Dr Jennifer Bleazby: Religious Education in Australian government Schools

[@AmboscottUK]

Great work Dr Bleazby

[@haynesgt]

Bleazby has a very poor understanding of religion. Indoctrination just means the act of forming to a doctrine. It is a good thing if the doctrine is good, but it is concerning that Bleazby is using this word to as if it is the same as deception. People need to be indoctrinated with goodness, but just not deceptively. As well, she has a strange view of what beliefs are. Religious beliefs are moral in nature and are thus not subject to evidence or reason. It is a simple category error. Anyone who has studied theology would easily notice it. Also, thinking for yourself is too hard. People need community and tradition in order to think given the complexity of the world and the infinitude of how it can be interpreted. Bleazby's views are extremely nihilistic, and amount to a cruel indifferentism.

[@RationalistsAustralia]

It sounds as if you are writing from the perspective of someone who has studied theology. We understand that theology uses words in particular ways - 'formation', for example. But these are not the ways most people use these words. According to the Merriam Webster dictionary, 'indoctrinate' means 'to imbue with a usually partisan or sectarian opinion, point of view, or principle' and they note that 'Indoctrinate means "brainwash" to many people, but its meaning isn't always so negative.' You state that 'religious beliefs ... are ... not subject to evidence and reason.' Here you have encapsulated the basic difference between your (religionists') views and the views of Rationalists. We say all beliefs should be subject to evidence and reason. That's what makes humans human: our power of reasoning and the necessity to justify our beliefs by reference to evidence. You then assert that 'thinking for yourself is too hard'. It's true (drawing upon the work of Daniel Kahneman) that much of a human brain's work is automatic and below the level of everyday consciousness (breathing or walking, for example) and that conscious thinking - reflecting, analysing, asssessing, evaluating - uses a lot of the brain's energy. No doubt it's what you do when you study theology. This sort of conscious thinking is what makes humans human, and it should be encouraged, not rejected in favour of unreflective crowd-like behaviour. You finish with an ad hominem attack on a professional educator, which is simply unworthy. Shame on you.

[@BassMatt1972]

"Religious beliefs are moral in nature and are thus not subject to evidence or reason." - only a moron follows blind faith. Prove your god exists. you cant, because ALL GOODS ARE fallacies FOR THE CONTROL OF THE PLEBEIANS IN MEDIEVAL TIMES. Your commebnt is aperfect example why this RELIGIOUS GARBAGE should be kept OUT of public schools and life. KEEP YOUR RELIGIOUS DELUSIONS TO YOUR OWN PERSONAL LIFE Slow clap for you. arguing inane points with a highly qualified Educator.

[@newmove4378]

It sure sounds as if you've been indoctrinated. Religious beliefs are not moral, they are about subjugation, division and control. that type of instruction should not ever be offered in a public secular school, EVER. No we are not denying christian people the ability to indoctrinate or provide scripture class for their kids, they can do that at home, church, sunday school whatever floats your boat. Forcing others to participate IS a crime.

[@Artman1]

Your morals aren't based on evidence and reason?