By Ande Jacobson
I’ve long been wary of indoctrination. The Concise Oxford English dictionary defines the verb indoctrinate as:
“Cause to accept a set of beliefs uncritically through repeated instruction.”
Indoctrination is the practice of indoctrinating, and the most common form of indoctrination is how religion is often presented to young children by their parents and clergy with whom they are acquainted. They are generally taught from early on that these religious beliefs are not to be questioned. They are to be accepted without evidence as facts.
Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens have both written extensively about this practice. They equate this type of indoctrination with psychological child abuse, especially when threats (such as the concept of Hell or eternal damnation) are part of the teaching. They assert that this type of indoctrination at such a young age before children are cognitively equipped to critically evaluate what they are being told can prevent them from critical thinking later in life, and therein lies a significant danger.
Dawkins has also stated that it is important for people to read the scriptures as literature. He acknowledges that they reflect the era and culture in which they were written, and they even contain some useful ideas as literary sources. Where he has an issue is when they are presented as absolute authorities given they cannot be independently verified or tested while encouraging accepting what is effectively magic as reality. He disputes the idea that they come from some supernatural source as they are books written by men. Dawkins also asserts that even seemingly benign religious practices lay the groundwork where extreme fundamentalism based on a literal interpretation of fictional stories can take hold.
An interesting pair of studies from Cognitive Science (originally appearing as an Epub in 2014) determined that young children (aged 5-6) showed a marked difference in their ability to differentiate between a true narrative and one where religious or fantastical content was present based on their exposure to religion. The net conclusion was that religious children are much more likely to judge a narrative with religious or fantastical overtones as real; whereas, secular children with little or no religious exposure are much more likely to judge fantastical narratives as fictional and not possible.
Abstract
“In two studies, 5- and 6-year-old children were questioned about the status of the protagonist embedded in three different types of stories. In realistic stories that only included ordinary events, all children, irrespective of family background and schooling, claimed that the protagonist was a real person. In religious stories that included ordinarily impossible events brought about by divine intervention, claims about the status of the protagonist varied sharply with exposure to religion. Children who went to church or were enrolled in a parochial school, or both, judged the protagonist in religious stories to be a real person, whereas secular children with no such exposure to religion judged the protagonist in religious stories to be fictional. Children’s upbringing was also related to their judgment about the protagonist in fantastical stories that included ordinarily impossible events whether brought about by magic (Study 1) or without reference to magic (Study 2). Secular children were more likely than religious children to judge the protagonist in such fantastical stories to be fictional. The results suggest that exposure to religious ideas has a powerful impact on children’s differentiation between reality and fiction, not just for religious stories but also for fantastical stories.”
Impairing a child’s perception of reality can be a serious detriment to their cognitive development which in turn can prevent them from developing analytical skills necessary later in life especially given the modern technological advances we enjoy. The information disruption we are experiencing with the rapid growth of digital sources puts the onus on the individual to validate and verify the information they consume. This takes time and effort as well as analytical skills that many lack. Impairing one’s ability to learn how to think critically can be an enormous handicap. It also contributes to the current divide we are experiencing where the population as a whole no longer has a common understanding of reality. This in turn allows fictional narratives, including conspiracy theories, to thrive.
While members of the public may disagree about how to solve many of the problems we face, having a common understanding of reality at least gives us a solid foundation from which to work toward solutions. Lacking that foundation, collaboration and cooperation become difficult or even impossible.
All that said, exposure to religion isn’t in itself a bad thing. The dangerous thing is presenting something that is unprovable and has no evidence as indisputable fact, particularly to somebody who hasn’t developed the cognitive skills to discern the difference. We can learn a lot from various religious traditions as long as we keep them in perspective. We can grow and learn by using our imaginations as well. In all of it though, we need to understand the difference between what is real and what is imagined or even desired. We need to understand how to separate fact from fiction in order to effectively navigate the world around us.
In my own life, I was exposed to religion growing up, but it was never presented as any kind of absolute or even as fact. It was instead presented as a cultural custom. My mother wanted me to learn the history of the faith of my family, not to make me a believer. She didn’t care whether I believed in the faith or not. That wasn’t the point. The point was connection. The point was community. The point was family history. I don’t think I ever actually believed in any kind of supernatural being, and that was perfectly acceptable. My grandfather stated flat out that he had no belief in any God, but he still participated in family holiday celebrations. My mother was comfortable on the fence. She said that she didn’t know whether such a thing as a God existed or not and said that she couldn’t prove it either way. In her mind, we each had one life to live. She was a nurse, and she had a natural inclination to help others. She taught me the importance of being a good person and to help others not because of any supernatural edict but because she saw it as the right thing to do to make life better for everyone.
References:
The God Delusion, by Richard Dawkins, Bantam Press (2006)
The God Delusion – Why limit our perception?
God Is Not Great, by Christopher Hitchens, Hatchett Book Group USA (2007)
