As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/
Options
[Kids] and Ideology
Hamurabi
MiamiRegistered User regular
MiamiRegistered User regular
So I'm a couple of years from actually needing to make Philosophical Determinations™ on these matters, but something's been on my mind recently:
Should parents induct their kids into their ideology?
I don't just mean left vs. right (or what passes for those positions in U.S. political discourse), but also on things like religious observance or lack thereof, social justice, and the other realms of thought and action that may not necessarily govern day-to-day decision making, but in which you place value.
On the one hand, my Western liberal values compel me to think of kids as tiny little Rational Agents who will choose all these things on their own.
On the other hand, there is some amount of inevitability to the influence I (or any other parent) will exert on a kid, and that slapping a "Well, son, some people think this, but other people think that" disclaimer on every question isn't going to help anything. I also feel like a parent ought to have some amount of control over the kinds of messages their kids hear; I believe in the things I do because I necessarily think they're the best beliefs I've come across, and so naturally I would want some hypothetical offspring of mine to share those beliefs.
I go back and forth between those two positions -- though I clearly lean more toward the second, as evidenced by the paragraph to describe it versus the sentence to describe the alternative :P .
Should parents induct their kids into their ideology?
I don't just mean left vs. right (or what passes for those positions in U.S. political discourse), but also on things like religious observance or lack thereof, social justice, and the other realms of thought and action that may not necessarily govern day-to-day decision making, but in which you place value.
On the one hand, my Western liberal values compel me to think of kids as tiny little Rational Agents who will choose all these things on their own.
On the other hand, there is some amount of inevitability to the influence I (or any other parent) will exert on a kid, and that slapping a "Well, son, some people think this, but other people think that" disclaimer on every question isn't going to help anything. I also feel like a parent ought to have some amount of control over the kinds of messages their kids hear; I believe in the things I do because I necessarily think they're the best beliefs I've come across, and so naturally I would want some hypothetical offspring of mine to share those beliefs.
I go back and forth between those two positions -- though I clearly lean more toward the second, as evidenced by the paragraph to describe it versus the sentence to describe the alternative :P .
Hamurabi on
0
Posts
Of course.
If you believe that your ideology is correct and/or beneficial, then it would be remiss for you to withhold it from your kids.
If you believe that your ideology is neither correct nor beneficial, then why do you hold that ideology?
Perhaps the learning experience itself is important - that a given ideology is only beneficial if it has been discovered outside of parental assistance. I am sympathetic to that, but I don't agree. At least, I can't think of a given ideology that really fits that idea.
I think when people start to rabble, "How dare you indoctrinate your kids with your ideology," they're just pissed that the ideology you've chosen isn't one you agree with. That's a justifiable thing to be pissed about - for instance, I think that sexual abstinence until marriage is dumb, and I think it's dumb to teach your kids that. But the smart thing to do is to criticize the idea. Expecting parents not to act on an idea, without effectively showing why that idea is wrong, is an incoherent expectation.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Will I secretly be hoping that they come around to my views on things? Abso-fucking-lutely. But I'm going to have to trust the hearts and minds of my progeny to arrive to that on their own.
Just because your parents didn't say to you 'Jesus is a super cool dude, p.s. vote democrat' or what have you, doesn't mean that you weren't brought up in an environment which tremendously encouraged the development of certain beliefs.
Even setting that aside, it seems obviously true that we should teach children our ideologies. Morality is sort of important, and isn't something to wait until they're eighteen to teach, everything else is an inherent expansion of that.
But to what extent should I try to indoctrinate my kids? I hold plenty of beliefs that I don't think can be grasped by kids, or are even necessarily correct. I mean, obviously I believe what I believe but that doesn't mean I'm absolutely certain about it. In fact, I could be utterly wrong. Should I then, in a time when they are very impressionable, pretend that my beliefs are stronger than they actually are?
I, on the other hand, am willing to risk the experience of pain being all in my head and tell my kids that reaching into fire is bad for you.
I suppose you're right. Doubting your political convictions is the same as solipsism.
There is no possible way to avoid "indoctrinating" a human child. Children do not work that way. Even if you make some attempt to avoid some issues with them (eg: religion and such) you are still having a huge impact on them as they develop just by your own behavior.
Kids do not learn only (or even at all) those things you actually try to instruct them in. Far more important is what they observe you doing in everyday life.
The idea that even a 7 or 8 year old could form their own opinion on ideas of religion is fucking absurd to me. They can be very good at memorizing things and imitating the behavior of trusted adults and such but it's just not the same thing.
As a result, I don't consider a religious person bringing their kids to church or whatever to be wrong. I think their adult decision to be religious in the first place is wrong but the teaching of it to their children is merely a very sensible result of that initial (wrongheaded) decision. What would be wrong would be someone who really did believe in religion not teaching it to their kids (or someone who did not actually attempting to).
