British think tank recommends atheism be included in new RE curriculum

[lord667]

http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=2533881

Senior IPPR research fellow Ben Rogers said it would be wrong to give in to the demands of some commentators for RE to be scrapped altogether, given that only 7% of the population went to their church, synagogue or mosque every week. “RE has an important place in the curriculum – but only if it’s brought up to date,” he said.

 

[Wandrail]

I'm really not familiar with England's public school agendas so I can't comment too much on this, but government run education in my opinion always becomes a source of indoctrination. If the government wants kids to abandon the religion their parents are trying to bring them up with, they'll put that bent in their teaching, if they want them to become catholic, or muslim, or anything at all the same thing applies. I don't think its the government's place to promote religion in public schools, and I also don't think it should be trying to promote humanism, which they do in US schools. In the end I don't think there should be public schools, period.

 

[lord667]

I have to say I'm all for it, personally. Religious Education at school, for me, consisted of three years reading the Old Testament (thus covering Christianity and Judaism at a stroke), a term or so skimming the surface of Islam, and then about a year and a half of mostly Ethics type lessons. I don't think atheism or any non-Abrahamic religion was ever touched on as a serious proposition, though there were a few Sikh factlet posters up on the walls of the RE room. I'm pretty damn sure we never read any holy books apart from the Old Testament.

Philosophy and logic as a whole is somewhat lacking from the English school system. Up till now, it's not been part of the National Curriculum, except for a few specialised crash courses as part of English Language or Religious Studies. I think the first time I heard the name Bertrand Russell, in an educational context, was in the first year of University, during a course on predicate calculus. It's just worrying that we can go into so much depth on two or three religions and yet completely ignore topics such as intellectual rigour or even polytheism! So I welcome the IPPR's suggestions and hope the Government approves them.

 

[Wandrail]

I detect too much of a political and social agenda in the curriculum of US public schools, and its sure not helping the kids - the more money we pump into these public schools, the worse the scores seem to be. Like everything in government, there is no need to excel as a teacher in a pubic school because there is no competition. You never have to worry about getting fired or anything, and there is nothing except self-motivation to make you do your best, and when it comes to a day-to-day job that only goes so far. Everyone knows private and perochial schools offer the best education, and if the government had not thrown its monkeywrench into the schooling market, private schools would be everywhere and alot more varied in content (so you wouldn't have to attend a catholic private school) and vastly more affordable. So much of each citizen's paycheck is dumped into this education fund, and its all wasted. I personally think someone should be tarred and feathered over it.

 

[Rusty]

Religious Education at school, for me, consisted of three years reading the Old Testament (thus covering Christianity and Judaism at a stroke), a term or so skimming the surface of Islam, and then about a year and a half of mostly Ethics type lessons. I don't think atheism or any non-Abrahamic religion was ever touched on as a serious proposition, though there were a few Sikh factlet posters up on the walls of the RE room. I'm pretty damn sure we never read any holy books apart from the Old Testament.

Exactly the same for me, except I don't think we did Islam and we brushed the surface of Sikhism instead. And it was just pointless.

 

[Abou]

I am quite pleased with the idea of this. People should really learn about others about them as education is the best way to combat blind hate.

Another interesting side-effect might be people choosing their own religion rather than being stuck with what they were given upon birth.

 

[[0hr]Sunlapse]

I would be all for it.... but in these days i know it would never happen. Religion has too much of a strong hold on everything still.

 

[mourningstar]

i think i've learnt more about religion with my philosophy classes than during the hours of "religion"; this because, imo, it is more interesting and useful to understand the concepts that lie behind religion, god, his existence, etc, rather than some stories about different religions. just my thought (dunno how much on topic :Spin: ).

I think the first time I heard the name Bertrand Russell, in an educational context, was in the first year of University, during a course on predicate calculus.

it might also depend on how your philosophy teacher went through the subject. i studied all the way to university in italy, so i can't speak for myself, but for example for my boyfriend an a-level in philosophy was enough to get into russell a lot (then of course you have to keep on studying the subjects you like).

 

[lord667]

it might also depend on how your philosophy teacher went through the subject. i studied all the way to university in italy, so i can't speak for myself, but for example for my boyfriend an a-level in philosophy was enough to get into russell a lot (then of course you have to keep on studying the subjects you like).

I didn't even get the option to do a Philosophy A-Level. I suppose I could have gone to community college instead of sixth form, but I had a full scholarship to a top private school, and that's not something you turn your back on without a lot of thought.