Written by wormdrink414 on 26.03.2011 at 07:03

The word doesn't necessarily deserve its negative connotations. Teaching is, more or less, a form of manipulation ("molding" might be a more friendly adjective), and I can't imagine anyone being opposed to teaching. Teachers, on the other hand...

: The easiest way to combat the more nefarious sorts of manipulation is by keeping the church and state as fucking far away from one another as possible and to not send kids to religious schools. (Then again, many of the people I know who went to Catholic school as children are pretty hard-boiled when it comes to their anti-theism.)

THe bible is the best tool against Christianity and it's brand of theism

My public school experience was (from what I could tell) pretty unbiased. We were actually taught logic, foreign language, independent thinking, etc. The only real problem I had was that a lot of the information we were taught was out dated, especially in science (I read Popular Science as a kid and always called out my teachers for dated info. ). Having said that, I don't think my experience was at all typical from a national or world perspective. I believe that the information taught in most schools is swayed to breed complacent worker/consumer adults.

I don't think school is too manipulative... I sure can vouch for it being boring, and for a lot of it being pointless time-wasting shit, but in the end you'll learn a thing or two. Maybe some math here, little bit of science there. Little bit of pointless crap you'll forget about and never use sprinkled around.

To a small extent yes, depending on many other factors besides the government, the teachers and professors themselves might impose their views on certain subjects, also other people in the lives of children influence how they will react to the information presented to them in school.
In my opinion it's impossible to create a manipulation free education system, but we can do our best to develop critical thinking, healthy skepticism and logical thinking in new generations, with that we don't have to worry about anyone manipulating them.

Written by Sophist on 16.07.2011 at 15:33

To a small extent yes, depending on many other factors besides the government, the teachers and professors themselves might impose their views on certain subjects, also other people in the lives of children influence how they will react to the information presented to them in school.
In my opinion it's impossible to create a manipulation free education system, but we can do our best to develop critical thinking, healthy skepticism and logical thinking in new generations, with that we don't have to worry about anyone manipulating them.

Naturally, there is a difference between manipulation and the inevitable life-molding interaction children receive from their peers, teachers and everyone else they interact with, even when those people attempt to impose their ideals on them. In a sense we are all "manipulated" into who we are today...

I think education is OK, you have to have certain knowledge about how the system supposedly works, or better said, about what the system wants you to know. It depends on you to investigate what is beyond education or behind the curtain, if there's really something behind it.

Fortunately today we have Internet and books where you can find much information about almost every theme. There's much literature, but to know what to read and see is not an easy task. Today it is not like the Middle Age, when everything was under a sick strict control.

Religious schools, or the communistic-influenced elementary schools I went to in China, have manipulative tendencies, judging from the kind of material that were taught. Morality, for example, telling little kids what to believe and how to think. I was taught to hate the Japanese, though I was not informed of a logical reason to hate them other than blunt excuses like, "they are stupid", "they are dogs", etc. I don't hate the Japanese actually, by the way.

But I think that kids have a right to know the truth about the world around us. They should be taught science, philosophy to gain an understanding about the world in which they have been born. If they were denied these rights for some reason, that, oppositely, would be considered manipulation, because then the state is denying the kids the right to know the truth, or what humans perceive as the truth, like what happened in the Middle Ages.

So school education is not manipulation as long as the information is taught in an informative manner, in which the material is communicated in a neutral tone. I don't think the teachers should tell the students what to believe, but simply present them with the available evidence on a certain issue, and encourage them to take sides. That would be the idealistic form of education, IMHO. Haha, though idealism leads to disappointment. I have had a neo-nazi as a history teacher before... Oh dear...

Education systems can and do indoctrinate children into the "normal" of the society in which they live. This is not to say that every child who goes to a Catholic school will become a devout catholic, but many most certainly do. As with government schools, the ideology of the country and the perceived national identity are all implemented and indoctrinated upon children during this time. Of course parents, sports teams and indeed music can have similar affects but with varying messages. I guess the lesson is, read far and wide and learn to recognise propaganda, both religions and political and research for yourself. This is where Nationalism, and Civic values are formed in many young people. Not because they think its the best, but because they are told it is. This can be applied in most if not all societies and cultures.

Written by ToMegaTherion on 27.07.2011 at 01:28

This is not to say that every child who goes to a Catholic school will become a devout catholic, but many most certainly do.

