From: mathew <mathew@mantis.co.uk>
Newsgroups: alt.atheism,talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Reader's Digest on prayer: amusing, or scary?
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 92 10:36:51 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: Mantis Consultants, Cambridge. UK.

gpalo@digi.lonestar.org (Gerry Palo) writes:
> In article <Xi40TB3w165w@mantis.co.uk> mathew@mantis.co.uk (mathew) writes:
> >So it seems to me that your idea of "choice" is guaranteed to be no better
> >than having all schools teach the same range of subjects, and might very
> >plausibly result in pupils being taught a narrower range of subjects.
> >
> >For instance, can you imagine a Fundie school teaching evolution properly? 
> >And conversely, can you imagine a strong atheist/sceptic school teaching
> >Eastern philosophy properly?
> >
> >Or are you not concerned with diversity as it applies to students?  Are you
> >just concerned with some more abstract notion of diversity in the sense of
> >"Well, I guess there's a school *somewhere* that teaches it..."
> 
> Your comments are well taken.  I do not expect every school to offer a
> full variety of points of view.  That is not the purpose of education.
> Rather it is to prepare the growing child to be able to use his own
> sound judgement so that when he or she goes out into the world they
> will be able to meet the enormous diversity there with understanding,
> an open and thougthful mind, and clarity of thinking.  The problem of
> the smorgasboard approach at the outset is that it does not allow
> for enough depth.

It's all very well to say "Yeah, we'll teach the children to think, then when
they're adults they'll work out how to deal with diversity", but I'm VERY
sceptical of such a claim.  Look at racism, for example.  In the UK, I've met
far more casually racist bigots in the '50 or more years of age' category
than any other age group -- that is, the people who are most likely to be
racists seem to be those who grew up with less exposure to other races and
cultures.  Yet few of these people have any trouble understanding why men and
women should be considered as equals.  This seems to me to indicate that
exposure to something is important if one is to accept it.

I personally believe that children should be exposed to diverse cultures and
viewpoints from a very early age -- if for no other reason than to make them
bigotry-resistant.  It took quite a while to explain to my younger brothers
about the situation in South Africa; they literally could not understand how
anyone could be in favour of apartheid.  "What, you mean I wouldn't be able
to go to the same school as Ben?  But that's ridiculous!"  My parents tried
to explain why some people were racists, by mentioning a few of the typical
racist arguments, but my brothers could spot the lies from their own
experience.  Would the situation have been the same if they'd never met any
non-WASPs?

The process of broadening minds should continue past school age, of course. 
Personally, I would like to visit every country in the world; except that I
have a certain aversion to travelling to countries which are guilty of
appalling human rights abuse.  So China, for example, will have to wait until
there's a democratic revolution.  That's not cultural prejudice, it's ethical
choice (mixed with a little self-preservation); genocide and torture are not
culture.

> the state run school concept has little or no chance of becoming the vehicle
> for training fo children to become healthy, openminded, and thoughtful
> adults.  This is obviously a declaration, and it requires even more 
> words to defend it.

Well, yes.  I attended state-run schools for the whole of my educational
career until University.  I think they did a pretty good job.


mathew
-- 
"He is heterosexual.  It is a sort of breath of fresh air, isn't it?  The
 indecent assault, an expression of his sexuality." -- Judge Geoffrey Jones