Devilnaut

Mainly I just think that there is no efficient way of attacking this problem from a purely educational standpoint. I think you'd have a difficult time finding a correlation between religiousness and quality of education in society. Generally speaking, mormons raise mormons, atheists raise atheists, and creationists raise creationists. Schooling is not normally enough of a force to combat parenting. As for educating the parents themselves, IMO you don't have much of a chance of finding an efficient method of deconverting adults.


Edit to add:

That's certainly not to say that education isn't a factor, it's just that I think it's far less of a factor than other aspects of socialization.

[ December 15, 2002: Message edited by: Devilnaut ]</p>

scigirl

Do you have any links handy?

thanks,

scigirl

P.S. I have some anecdotal evidence that emotions can figure into creationism: I know people who are afraid to believe in evolution, or actually, too arrogant to think they "came from monkeys." These are highly educated people - and one of them was not even that religious! Just wanted to believe he was special....

Starboy

Thanks for clearing that up. I mistook you when you simply made reference to "education" without explaining that what you meant by that was a "galielian" education. Don't get me wrong, it sounds like a fine education. As to my last point, do you disagree that without the separation of "education" from government there is little hope that any significant improvements will take place?

Starboy

Principia

Sorry, the clarity of this statement is lost to me. Are you actually assigning blame to the teachers for any student's failed education? Or maybe I should ask you when you last taught a course where every student actually learned everything you intended them to learn...

lpetrich

Which reminds me of these comments:

Ennius, Roman poet (239-169 BCE):
William Congreve, English playwright (1670-1729):
(Ennius quote corrected)

[ December 15, 2002: Message edited by: lpetrich ]</p>

scigirl

lpetrich,

Are those inspired by my "I didn't come from a monkey" comment?

Those are great quotes!

scigirl

galiel

I think what you say is true if you think of "re-educating" people, that is using (or abusing) education to teach what you consider to be the right point of view.

Helping people gain mastery over the basic tools of critical thinking, on the other hand, provides them with the means to evaluate for themselves. I consider it a much more subversive, effective, and ethically consistent way of combatting blind faith.

As the saying goes, "Once they have seen gay Paree, how're you gonna keep them down on the farm?"

galiel

You are still confusing information with understanding. I am talking about learning how to think, and you seem to be talking about absorbing information.

And, yes, part of being a teacher is taking responsibility for your student's success of failure. Like being a coach of a sports team, or the leader of a military unit, or the head of a company.

A teacher isn't a teacher if their student doesn't learn.

scigirl

galiel, are you serious?

So at what point do the students have to take responsibility for their own learning?

scigirl

Principia

Wait. So tell me, am I confused or do I just seem that way? Anyway, I don't think you have made your case. Regardless of whatever it is that is being taught, a teacher can only impart so much to any individual student.
What I want to make sure is that the responsibility is not the teacher's alone to shoulder. How do we measure the success of a teacher? On a case-by-case basis? Or averaged over all of her students? And why are you singling out teachers here? What about the role of parents, for instance?
I suspect you have never been a teacher.

[ December 15, 2002: Message edited by: Principia ]</p>