Isn't it Obvious that Children Raised in Christian Homes Have Been Brainwashed?
Isn’t it obvious that in a Christian dominated culture children are taught to believe before they could ever come to their own conclusions through reason? And in such a dominant Christian culture isn’t it obvious that these children who are raised to believe receive certain benefits from the social relationships of the church they’re involved in that make faith comfortable for them? What best explains why the Amish children stay in the Amish fold if they never leave their particular small culture? What best explains the fact that many young people lose their faith when they get out of such a church environment by attending a University? And isn’t it obvious that if a child is told s/he should not doubt but have faith or else s/he will be eternally punished that this provides a very strong firewall against honest doubt? Child molesters tell their victims not to tell anyone or else they might be killed. Is that much different? And isn’t it obvious that this whole process is best described as brainwashing or mind control? What is it, if that doesn’t explain it? And isn’t it obvious that most of us could be persuaded or manipulated into thinking and doing what we normally would consider false or wrong? Doesn’t the malleability of human thinking alone call upon us all to be skeptics? I think so. If you disagree, why not?
The characteristics of a brainwashed person are 1) xenophobia, or the fear of outsiders, an us/them mentality (which includes the fear of reading what those who disagree write); 2) A high degree of emotionally attachment to a belief; 3) That a person highly prefers his/her beliefs are true. And, 4) wishful thinking, which clouds a person’s judgment. There are other factors.
Believers are blinded by their passions because they have been brainwashed by their culture. Our culturally inherited beliefs are what we use to “see” with. These inherited beliefs are much like our very eyes themselves, so it’s extremely difficult to examine that which we use to see with. We cannot easily pluck out our eyes to look at them since we use our eyes to see. But we must do this if we truly want to examine that which we were taught to believe. Again, it’s a simple fact that brainwashed people do not know they have been brainwashed!
The characteristics of a brainwashed person are 1) xenophobia, or the fear of outsiders, an us/them mentality (which includes the fear of reading what those who disagree write); 2) A high degree of emotionally attachment to a belief; 3) That a person highly prefers his/her beliefs are true. And, 4) wishful thinking, which clouds a person’s judgment. There are other factors.
Believers are blinded by their passions because they have been brainwashed by their culture. Our culturally inherited beliefs are what we use to “see” with. These inherited beliefs are much like our very eyes themselves, so it’s extremely difficult to examine that which we use to see with. We cannot easily pluck out our eyes to look at them since we use our eyes to see. But we must do this if we truly want to examine that which we were taught to believe. Again, it’s a simple fact that brainwashed people do not know they have been brainwashed!
23 comments:
It's only obvious once you have 'broken though to the other side'.
I was raised a catholic and, despite leaving the church almost 30 years ago, I can still acknowledge all 4 of your characteristics operating in my life. They are heavily subdued by rationality - but the early years of indoctrination are still prevalent in my 'default' thinking.
brainwashed people do not know they have been brainwashed!
Isn't it possible that you too could be brainwashed though? How would you know that you're not?
Anyways, I don't think Christians are brainwashed. Some may be, but I would argue that they are not true Christians.
As a Christian, I'd be the first to admit that the vast majority of Christians (in America at least) are just ignorant of what Christianity actually is and why it is true. Much less, they haven't the slightest idea of how to answer simple questions posed about their faith.
I don't think that would be classified as brainwashing though. Ignorance would be a better way of putting it.
A true scotsman would never use that fallacy
yes it is obvious
John, you're thinking too hard. Or, perhaps not hard enough.
Using your logic, we have been brainwashed about everything, and parents should have no right to teach their children about anything. Even "objective" facts are questionable, as our understanding of facts depend upon an epistemology which we have been taught.
Who, then, should decide? Should we be kept as blank slates until we're old enough to learn critical thinking? btw, that would include us not learning language at an early age, since language has a lot to do with how we understand things.
1 -Religion encompasses a body of philosophies that almost always incorporate the supernatural.
The exclusion of the supernatural element does not create a safe, sane philosophy.
We conclude, then, that there are other non-religious, secular philosophies equally (or more) dangerous than religion.
One such dangerous philosophy advocates the licensing parents.
Thomas, I once thought as you, and I could not see reality as it really is. I once thought I was a real Christian, and most others were ignorant, but I eventually had to recognize my cognitive dissonance and have the integrity to acknowledge the facts and evidence as they really are. I hope you too can have the honesty to know when you are wrong and accept the facts and change your life. But until then, I'm keeping my children away from you and your congregation.
Thomas, I once thought as you, and I could not see reality as it really is.
Tyson, how could you know that you are seeing reality as it really is? What is your basis for reasoning? How can you trust your mental capacities, given atheism?
I once thought I was a real Christian, and most others were ignorant, but I eventually had to recognize my cognitive dissonance and have the integrity to acknowledge the facts and evidence as they really are.
Tell me how you really feel about me.
