I was in a philosophy class, and as the professor was discussing various religious beliefs, i could see a few students were getting noticeably upset...specifically discussing the "problem of evil" in religion....finally there was an outburst....
"it was the devil's fault" one student yelled out.
"no it's because of free will" another cried.
"you can't blame god for evil" another said.
It was as if they couldn't understand the arguments at all, the professor wasn't claiming any argument to be correct, he was just explaining all angles of the argument, and these students couldn't even wrap their head around the argument to understand what it was saying...Their responses were the same, blindly regurgitating what they had been taught rather than thinking about the argument, and finding problems: either with it's premises, or problems with how the premises lead to the conclusions.
Where as I, with no religious bias, could clearly see both sides of the argument, and understand it.
2007-10-22 02:55:09 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
i agree skalite, i'm not saying all christians are terrible at philosophy, but there is a "knee jerk" reaction built into most Xians to disagree with any non-god argument with a pre-programmed message...
2007-10-22 03:09:33 · update #1
hope, these 3 students are not imaginary, they were in my philosophy class a year ago at the kent state branch near my home...
2007-10-22 03:11:30 · update #2
terry, we were in the middle of the god question, he had given arguments for the existence "pascals wager, perfect island arguemnt, etc" and was going over arguments against..problem of evil, etc...
2007-10-22 03:51:55 · update #3
I think it would depend on the person. I've seen some atheistic responses I thought were kind of the 'knee jerk' reaction type. But, I'd say it's easier to find an open-minded atheist than Xian, in general. Of course, there are always exceptions.
2007-10-22 06:42:10 · answer #1 · answered by strpenta 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Education must be about facts and the development of critical thinking. You do not say what the tutor was putting forward as the argument. In philosophy, the arguments around religion and morality MUST be objective/value neutral. If the tutor had stepped outside that, then he/she was entering into theology which takes as its starting point the existence of god.
It sounds as if the students were indeed closed to the concept of objective/value neutral argument therefore philosophy is a waste of time on them. I know, I've tried teaching philosophy, psychology and other subjects to students who have already made up their minds IE closed their minds. They are more often than not religious and indeed have had similar and worse outbursts.
One accused me of 'just getting all I thought out of a book' which I thought was extremely funny as he was a fundy and kept quoting the bible.
Note:
Even with Pascals wager and other god questions a philosophy tutor MUST remain neutral and objective. That must be the nature of all education, especially when developing analytic thinking.
2007-10-22 09:58:34 · answer #2 · answered by Freethinking Liberal 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I don't know if I fully understand the question that you are asking, but I believe that both atheists and Christians can be pretty stubborn when it comes to education especially in the beginning to the universe or the beginning of life. Atheists want no mention of alternative theories if they involve a creator, but Christians along with other religions that believe in a Creator would like to have the idea of alternative theories mentioned. Basically, all sides want and promote the educating of children in what they believe themselves.
2007-10-22 10:04:24 · answer #3 · answered by jwbyrdman 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
To be fair, as a philosopher, when you get above the beginner's level courses, the Christians who stick with Philosophy are much better at understanding and arguing points. It's not fair to say that ALL Christians would react in this manner, one of my fellow students with whom I did a substantial bit of work in several classes relating to and going outside of religious metaphysics and ideology was a Christian, and he was able to be objective.
2007-10-22 10:01:45 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 0⤋
They're adolescents. Actual philosophical discussion is beyond the capacity of most adolescents--they just lack the ability to entertain discussion. What they want is for people to agree with them, and any statement that might not agree with them is treated as an attack. Most people remain intellectual adolescents their entire lives, and this includes atheists.
Adolescents believe that they are right. Adults question themselves and are open to the possibility of self-examination.
2007-10-22 10:08:51 · answer #5 · answered by Hoosier Daddy 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
They are trained to believe in absolutes. Such a view of the world is not conducive to open mindedness.
2007-10-22 10:11:04 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
People are individuals. Actually your bias is no religon, wrap your head around that.
2007-10-22 10:56:12 · answer #7 · answered by just a man 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
An outsider is ALWAYS more objective than someone with a particular bias.
Not education in general, but in religion classes, generally an atheist is capable of being more logical because they are the outsider.
2007-10-22 09:59:37 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 10⤊ 4⤋
I would tend to say that atheist in general are more open minded to education, but it really depends on the individual atheist or christian.
2007-10-22 09:59:37 · answer #9 · answered by Pirate AM™ 7 · 6⤊ 2⤋
I kind of agree with some others.
This sounds made up.
2007-10-22 10:08:13 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