Why does being a devout Catholic automatically equate with an individual being indoctrinated? Simply because a child is educated in a particular religiously inclined environment and later in their lives continue to practice such a religion does not necessarily mean that they are indoctrinated.

Personally I think that education is only manipulative if it is allowed to be. That is if an individual goes through their education without developing any independence of thought obviously they will be manipulated into the 'normal' way of thinking about the world, whatever that may be. The blame can be placed as much on the educative institution as the particular individual.

Education, no matter which way you slice it, is inherently manipulative because when you pass on a particular way of thinking to another if that individual only perceives the information in exactly the same way and doesn't consider its value/truth/importance etc then this is indoctrination. Education is designed not simply to pass on a particular way of thinking but to generate new ways of thinking. Whether it, or the individual, lives up to this expectation is another matter.

Written by R'Vannith on 31.07.2011 at 16:19

Written by ToMegaTherion on 27.07.2011 at 01:28

This is not to say that every child who goes to a Catholic school will become a devout catholic, but many most certainly do.

Education, no matter which way you slice it, is inherently manipulative because when you pass on a particular way of thinking to another if that individual only perceives the information in exactly the same way and doesn't consider its value/truth/importance etc then this is indoctrination. Education is designed not simply to pass on a particular way of thinking but to generate new ways of thinking. Whether it, or the individual, lives up to this expectation is another matter.

You are quite correct! Education is in a sense inherently manipulative, but when a system of education is set to take a certain agenda, not so much in the 'knowledge' taught, but in the discipline and lifestyle taught. An understanding of the world is as much to do with the values, and lifestyle that are taught in an education curriculum play a significant role in the indoctrination of individuals, be it into a particular ideological or religious perspective - or into a particular lifestyle.

Well, school education in my country really sucks (public schools, like the one I went to, suck even more). I mean, I have learned nothing there, and the teachers are only interested in getting payd in the end of the month, or being on strike...
The whole thing is: if you are different from the others, then you must be controlated, stopped, and silenced. Everyone must follow the rules, no questions, don't mention the teacher's errors, because they are right and you are wrong, because you are a child.
I really was a trouble in school, the "freaking nerd", you know, people really hated me

Education is certainly intrinsically manipulative. It is acceptable to an extent, for instance, you can't expect a country not to praise itself, and breed a sense of national pride to children. It's when they begin to spread false propaganda about everything that things get worrisome. Even then, the system leaves kids jaded and stripped off of creativity.

The education system here is so shallow, it doesn't allow any space for anything but the one path. Parents and teachers still feel that their kids should either become engineers or doctors. Nothing else. Things are changing, but changing too slowly. Love for the subject, a clear understanding, inculcation of scientific thinking are almost laughed at here. Its all about grades, all about beating the other student. Even teachers teach only in the examination point of view. Ideas wilt and rot away, in this quest for job placements and campus recruitment.

This is why India doesn't produce radical scientists and thinkers. We produce engineers and a shit-load of them, but with a quality which basically makes them over-hyped mechanics. I am one of them, in a course I have a genuine interest for. Now I find myself learning much more from the internet than from the college itself.

I remember every good teacher I ever had; a precious handful of them. A good teacher is the one who cultivates a love for their subject...but all my teachers did was chastise me for not taking exams "seriously". And complain how retarded we were. How they wouldn't have bothered to teach but are doing so cause they "care". Employees, not teachers...fucking money-mongering employees, who are here because they cannot get a proper job.

Written by VloRD on 05.02.2012 at 12:52

teachers...fucking money-mongering employees, who are here because they cannot get a proper job.

it's the same Yavanna pointed it out just before your post. No big deal. But I do understand that India's concept of raising a child( IN A SCHOOL!) is very primitively awry. they just get away from their disciplines and crap money at the end of the day..well, you know the problem is as far as I'm concerned its not in the teaching staff( at any fucking level!)..it's in the whole system. Now blame your government for that, whole education criteria or anything else...that you understand it really well. We only know that India produces two big headed tons of guys of Engineers or Call Centers. Are they bias? or they think that they're only 2 golden assets to shrine on?! >> is question raised by everyone i actually had a chat with in UK, US and even in Germany. If you really guys have a shitload of innovation, hardworking, goal-oriented, team player or any other thesaurus attribute can be attached here..you guys should stand against the government and fight for your justice. I am in India from past 6 months and it has incredibly changed since i last visited in 2009. They are growing, smashing every objectives coming on their way but i think where they are lacking in....It's their basic values/way of working.

