Students to be taught there isn't a God

[Varda]

By exploring the same subject in several ways, by learning to approach the same issue through different points of view, by speaking and writing your own points of view. We had a lot of composition, essay writing, paraphrasing, reading comprehension, elocution, drama. History class was an airplane ride, English a singing or story telling lesson, biology was debate, french was acting. That sort of thing. It was a private school.

I had a similar education.
However, by saying that I was taught facts, I mean that I was not fed illusions at school, not was I stimulated to waste time on "illogical things".

 

[S.A.M.]

Yeh, I can tell.

 

[Varda]

What the fuck is that supposed to mean?
I went to bible school and sang in the church choir!

 

[S.A.M.]

I mean, you lack...empathy. Or rather fail to practise it. I put it down to a lack of imagination.

 

[EntropyAlwaysWins]

Empathy is just a very primitive way of getting people to 'care' for each other in order for the tribe to be able to survive without people killing each other while they sleep. For a sufficiently enlightened person it is entirely unnecessary and potentially harmful because in our society we encounter far too many people to be able to empathise with all of the, hence the monkeysphere becomes a serious problem.

more info here

 

[S.A.M.]

I really don't care what the behaviourists say it is. To me its a person who hears a first hand account of a friend in a coma following an attempted suicide and does not say "Oh its natural selection at work".

 

[EntropyAlwaysWins]

That's not what I'm saying at all, it is beneficial to everyone for the comma patient to recover therefore it is moral to assist them.

 

[S.A.M.]

No that is what Varda said to someone here.

It will be inetersting to see how they handle teaching the "humanism"

I predict though that some religious people will see this as an atheist attempt to convert or influence their children negatively and pull their children out of the schools/

Also, the educators might be interested in doing a study like this:

Religion is associated with lower rates of self-killing, but the mechanism underlying religion-suicide association is not clear. To better understand this relationship, the present study investigated the impact of religious versus secular education on suicidal ideation and attitudes towards suicide and a suicidal close friend in Turkish adolescents. Deduced from religious commitment, social integration, networking and stigma perspectives, the study tested five specific predictions.

A questionnaire was used to collect the data in a group of adolescents (n = 206) undergoing religious education and a group of adolescents (n = 214) undergoing secular education (N = 420).

Suicide ideation was more frequent in adolescents undergoing secular education than in those undergoing religious education. The secular group was more accepting of suicide than the religious group. Those from the religious group, however, were more accepting of a suicidal close friend than their secular counterparts.

http://www.ingentaconnect.com/conte...05;jsessionid=hgqvv05veja8.alice?format=print

 

[(Q)]

I think religion is important for survival, so I don't think its a question of being "used", thats like saying should food be used to prevent death. It just is.

The "List of Countries by Human Development Index" would wholeheartedly refute you.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Human_Development_Index

 

[S.A.M.]

Look up structural adjustment policy.

 

[(Q)]

Look up structural adjustment policy.

A red herring. Nice work.

 

[S.A.M.]

Not at all. A very secular exploitation of the masses. Also an apparent by product of atheism

Gallup Polls conducted in more than 140 countries worldwide between 2006 and 2008 show that those whose responses identify them as highly religious are more likely than less religious respondents to report that they have engaged in each of three "helping behaviors" in the past month. In all four major global regions, for example, highly religious people are more likely than those who report being less religious to report having donated money to a charity in that time.

However, the tendency of highly religious people around the world to say they donate their time and money does seem more impressive when you consider that, from a global perspective, those people are consistently poorer than those who are less religious. Among those highly religious respondents worldwide who reported their annual incomes to Gallup, the average figure (converted into international dollars) was about $10,000. Among those less religious respondents who reported their incomes, the average was about $17,500. Seen in this light, the data presented here offer compelling evidence of the role of religious dedication in helping to encourage supportive, community-oriented behaviors in areas where they may be most needed.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/111013/Worldwide-Highly-Religious-More-Likely-Help-Others.aspx

 

[(Q)]

Not at all. A very secular exploitation of the masses. Also an apparent by product of atheism



http://www.gallup.com/poll/111013/Worldwide-Highly-Religious-More-Likely-Help-Others.aspx

Your gallup polls are insignificant when held up to actual facts.

 

[spidergoat]

If it doesn't matter which religion makes people give more or kill themselves less, then it proves the benefits are independent of wether that religion is true or not. This argument only supports religion as a convenient falsehood, a means of social maintenance, and a drugless anti-depressant.

 

[Baron Max]

If it doesn't matter which religion makes people give more or kill themselves less, then it proves the benefits are independent of wether that religion is true or not.

Agreed. But then you go on to say:

This argument only supports religion as a convenient falsehood, a means of social maintenance, and a drugless anti-depressant.

And I disagree! That concept does NOT support anything that means religion is a "falsehood". It only means that it's as you said above ...that religion may or may not be true.

But as you've said above, if religion provides a benefit for society, then whether it's true or not is irrelevant. The benefits are real ....and that's all that really matters.

Baron Max

 

[swivel]

I don't want to be a computer. I want to be a person. I like having the imagination that sets me apart from every other creature on earth. I like all the illogical things that make life worth living.

Yet you seem to be promoting a system whereby we program our children with an ideology. Greater imagination would be fostered via atheism than the entire pantheon of gods. One is a blank slate, the other is a paint-by-number.

You either don't understand what you are saying or you are being hypocritical. Which is it?

 

[S.A.M.]

I go by the evidence. The evidence is that atheism is not compatible with imagination. What do you go by?

 

[James R]

I predict though that some religious people will see this as an atheist attempt to convert or influence their children negatively and pull their children out of the schools/

There's no need. These classes are voluntary. Parents can tell the school if they don't want their children to attend them. And that also applies to religious education classes.

Also, the educators might be interested in doing a study like this:

They might also like to study homicide rates, which tend to show that religious people are more likely to kill others.

 

[James R]

I go by the evidence. The evidence is that atheism is not compatible with imagination.

Nonsense.

 

[spidergoat]

I go by the evidence. The evidence is that atheism is not compatible with imagination.

What if it is, and suicide is the result of comparing what is to what could be?