Author Topic: Teaching vs Indoctrination ?  (Read 6084 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Squidward von Squidderson

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5630
Re: Teaching vs Indoctrination ?
« Reply #45 on: February 15, 2018, 06:48:47 pm »
Quote
Depends. If you're teaching Math, Science, History, Geography and English, you're teaching facts which can't be contradicted.

Things in these disciplines are questioned and contradicted all the time.  Which is why they’re not indoctrination.
Like Like x 1 View List

Offline cybercoma

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2956
Re: Teaching vs Indoctrination ?
« Reply #46 on: February 15, 2018, 06:52:02 pm »
They are part of culture.  You are right that they have *changed* and I want to point out that 'lax' doesn't mean 'bad'.  The drive to conformity was a stultifying aspect of life as I understand and that's gone.

But I also feel that with gains there are losses. 

Lots of things are worse today, and lots of things are better.
They are part of culture is too vague. What is culture? How does it change? Where does it come from? How are values part of that?

Offline Michael Hardner

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12477
Re: Teaching vs Indoctrination ?
« Reply #47 on: February 15, 2018, 06:55:39 pm »
They are part of culture is too vague. What is culture? How does it change? Where does it come from? How are values part of that?

That's a fascinating and only partially answerable question.

Offline SirJohn

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5801
Re: Teaching vs Indoctrination ?
« Reply #48 on: February 15, 2018, 07:54:31 pm »
Treating people unequally due to the color of their skin is racism.

Unless, of course, you're hiring for a job, then it's okay to hire based on skin colour... as long as that colour isn't white.
"When liberals insist that only fascists will defend borders then voters will hire fascists to do the job liberals won't do." David Frum

Offline SirJohn

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5801
Re: Teaching vs Indoctrination ?
« Reply #49 on: February 15, 2018, 07:55:34 pm »
Consider: What are morals? Who defines them? Are they more lax or have they just changed/adapted over time?

Morals would say respect your elders and don't talk back. That was pretty well universally enforced when I was a kid. Not so much these days.
"When liberals insist that only fascists will defend borders then voters will hire fascists to do the job liberals won't do." David Frum

Offline SirJohn

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5801
Re: Teaching vs Indoctrination ?
« Reply #50 on: February 15, 2018, 07:57:58 pm »
Things in these disciplines are questioned and contradicted all the time.  Which is why they’re not indoctrination.

What is questioned about English? The rules are the rules. What about Math? How do you question Math? History? You can put a different spin on it I suppose, but for the most part, history is immutable.  Geography can't be questioned. A river is where a river is, and it's as long as it's been measured as being. Science? Most of science can't be questioned. There are theories which some suggest might be mutable, but that's a small percentage of the whole.
"When liberals insist that only fascists will defend borders then voters will hire fascists to do the job liberals won't do." David Frum

Offline SirJohn

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5801
Re: Teaching vs Indoctrination ?
« Reply #51 on: February 15, 2018, 07:58:53 pm »
They are part of culture is too vague. What is culture? How does it change? Where does it come from? How are values part of that?

Culture is a shared sense of national identity which binds the people of a nation together.
"When liberals insist that only fascists will defend borders then voters will hire fascists to do the job liberals won't do." David Frum

Offline ?Impact

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2941
Re: Teaching vs Indoctrination ?
« Reply #52 on: February 15, 2018, 08:18:53 pm »
Morals would say respect your elders and don't talk back. That was pretty well universally enforced when I was a kid. Not so much these days.

Lots of elders took advantage of that and sexually abused kids.

Offline cybercoma

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2956
Re: Teaching vs Indoctrination ?
« Reply #53 on: February 15, 2018, 10:10:46 pm »
Culture is a shared sense of national identity which binds the people of a nation together.
National as in nation-state or national as in “nations within a nation”.

National is general a term for political boundaries, which has little to nothing to do with cultural boundaries. Just look at the way colonists divided up African states or look at the Kurds.

Moreover, your definition of culture is not functional in any way. You’re simply saying culture is a sense of identity. Culture is also a set of tools for mutual understanding, allowing people to interact without having to come to negotiated understandings in every single detail. Culture is functional and shared, but is also negotiated, contingent on language and meaning, and predicated on consensus. This means culture is malleable. It’s both reproduced and transformed. It’s the input, the medium, and the output of social interaction.

What you’re talking about is identity. And you would probably be very disappointed with a survey of people asked to describe the Canadian identity because one of the top responses tends to always involve a plurality of ethnic and cultural backgrounds allowed to co-exist in a patchwork.

Offline Michael Hardner

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12477
Re: Teaching vs Indoctrination ?
« Reply #54 on: February 16, 2018, 06:06:21 am »
No, it's usually much more subtle than that.

Ok - but it is implied that there's no option to disagree maybe ?

guest4

  • Guest
Re: Teaching vs Indoctrination ?
« Reply #55 on: February 16, 2018, 10:11:10 am »
Ok - but it is implied that there's no option to disagree maybe ?

I think in some cases there is an option to disagree, it may even be invited.  The goal would be to persuade the person that the disagreement isn't valid.  Religions are especially good at that, imo, since they essentially require a starting position of "God is always right" so disagreement can be met with "proof" of God's position through selected scripture. 

One could argue that "or else" comes into play with the threat of eternal hellfire/punishment, but I think that only is useful to keep believing in God as the starting point.  Each sect has its own particular beliefs that they wish to indoctinate into their group and that requires a more subtle approach, imo.

guest7

  • Guest
Re: Teaching vs Indoctrination ?
« Reply #56 on: February 16, 2018, 10:16:53 am »
I suppose teaching is an effort to inform, whereas indoctrination is an effort to convince.

Teaching methods can vary, but probably not as much as those used for indoctrination.
Like Like x 2 View List

Offline Michael Hardner

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12477
Re: Teaching vs Indoctrination ?
« Reply #57 on: February 16, 2018, 10:58:40 am »
Culture is a shared sense of national identity which binds the people of a nation together.

That's the definition of national culture but really if you're talking about the intangible "What is culture ?" question... it is probably more related to tribal behaviours that are more closely imprinted on our biology.

National culture is a subversion and an attempt to direct those tribal impulses towards people who share our citizenship.

Offline Michael Hardner

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12477
Re: Teaching vs Indoctrination ?
« Reply #58 on: February 16, 2018, 11:00:11 am »
I suppose teaching is an effort to inform, whereas indoctrination is an effort to convince.

Brainwashing ?  I can't think of anything that moves me away from the "there can be no dissent to what I am telling you" aspect.


Quote
Teaching methods can vary, but probably not as much as those used for indoctrination.

How so ?

Offline ?Impact

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2941
Re: Teaching vs Indoctrination ?
« Reply #59 on: February 16, 2018, 11:10:26 am »
it is probably more related to tribal behaviours that are more closely imprinted on our biology.

Is that a subtle way of saying non-whites are savages? I really don't understand what you are trying to say about being imprinted on our biology. We could go back 10's of thousands of years to common ancestors and they would blend into our modern world with no problems other than the bigotry we teach them about physical characteristics. Going back more than that we would get into significant brain differences and then the biological factors would come into play.