I cant figure that Sh*t out as well.....

I dont know about primary education itself....
You dont remeber most of the SH*T that you learn at that time and it takes like forever to figure out what you are passionate about.

I just dropped out of Engineering coz it was fuc*ing boring and i couldn't let my parents dominate me anymore.

Education is Fu*ked up because you dont learn no life lessons.. all is made up bullshit..

Where are free MEN now a days ...

Written by [user id=132201] on 13.06.2012 at 13:56
Where are free MEN now a days ...

>implying there were ever free men

Gigolos cost money.

Although I do agree with you, for the most part.

If you really think about, all teaching period is essentially a form of manipulation of some variety. Every teacher has a different way of coming across a specific message, and what the student gets or even doesn't get out of the teacher will affect how the student will learn, which in itself is pretty much manipulation as well. When we learn, we tell our minds how to respond to certain things, and it affects who we are as people as a result. So you could call it self-manipulation I guess.

And yes, I see people have made this point already in earlier comments, but whatever.

Excerpt from "THE SEMI-REGULAR DOGMATIC 7: DOCTRINE":

"WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ?EDUCATION" AND ?INDOCTRINATION"? THE DISTINCTION MADE IN THE ORDINARY DIALECT CLAIMS TO BE ONE OF PROCEDURE BUT IN FACT IS ONLY ONE OF CONTENT. THE IMPARTING OF DOCTRINE (TEACHING) FOR THE PURPOSE OF INSTILLING BELIEFS IS PRACTICED BY ALL SOCIETIES, AND MUST BE; BUT SOMEHOW WHEN SCHOOLS AND PRISONS IN ENEMY SOCIETIES DO THIS, WE PIOUSLY SPEAK OF ?INDOCTRINATION", AND CONTRAST THAT TO WHAT OUR PUPILS AND INMATES GET ― THE GOOD STUFF. THE PROSECUTORIAL/JUDICIAL SYSTEM IS REFERRED TO NOT AS ?PUNISHMENT" OR ?RETRIBUTION" BUT AS ?JUSTICE" AND ?CORRECTIONS". AND, IT GOES WITHOUT SAYING, OUR CHILDREN GO TO STATE-RUN SCHOOLS TO BE ?EDUCATED".

THE DISTINCTION IS NONSENSE, OF COURSE. THIS IS ALL INDOCTRINATION. I PREFER TO USE THE LEFTOVER WORD ?EDUCATION" FOR THE PROCESS IN WHICH AN INDIVIDUAL STUDIES AND LEARNS ON ITS OWN, BUT THAT DOES NOT MATTER. THE POINT IS TO MAINTAIN A CONSISTENT CONCEPT OF INDOCTRINATION. IT DIFFERS FROM PERSUASION IN THAT IT IS USED ON PERSONS WITHOUT PRECONCEIVED NOTIONS; IT IS AN ATTEMPT TO ?FILL AN EMPTY VESSEL".

THOSE WHO ARE SO SUCCESSFULLY INDOCTRINATED THAT THEY ARE LATER UNWILLING TO CHALLENGE THE DOCTRINE, EVEN IN THE FACE OF OBVIOUS INCONSISTENCIES OR IMPRESSIVE ARGUMENTS FOR OPPOSING BELIEFS, ARE ?DOCTRINAIRE". (CLEARLY I WOULD NOT CONSIDER THAT SYNONYMOUS WITH ?DOGMATIC".) PROBABLY THE MOST IMPORTANT PART OF ANY ACCEPTABLE DOCTRINE IS A REJECTION OF THE DOCTRINAIRE ATTITUDE. IF YOUNG PERSONS CAN BE INDOCTRINATED TO QUESTION WHAT THEY HAVE BEEN TOLD, AT LEAST THERE IS A CHANCE THAT ANY OTHER FLAWS IN THE DOCTRINE WILL NOT BE PERPETUATED THROUGHOUT THE GENERATIONS. "

More at this website. Very rational, though I'm not sure why it's necessary to have it all in CAPS. And for that, I apologize for posting it in its original form.

http://the-stewardship.org/dogmatic/doctrine.htm

Written by R'Vannith on 31.07.2011 at 16:19

Written by ToMegaTherion on 27.07.2011 at 01:28

This is not to say that every child who goes to a Catholic school will become a devout catholic, but many most certainly do.