I see nothing wrong with parents taking their kids with them to church and raising them in their value system, that's kind of the point of the family unit. Kids will also diverge from their parents through education and life experience. I, for example, am not a radical southern baptist who wants to see planned parenthood defunded and a gun in every truck and a bible in every school desk. Obviously fringe groups would be an exception (that's why they're fringe, you can't plan for every outcome), but there's little you can do to stop them that wouldn't infringe on normal parents.
There's no way to raise children where they aren't influenced by their parents, you're fooling yourself if you think there is. People learn by observation, especially at a young age. You raise them the way you want, but you should also give them the tools and ability to come to their own conclusions.
NDT once said, when talking about science and discovery, that the best thing you can do for a kid is to let them play, let them take things apart to learn how they work. I plan on having copy of all the major religious texts in my house as well as philosophy stuff (also, internet) and my kids are going to be free to come to any dumbass conclusion they want. Just like I was.
I will say that I would outlaw home schooling. I see no value in that at all.
I don't think you can "indoctrinate them" in any way other than just living your life. If you're living a life you don't think your kids should emulate, you probably shouldn't have kids.
If you folks honestly can't see the difference between consciously indoctrinating your children into certain beliefs - even if you believe it is the right thing to do - and the kind of unavoidable influence your beliefs have on that of the kids you raise, then I don't know what can be said.
Of course there are values and habits and viewpoints of your own that are going to be exposed to your children, whether or not you deliberately choose to do so. I didn't say it because it's obvious enough that I thought it goes without saying. But this specific topic entertains the idea of consciously and deliberately pulling your children to your views on, which is a far fucking cry from what everyone is rushing to point out as a response to my post.
So yeah, I'm comfortable with saying 'No I would not feel okay with manipulating my children into common views on certain matters'
I think it needed to be said because you are aparently completely unaware of how real children work.
The high-mindend stuff you might try to deliberately teach them means exactly dick. Not important in the long run. What really matters is the day in, day out stuff they learn by observation of the trusted adults in their lives.
No, please do get the specifics on this because I'm not sure what you're saying. Teaching your kids is part of being a parent. Do I think that parents should strap their kids down and teach them to believe in the All Spark? No. But I'm probably going to use examples from mythology to impart lessons to my kids and there are some religious traditions that I rather enjoy that we'll be taking part in but I think it's important to teach kids to challenge their assumptions about things.
I might read from the Bible or the Torah or the Sagas to my kids, but I'll be reading Sagan and Tyson and Hawking as well.
Oh but I certainly can indoctrinate them more than them just following by example. Many of my beliefs are not put into practice daily, and even those which are are not instantly obvious. I could either tell or not tell my kid every day that God doesn't exist. Obviously I believe I'm correct in that view, and I would disown my child if he/she ever came home with a religion, but that doesn't mean that it's clear that I should tell my kid that.
Because that's exactly what your kids want to hear when they ask why the sky is blue.
So wait...you're saying that it's impossible to indoctrinate a child?
Let's say I'm an Atheist and wanted to be sure my kid grew up to be one too.
Deliberate indoctrination would be me raising the kid and confidently informing them that there is no God, if the question ever comes up. I may even go out of my way to avoid exposure to religious materials. I definitely wouldn't send them to summer camp once I learned the place was ran by fundies.
I don't think I'm comfortable with that route, and I'm pretty confident I can avoid a lot of the stuff that I'd personally categorize as indoctrination.
What would I do though? I'm pretty sure if my kid is asking me about God they would be able to understand the idea that what someone believes isn't necessarily what is correct. I could tell them that I personally didn't believe in God, but I wasn't 100% on the matter. Their life would go on, and they'd encounter religious stuff as much as the next kid whose family didn't go to church. And I would think they are better off for having experienced certain parts of the world a little more on their terms than on mine, even if the lines are quite blurred.
You... you would disown your kid if they got religion? oO That makes as much sense as people who disown their kids for becoming atheists. I'm going to assume you were using hyperbole here.
The God question is a tricky one for me. Because if my kids want to be religious, that's fine. I'm going to teach them what I think is right and tell them to do their own research, but that's just me.
I know you're being glib, but that's an incredibly useless thing you just said. The sky being blue is a matter of empirical fact. Believing that Jesus is the son of God or that abortion is murder is not.
That makes sense. Though honestly, I don't see anything wrong with teaching your kids that there is no God since they're going to be exposed to religion anyway and they might reverse course from you.
My parents certainly didn't raise me to believe the things I believe now.
Why are you indoctrinating your kids into accepting an empiricist universe? You're excluding an awful lot of alternatives there.
So you put quotation marks around the word in order to show us that we're thinking about this all wrong, man. Congratulations.
You said that teaching your kids something deliberately means dick, which means that you don't believe you can indoctrinate your kids because that is was indoctrinating means. Which I guess means that those kids at Jesuscamp must've picked up their belief that homosexuality is evil by observing their parents being...not gay?
No, the problem is that there are as many different definitions of "indoctrinate" being used in this thread as there are posters.
Personally, I fully intend to indoctrinate my hypothetical children into secular humanism, and instill the notion in them that above all things, personal philosophy must be submitted to (and sustain) inquiry.
