been found in every culture everywhere on earth is the immorality of breaking an oath sworn to another.

That being said, I'd rather err on the side of caution and assume that moral codes based upon reason are the best path forward for the human race.

Again... depends upon the notion of the 'other' person, ne?

*heh* your final line reminds me of Starship Troopers (The book, not the movies). Now I LOVE Starship Troopers, I consider it a good book, but even I, as a teen, detected a lot of hand-wavum when we got to the scientifically proven moral system. I'm not making the argument that religious moral systems are better, just that we've had philosophers going on for thousands of years attempting to find one that works are we're still coming up short.

[Loben The 2nd]

No.

You are free to leave as you please. Just remember you will be branded as a heretic.

[No State Here]

Religion is indoctrination, and frankly the values taught by religion could be easily taught in a secular way without needing to add God or some hypothetical higher power to it. That being said, if parents want to teach their kids religious traditions (without being hyper orthodox traditionalists) then go ahead

[Kowani]

If I recall, the only universal morality that has been found in every culture everywhere on earth is the immorality of breaking an oath sworn to another.

That being said, I'd rather err on the side of caution and assume that moral codes based upon reason are the best path forward for the human race.

Again... depends upon the notion of the 'other' person, ne?

*heh* your final line reminds me of Starship Troopers (The book, not the movies). Now I LOVE Starship Troopers, I consider it a good book, but even I, as a teen, detected a lot of hand-wavum when we got to the scientifically proven moral system. I'm not making the argument that religious moral systems are better, just that we've had philosophers going on for thousands of years attempting to find one that works are we're still coming up short.

Laughs in nihilism.

[Vetalia]

Again... depends upon the notion of the 'other' person, ne?

*heh* your final line reminds me of Starship Troopers (The book, not the movies). Now I LOVE Starship Troopers, I consider it a good book, but even I, as a teen, detected a lot of hand-wavum when we got to the scientifically proven moral system. I'm not making the argument that religious moral systems are better, just that we've had philosophers going on for thousands of years attempting to find one that works are we're still coming up short.

True, but in pretty much every culture before the present breaking an oath of that magnitude would typically involve society breaking said person in one way or another, typically physically. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

If every human being has overall the same capability for reason we should be able to come up with a universal moral code.

[Rojava Free State]

some people in america: we need religion cause without a belief in God, everyone would just start killing each other for no reason

Sweden: laughs in Viking

[Jean-Paul Sartre]

Yes. Teaching children to be dishonest is, in fact, indoctrination.

[Nakena]

some people in america: we need religion cause without a belief in God, everyone would just start killing each other for no reason

Sweden: laughs in Viking

Laughs with you

[Vetalia]

some people in america: we need religion cause without a belief in God, everyone would just start killing each other for no reason

Sweden: laughs in Viking

Technically, though, the secular Swedish morality is ultimately derived from the Christian morality that preceded it.

And Sweden has a pretty big problem with the religion of peace these days.

[Tabor-Zion]

Yes, and Atheism, an active belief God doesn't exist, as well as Agnosticism, an active belief that it cannot be known that God exists are both also religions by definition

[Kowani]

Yes, and Atheism, an active belief God doesn't exist, as well as Agnosticism, an active belief that it cannot be known that God exists are both also religions by definition

Are we doing this again?

[Jean-Paul Sartre]

some people in america: we need religion cause without a belief in God, everyone would just start killing each other for no reason

Sweden: laughs in Viking

Technically, though, the secular Swedish morality is ultimately derived from the Christian morality that preceded it.

And Sweden has a pretty big problem with the religion of peace these days.

Wrong. Morality in modern democratic societies is developed from enlightenment values, which ran opposed to Christianity for years.

[Jack Thomas Lang]

No, because atheists and those who were raised atheist can become religious. They weren't indoctrinated, for reasons of their own they found faith.

[Jean-Paul Sartre]

No, because atheists and those who were raised atheist can become religious. They weren't indoctrinated, for reasons of their own they found faith.

That doesn’t make religion not indoctrination.