Why does being a devout Catholic automatically equate with an individual being indoctrinated? Simply because a child is educated in a particular religiously inclined environment and later in their lives continue to practice such a religion does not necessarily mean that they are indoctrinated.

Personally I think that education is only manipulative if it is allowed to be. That is if an individual goes through their education without developing any independence of thought obviously they will be manipulated into the 'normal' way of thinking about the world, whatever that may be. The blame can be placed as much on the educative institution as the particular individual.

Education, no matter which way you slice it, is inherently manipulative because when you pass on a particular way of thinking to another if that individual only perceives the information in exactly the same way and doesn't consider its value/truth/importance etc then this is indoctrination. Education is designed not simply to pass on a particular way of thinking but to generate new ways of thinking. Whether it, or the individual, lives up to this expectation is another matter.

Well I asked my religion teacher back in highschool why should my country determine my religion. To that he replied: "Because it is so!". Maybe a general religion class should do the trick (including the history of all religions and not just one). But honestly it sounds like wasting hours in the kids schedules.

Written by rekkuza- on 19.07.2011 at 05:33

Religious schools, or the communistic-influenced elementary schools I went to in China, have manipulative tendencies, judging from the kind of material that were taught. Morality, for example, telling little kids what to believe and how to think. I was taught to hate the Japanese, though I was not informed of a logical reason to hate them other than blunt excuses like, "they are stupid", "they are dogs", etc. I don't hate the Japanese actually, by the way.

But I think that kids have a right to know the truth about the world around us. They should be taught science, philosophy to gain an understanding about the world in which they have been born. If they were denied these rights for some reason, that, oppositely, would be considered manipulation, because then the state is denying the kids the right to know the truth, or what humans perceive as the truth, like what happened in the Middle Ages.

So school education is not manipulation as long as the information is taught in an informative manner, in which the material is communicated in a neutral tone. I don't think the teachers should tell the students what to believe, but simply present them with the available evidence on a certain issue, and encourage them to take sides. That would be the idealistic form of education, IMHO. Haha, though idealism leads to disappointment. I have had a neo-nazi as a history teacher before... Oh dear...

All China, Vietnam, and maybe Soviet (pre Iron curtain falls) are same as somewhat of manipulation... maybe Japan too, not sure of Korea... but that typical of education inducing too much grandeur of delusion to how children feel about their countries..

Written by Evil Chip on 19.12.2012 at 07:23

Well I asked my religion teacher back in highschool why should my country determine my religion. To that he replied: "Because it is so!". Maybe a general religion class should do the trick (including the history of all religions and not just one). But honestly it sounds like wasting hours in the kids schedules.

I went to a Catholic highschool myself and they had a general sort of religion class, which was also compulsory. Of course they taught us about the Catholic religion but they tried to give us a broader perspective by devoting equal parts of the year to other main religions (Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism). Also had some other religions thrown in there too, like Norse mythology for example. As for whether it was a waste of time... well there's only so much you can learn in short periods of time but I found it to be beneficial, especially stuff like the Norse mythology as that was the only bit of medieval history which our school provided. Found it interesting as that's what I enjoy (medieval history that is), been studying it since graduating highschool.

Written by R'Vannith on 19.12.2012 at 15:30

Written by Evil Chip on 19.12.2012 at 07:23

Well I asked my religion teacher back in highschool why should my country determine my religion. To that he replied: "Because it is so!". Maybe a general religion class should do the trick (including the history of all religions and not just one). But honestly it sounds like wasting hours in the kids schedules.

I went to a Catholic highschool myself and they had a general sort of religion class, which was also compulsory. Of course they taught us about the Catholic religion but they tried to give us a broader perspective by devoting equal parts of the year to other main religions (Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism). Also had some other religions thrown in there too, like Norse mythology for example. As for whether it was a waste of time... well there's only so much you can learn in short periods of time but I found it to be beneficial, especially stuff like the Norse mythology as that was the only bit of medieval history which our school provided. Found it interesting as that's what I enjoy (medieval history that is), been studying it since graduating highschool.

