Should Children be fed religion

[Strider24]

God Bless Atheism. As you can tell i am an Atheist but i love Religous Studies at school and find learning about other religions very interesting. I have family who are very religous and syaing things like Jesus Christ in ther house is a no no. And i love having chats with them about thier religion (Christianity). I myself was Baptised and i'm open to all views and opinions.

Now i wasn't fed religion and i have come to my views through experience, teachings and on my own. But the things that intreges (sp) me the most about religion is the beliefs, God(s) and the history of that religion.

Bytheway i am 15 and am currently in year 11 (England, secondary school) and sadly are no longer being taught RE.

And as you can tell i am really mature and sophisticated

[Strider24]

Oh also my RE teacher was the est. and only a couple of weeks ago did i find out he is an Atheist. And because i don't "have" a religion i really it makes learning about other religions evern better as i am more open. I owe alot to my teacher.

[muy_thaiguy]

Oh also my RE teacher was the est. and only a couple of weeks ago did i find out he is an Atheist. And because i don't "have" a religion i really it makes learning about other religions evern better as i am more open. I owe alot to my teacher.

There are many Atheists that I know personally that are quite the opposite of you Strider. This is good to know.

[Strider24]

Well i love school education and i am not the type of person to say you are wrong ther is no god ets. One of the thing i like is how different religions explain how the earth/solar system was created.

[Bertros Bertros]

Oh also my RE teacher was the est. and only a couple of weeks ago did i find out he is an Atheist. And because i don't "have" a religion i really it makes learning about other religions evern better as i am more open. I owe alot to my teacher.

I know 3 secondary school RE teachers. They are all atheists. I'm not entirely sure thats not because teaching has a bias towards liberalism which in itself is biased towards secularism. Without being able to know the statistics of the profession as a whole its impossible to tell.

I've been wondering what to do next; don't want to play with computers forever, its great money for old rope but not very satisfying. I must admit it has occured to me that if I was to teach anything it would be religious studies.

[CrazyAnglican]

Any theory is, by its nature, unproven, and which is more likely to be truthful is often the subject of lively debate.

Care to debate the Theory of Gravity with me? Or Pythagoras' Theorum?


The word "theory" does not imply that it only exists in theory

A debate isn't necessary here the definition suffices. Theory: a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact. Dictionary.com

I'm not discounting the validity of any theory. I'm just stating that a theory and a fact are different things.


A Theorem, however, is different:
Theorem, an idea, belief, method, or statement generally accepted as true or worthwhile without proof. Dicitionary.com

So I stick by what I said earlier. Unriggable seemed to say that we shouldn't teach things that aren't proven. I merely intimated that there are lots of things that aren't proven, but are still worthy of being taught to children.

[btownmeggy]

A Theorem, however, is different:
Theorem, an idea, belief, method, or statement generally accepted as true or worthwhile without proof. Dicitionary.com

That's the FOURTH definition, and is rather deceptive.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/theorem

[CrazyAnglican]

A Theorem, however, is different:
Theorem, an idea, belief, method, or statement generally accepted as true or worthwhile without proof. Dictionary.com

That's the FOURTH definition, and is rather deceptive.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/theorem

Yes, it was the fourth definition. That's the one that seemed to apply. I wasn't trying to be deceptive, though. All I meant was that a theory wasn't the same thing as a theorem.

I chose the second definition for theory for the same reason.

How was I being deceptive?

Oops... nevermind I see it. The fourth one isn't necessarily the mathematical definition. This was the first one, but I don't see it as being the same thing as a theory either.
Mathematics. a theoretical proposition, statement, or formula embodying something to be proved from other propositions or formulas.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/theorem

Thanks for keeping me honest

[luns101]

Yep, and give a person a match and he's warm for a day, set him on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.

Are you making these up yourself or getting them from another source? Keep 'em coming regardless!

[MeDeFe]

I think I'd heard it somewhere before, I don't remember where, though.

[XenHu]

Short answer: No.

Long Answer:

I don't want my children to have my beliefs/morals/religion etc. I will try and teach them basic right from wrong, and in the course doing so, be un-biased as possible. However, I think that, my children should discover their own beliefs/morals/religion, not mine. If my child wants to believe in Jesus, so be it. That may be what's best for my child. If my child wants to believe in something(i.e: Not necessarily 'God' , but yet still have the belief that something un-explainable caused our existence) then, again, so be it. Why? Well, I guess part of my reason would be, if they believe what I believe, they may go down the path I'm going. Do I want that for them? Not really. Where's the fun in walking a road you've already traveled on?

-X

[btownmeggy]

Mathematics. a theoretical proposition, statement, or formula embodying something to be proved from other propositions or formulas.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/theorem

Yeah, I just meant that "without proof" means something very different in mathematics and science than in everyday talk. I didn't necessarily mean that you were being purposely deceptive, just that that definition is perhaps not very representative of what a theorem actually is.

[Arbustos]

I think I'd heard it somewhere before, I don't remember where, though.

It's been around for awhile.

[luns101]

I will try and teach them basic right from wrong, and in the course doing so, be un-biased as possible.

I hear this phrase used a lot, but when I press a little further people here usually tell me that there is no universal good or bad. Instead they say it's a "consensus" of morality that has developed over the years.

I'm not necessarily disagreeing with your post, but rather pointing out that people do believe that there's a basic standard of ethics.

[The1exile]

I'm not necessarily disagreeing with your post, but rather pointing out that people do believe that there's a basic standard of ethics.

IMO it's based on how good a reason you have for justifying your actions.

[luns101]

I'm not necessarily disagreeing with your post, but rather pointing out that people do believe that there's a basic standard of ethics.

IMO it's based on how good a reason you have for justifying your actions.

From what I've read on this website...there are always limits to how far someone will go on any given subject that we discuss.

[XenHu]

I will try and teach them basic right from wrong, and in the course doing so, be un-biased as possible.

I hear this phrase used a lot, but when I press a little further people here usually tell me that there is no universal good or bad. Instead they say it's a "consensus" of morality that has developed over the years.

I'm not necessarily disagreeing with your post, but rather pointing out that people do believe that there's a basic standard of ethics.

Good point Luns. Do I believe there to be a basic standard of ethics? Yes? Do I follow them? Not at all. But I want my children to know their options. Yes, there is a basic right from wrong. But that doesn't mean I'll force them to follow it.

That's their choice.

-X

[CrazyAnglican]

Mathematics. a theoretical proposition, statement, or formula embodying something to be proved from other propositions or formulas.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/theorem

Yeah, I just meant that "without proof" means something very different in mathematics and science than in everyday talk. I didn't necessarily mean that you were being purposely deceptive, just that that definition is perhaps not very representative of what a theorem actually is.

Good point. I guess what I was saying to Unriggable was that being unproven doesn't immediately make an item unusable for educational purposes. If it did, we'd have a lot of unemployed history & literature teachers.

[mybike_yourface]

i think spirituality is a good thing for children(and all humans) to develop. religion, not so much.