If they wish to adopt any other philosophy that fits within those parameters, have at it. Will I disown my children should they deviate from that instruction? That entirely depends on the the depth and dangerous potential of such deviation. If converting to Judaism or Methodism in a move of lip-service that eases tensions between them and a potential mate, then sure, whatever. It's just a label. But if they want to give money to a cult? Or want ME to join a cult with them? Hardly.
If my kids grow up to become Mormon business executives or Buddhist astronauts or atheist banana farmers, that's their prerogative, so long as they chose the lives they felt were right for them. Admittedly I think the core values I instill in them are more likely to lead to certain outcomes than to others, but the idea that you can raise your children as completely blank slates is pretty silly.
I think you missed the word "why."
:^: that's my goal for parenting.
Obviously there are things you have to teach your kids, but there are also a lot of things they need to figure out for themselves.
Well, technically, whether or not Jesus is the son of God is an empirical fact. Just not necessarily one that anyone can agree upon.
Yeah I was being hyperbolic to illustrate that I'm pretty heavily atheistic. Obviously I would never disown my kids.
But that's it. I would be really disappointed if my kid got religion, so I'm not going to raise them religiously. But does that mean I should raise them like I'm some caricature atheist? I see no value in the bible, but does that mean I should deny my kid even the option?
I was raised on the topic of religion in much the way I will probably raise my own child, with there being a bunch of religious stuff around but my parents being non-religious. We had childrens bible stories and shit like that which I just read on my own (since I just read everything I found) but my parents never pushed me in either direction.
The god-thing is actually not what I would have any trouble with, it's just an illustration of a topic that I think this thread is about.
I think it needs to be said that you seem to think that 'real Scotsman children', as children, are completely immune to anything but the ideas that creep in through the unavoidable exposure to their parents.
What I'm hearing from you is that teaching children to decide certain things for themselves is impossible or "not important in the long run". And that's just utterly false. The 'high-minded stuff' you're referring to are such values as 'what I believe is not necessarily what everyone should believe' or even 'what I believe may not necessarily be correct'. Oof. Terrifyingly complex stuff.
If we're dealing with infants and toddlers, sure, I don't think they can grasp that. But I also don't think they are the ones that are going to be asking about politics or religion too much, either.
Well, not only agree upon but actually know. But you're technically correct. The best kind of correct.
This is also why I hate homeschooling.
Sure, but what you said basically implies that for any accepted definition of indoctrinate it doesn't work.
There's also something to be said for exposing your kids to the lifetime of reasoning, thought, and experience that you've already accumulated. It seems a bit cruel to me to wish ignorance on your kids when you have the opportunity to teach them what you've learned.
Your position makes sense to me.
I think it's quite likely that at some point, my (hypothetical future) kids will start to talk about politics, or religion, or occupations, or charity. At that point, I'm not going to withhold my opinions - I think that physician is a better occupation than priest, for instance, because I think that physicians do more good, because I think that objective medicine is important, because I think that a life based on empirical observation and logical critical thought are better than a life based on religious faith. I don't think that it is unreasonable to predict that these topics would naturally out of an adolescent's curiosity about abstract ideas. I'm not going to sit and say that, "Oh, anything you want to do with your life is fine, dear," because that is, IMO, skipping out on my responsibility as a parent.
I agree with MrMister that there's a difference between discussing these things with an honest expression of your belief as you would with another rational human being, versus using punishment or manipulation or censorship. There's a time and place for the latter, but once your kid gets to the age where they're becoming curious on their own about abstract ideas, I think they're old enough to have polite conversations (most of the time).
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
I don't see anything negative in there. Telling your kids to drop loose change into a Salvation Army tin is indoctrinating them in that activity. Just because in the American political milieu it's often used pejoratively doesn't mean it's just something Evil Hood-Wearing Cults™ do.
2. There's something to be said for the experiential aspect of ideological positions that a couple of people have mentioned. I think I remember reading at some point about a study that found that there's almost literally no link between kids'/young adults' personalities and the way they were raised. While that study (and I should probably try to Google-Fu it for the purposes of this thread) dealt specifically with personality, and not specific ideological positions, I think the results could potentially be similar. There're confounding factors, of course: every generation tends, generally, to be more socially liberal than the one before it; some types of beliefs are much more consistent across generations (religion/religiosity being one of them, iirc) than others; the impact of intelligence; etc.
I agree with you generally, but in a sense isn't this just your ideology as well?
I think censorship with children is a serious issue, because realistically everyone is going to want to protect their children from something, but who can determine at what point you are censoring them in a way that is directly harming them and their eventual individuality? It's unfortunate, because, say, a parent who goes out of their way to prevent their child from being exposed to any sort of sexual material (like not allowing them to read classic literature with sex scenes) is genuinely doing what they think is best for their child, when in reality it might be smothering them and giving them unhealthy views towards sex. At the same time, I'm sure that most of us here would be very willing to not allow their child to spend hours watching a TV show that espoused views that were racist, sexist, or otherwise bigoted. Who is to decide what is acceptable to censor your child from?