Well if it's made good and from a wider perspective then I guess it's good. That's the difference between a doctrinal religion class and an historical religion class. I had the first one appereantly.

In Syria, school's definitely some time-wasting shit. Don't ask why.

Written by Oaken on 27.12.2012 at 17:08

In Syria, school's definitely some time-wasting shit. Don't ask why.

but it"s important to ask

I don't think it's manipulation. I believe it's badly conducted, most of the education systems all over the world are not adapted to the modern world and simply rule itself for a standard of rules that were set a lot of years ago. Some education systems ostracize talented people, people who are talented in a lot of stuff that isn't taught in schools. School doesn't makes you ready for the world, it just trains you to be some office desk rat who's reading books. I have a degree in Economics and most of the teaching is theorical and it shouldn't, it should be more pratical, because that's what Economics is. Most of us have to learn mathematical models that don't even are fit for reality...any reality.

Just listen to one of the biggest specialists in Education and give me your feedback: Sir Ken Robinson.
Videos: here, here and here.

I think it can very easily be argued that school prepares you to be a hard worker, and good at following and taking orders, and doing mindless work. It teaches you that if you do all that, you'll be rewarded with a good college, then a good job, and then all the THINGS you think will make you happy. You're like a mouse on a wheel, always running towards that big lump of cheese.

Well the truth is (and they've done lots of scientific studies on this) that monetary rewards do not inspire people to be better at what they do, unless it is physical labour (like on a building site). In fact the opposite is true of even the most rudimentary cerebral tasks - the less money that people are offered, the more successful they are. To be successful at using your brain and your imagination, you need an open mind, creativity, and to not be concerned with thinking about how much money you can make. To give an example, we all have metal bands that we love. These bands are far from rich. In fact many of them are only just making enough money to record a new album and pay for touring. Many of them have second jobs. There's no monetary reward at the end of the tunnel for them but they continue to write GREAT MUSIC because they love it.

I always warn parents with little kids to be careful about what school does to their precious ones

School was created to enslave our children and to prevent them from using critical thinking.
It is a tool used for national crowd & thoughts control.
School teaches them to sit and be quiet like a herd of sheeps instead of letting them express their opinions and think by themselves.
School teaches them that what teachers tell them is a truth that can never be denied or questioned.
School teaches them that one who questions authority will be punished no matter the way it was done.
School teaches them that without diplomas whatever you're skilled at doing is worthless and insignificant.
School teaches them that other people's opinions rule our very existence, our identity.
School teaches them that if you don't do like everyone else you're not fit to shovel shit from one place to another.
In other words, being original/marginal, is a form of weakness that society must be rid of.
School is a form of prison that traps us and restrain us.

-Trolling 101 by Guib-

I was born in Brazil but moved to the United States at an early age so I've experienced two different educational systems.

While in Brazil I attended both a Private and a Public school. While my public school was very good by Brazilian standards, the education I got there was years behind the schooling I got at the private institution. When I moved to the US I was shocked to see that my 3rd World Country education was on par (and ahead in Math and Science) to a 1st world country.

While the basics were roughly the same in the two countries, the US system is a lot better. This is because they actually separate the students who don't give a shit from the ones that actually care and allow these individuals to take advanced courses. Not only that, but the diversity of subjects which one can choose to study is quite remarkable.

Personally I do not believe in Public education. It is wasteful, and it leads people into believing they are entitled to an education (rather than recognizing the privilege they have). However given the perils of the system, I do believe that the US has gotten the basic frame work correctly.

In a perfect world all institutions would be private and run in a perfectly competitive market system. This way if you think your education is being manipulative you could just go across the street to a completely different institution. And since people would be directly paying for their own education, they would actually start to give a shit about it.

Written by 4look4rd on 27.01.2013 at 16:42

In a perfect world all institutions would be private and run in a perfectly competitive market system. This way if you think your education is being manipulative you could just go across the street to a completely different institution. And since people would be directly paying for their own education, they would actually start to give a shit about it.

If an educative institution had as one of its goals to engender a particular mindset or behaviour in its students I think it would go well out of its way to ensure they DON'T know about it. Manipulation often goes undetected. Wouldn't be much difference between private and public as far as I can tell. I mean private institutions are just as likely to have their own agendas and the potential for manipulation would be as likely to occur there as in a public institution. And probably less likely to be detected as well.