I'd rather theology not be taught at all in public schools, save for universities where it can be treated with proper academic rigor. Note here that I don't mean to say, "all religion should be...
I'd rather theology not be taught at all in public schools, save for universities where it can be treated with proper academic rigor.
Note here that I don't mean to say, "all religion should be forbidden from schools". There are certainly educational aspects of every religion that can be very beneficial to a developing mind; I just don't think there should be entire classes devoted to one specific religion in K-12 public schools. Use the Bible's Psalms to teach poetry in English, or if we MUST have theology in public schools keep it broad; classes on branches of religion, such as the Abrahamics, or inject study of African theology into your US History class while covering the slave trade, showing how the various belief systems made their way to the Americas via slavery and grew from there.
Anything that passively or actively dissuades someone from critical thinking or focuses on believing in that which you cannot prove does not have a place in general, public education. In my opinion, at least.
That would work, sure. Though I would imagine that would focus less on the specifics of the doctrines themselves (excluding where necessary, of course) and more on the impact of the overall ideas...
That would work, sure. Though I would imagine that would focus less on the specifics of the doctrines themselves (excluding where necessary, of course) and more on the impact of the overall ideas and themes of the works. Which is totally fine, I've got no problem with studying theology. I just think it's dangerous to present such a heady, difficult topic to kids still in K-12 education.
If forced to compromise, truthfully, I would probably be fine with theology courses in the last year or two of public education. By that point I feel most people have their core beliefs (though perhaps not their personal identity) pinned down pretty hard, and if they don't then there's no reason to keep them from exploring whatever avenues they might choose. But, there must be some mechanism to compensate for the geographic effect of, for example, growing up in the Midwest where (theoretically) every single school would have Biblical theology classes but theology outside of that "accepted norm" would be either de facto unavailable or purposefully avoided.
I say this only because I've lived in the Midwest my entire life and, at least in Missouri, it's very much an "it is how it is" culture, primarily driven by the state's history of poverty, blue-collar work, and strong cultural ties to the religious south. I'd run out of fingers and toes were I to try and count the times myself or friends were unable to pursue an academic enterprise solely because there was "lack of interest". There are funding limits that also play into this, of course, but going down that path leads only to an entirely different can of philosophical worms in which I will likely once again reveal myself as a bit of an outsider.
That brings me back to my original point, though: If we simply allocate formal theological studies to post-secondary education, we avoid all of these issues. It's not a perfect fix, but I'd think it's better than the way we currently treat it; that is to say reactive, rather than proactive.
I think there's value in theology and spirituality, in that it provides people with a sense of comfort or understanding beyond what they otherwise may have access to. There's plenty of people who...
I think there's value in theology and spirituality, in that it provides people with a sense of comfort or understanding beyond what they otherwise may have access to. There's plenty of people who live their lives totally uninterested in academic pursuits and only need something behind which they can stand when life inevitably gets difficult, and I see no fault in that. People deserve to feel happy, because without happiness then what are we even here for? Random chance? I mean, probably, but that's not exactly helping many people sleep at night. I could wax poetic on the beauty of the structural simplicity of the atom comparative to its functional depth, and perhaps throw in some Einstein and Sagan, maybe a couple quotes from the Buddha or Mahavira, but that will be largely lost on anyone without a solid understanding of who those people were or why they should take their words to heart.
Do I dream of a world where religion is truly treated as a purely historical pursuit? Sure, but that's not a practical belief, at least for the age in which we currently live. Therefore it behooves me most, in pursuit of my OWN happiness, to compromise and understand the limitations of what can and cannot be achieved by my own hands. If that means allowing theology to continue to prosper and spread, then so be it. I sometimes fail, but I do try not to presume to think I know how best everyone might pursue their own brand of happiness in life. That's a very personal question that many people die without ever having answered, and it would be a detriment to my own happiness to know I had a hand in robbing that from someone.
I'd rather theology not be taught at all in public schools, save for universities where it can be treated with proper academic rigor.
Note here that I don't mean to say, "all religion should be forbidden from schools". There are certainly educational aspects of every religion that can be very beneficial to a developing mind; I just don't think there should be entire classes devoted to one specific religion in K-12 public schools. Use the Bible's Psalms to teach poetry in English, or if we MUST have theology in public schools keep it broad; classes on branches of religion, such as the Abrahamics, or inject study of African theology into your US History class while covering the slave trade, showing how the various belief systems made their way to the Americas via slavery and grew from there.
Anything that passively or actively dissuades someone from critical thinking or focuses on believing in that which you cannot prove does not have a place in general, public education. In my opinion, at least.
Shouldn’t major religious movements simply be part of the History curriculum? They actually ARE history. Makes sense to me.
That would work, sure. Though I would imagine that would focus less on the specifics of the doctrines themselves (excluding where necessary, of course) and more on the impact of the overall ideas and themes of the works. Which is totally fine, I've got no problem with studying theology. I just think it's dangerous to present such a heady, difficult topic to kids still in K-12 education.
If forced to compromise, truthfully, I would probably be fine with theology courses in the last year or two of public education. By that point I feel most people have their core beliefs (though perhaps not their personal identity) pinned down pretty hard, and if they don't then there's no reason to keep them from exploring whatever avenues they might choose. But, there must be some mechanism to compensate for the geographic effect of, for example, growing up in the Midwest where (theoretically) every single school would have Biblical theology classes but theology outside of that "accepted norm" would be either de facto unavailable or purposefully avoided.
I say this only because I've lived in the Midwest my entire life and, at least in Missouri, it's very much an "it is how it is" culture, primarily driven by the state's history of poverty, blue-collar work, and strong cultural ties to the religious south. I'd run out of fingers and toes were I to try and count the times myself or friends were unable to pursue an academic enterprise solely because there was "lack of interest". There are funding limits that also play into this, of course, but going down that path leads only to an entirely different can of philosophical worms in which I will likely once again reveal myself as a bit of an outsider.
That brings me back to my original point, though: If we simply allocate formal theological studies to post-secondary education, we avoid all of these issues. It's not a perfect fix, but I'd think it's better than the way we currently treat it; that is to say reactive, rather than proactive.
Why have theology at all? And I say that as a religious man...
I think there's value in theology and spirituality, in that it provides people with a sense of comfort or understanding beyond what they otherwise may have access to. There's plenty of people who live their lives totally uninterested in academic pursuits and only need something behind which they can stand when life inevitably gets difficult, and I see no fault in that. People deserve to feel happy, because without happiness then what are we even here for? Random chance? I mean, probably, but that's not exactly helping many people sleep at night. I could wax poetic on the beauty of the structural simplicity of the atom comparative to its functional depth, and perhaps throw in some Einstein and Sagan, maybe a couple quotes from the Buddha or Mahavira, but that will be largely lost on anyone without a solid understanding of who those people were or why they should take their words to heart.
Do I dream of a world where religion is truly treated as a purely historical pursuit? Sure, but that's not a practical belief, at least for the age in which we currently live. Therefore it behooves me most, in pursuit of my OWN happiness, to compromise and understand the limitations of what can and cannot be achieved by my own hands. If that means allowing theology to continue to prosper and spread, then so be it. I sometimes fail, but I do try not to presume to think I know how best everyone might pursue their own brand of happiness in life. That's a very personal question that many people die without ever having answered, and it would be a detriment to my own happiness to know I had a hand in robbing that from someone.