I hope you too can have the honesty to know when you are wrong and accept the facts and change your life.
The facts supporting your viewpoint are lacking, Tyson. For example, how did something come from nothing? How did life come from non-life? How did intelligence develop from non-intelligence? How can you know that you are reasoning correctly? How can you trust your thoughts? Where did the laws of logic come from?
But until then, I'm keeping my children away from you and your congregation.
First of all, it’s quite ironic that this post is about allowing children to think freely and not be brainwashed by their parents. Aren’t you just doing the same thing that Loftus claims that Christian parents are doing?
Secondly, why keep your children away from me? Just picture for a moment a Christian saying that to you. Sounds pretty foolish and close-minded, right? I hope a Christian wouldn’t say that to you. I’m sure they do though from time to time.
You sound like a nice guy. I’d have no problem letting my children hang around you or with your children. I’d even let you talk freely about how you think there’s no god to them. Because I truly believe people should think for themselves and use reason. I’m not so sure you do.
The facts supporting your viewpoint are lacking, Tyson. For example, how did something come from nothing? How did life come from non-life? How did intelligence develop from non-intelligence? How can you know that you are reasoning correctly? How can you trust your thoughts? Where did the laws of logic come from?
God did it.
That's not much of a better answer...aren't we allowed to be humble and simply say, "I don't know?"
God did it.
“Evolution did it,” says Jeff.
That's not much of a better answer...aren't we allowed to be humble and simply say, "I don't know?"
Jeff, if you don’t know if you can trust your thoughts or the laws of logic, you can’t even know that you don’t know. Get it? You have no reason to reason. If evolution did it, your thoughts are the result of time and space having its way with matter. Your thoughts are just matter in motion. You can’t trust them. You must assert that chance, time, and matter came together to formulate true thought but you have no basis whatsoever for making this claim.
Thomas i think you are really missing something, which is what brainwashing tends to do.Creates a type of tunnel vision !.
Jeff is in fact actually using some logic and good reasoning ,in that the presence and effects of evolution are quite plain to see.Its still actually happening around us all the time as well.
There is plenty of (evidence) to support evolution in this world.
Can you supply good (evidence) for your reason of belief in God/s ?.Or is it only by faith and what you have been taught that you believe ?.
Thomas we see time and chance playing a part in evolution all the time,there is a certain amount of chance involved even in your birth.Given that with many other different situations you actually could have turned out quite different than you actually have.
Even within your own personal being, its all a part of actual evolution in motion.
Now do you really believe it took the hand of some God some intelligent designer to make you actually happen as you have?.If so please supply the evidence?.
If not i suggest there is evidence that some random selection and chance actually exists in this world.
What reason would we have not believe it could happen when we can already see it does.Why would we discard obvious evidence, for faith in that what absolutely lacks any.
Without evidence it would take some Brainwashing.
John: I noticed you didn't reference any material in your initial post. Can you please provide some hard data (behavioural studies, etc.) that supports your theories. Thanks in advance.
BTW, I found this interesting and applicable post on the AllPhilosophy website:
"But we are only brainwashed when we cease to think about what we believe in. You can be Christian and totally competent, because you think about what you're taught and you choose to be Christian. You become brainwashed when you no longer are Christian or religious by act of the reaffirmation of your own will. You simply are because you're told to be. But religion does not equal brainwashing."
I would also be amiss if I didn't point out a wonderful article that discusses how brainwashing is actually carried out. Note specifically the requirements. Julia Taylor, How Brainstorming Works.
This is what I struggle with the most about religion! This is what fires me up! It is 100% brainwashing. I don’t think it is malicious by parents or authority, they truly believe what they are teaching is truth (most of them anyway). Regardless it is brainwashing. If, as a parent, your ‘faith’ or belief is SO strong – why not introduce other beliefs to your child. Why not give them a fair shot?
I 100% do not belief in any bible god, as my parents did not when I was a child. However, my daughter deservers to figure this out for herself. I will never hide what I believe but I will educate her on everything. She is entlied to learn as much as she can and come to her own. Most (if not all) Christians don’t do this – that is the problem. Not only do they not encourage free thinking – they tell young children that if they do not believe they will go to ‘hell’ – eternal scary hell. Please tell me how that is not brainwashing or cruel?? Christian parents – look at what you do to your children – why not introduce them to other thoughts – are you that scared that you are wrong?
And to all the posters who say “how do you know your (atheists) are not brainwashing your children?
We don’t use scare tactics (promise of hell), we don’t keep them in tight communities (and in some occasions home school with very limited contact with other ways of thinking), we don’t start bringing them to institutions (churches) that look down on any other way of thinking, we don’t tell them that some known science is wrong, we don’t monitor the books they read etc.
A lot of people don’t realize how powerful what they teach really is – the promise of hell is huge! That is brainwashing.
I think ahswan makes a good point with "language has a lot to do with how we understand things". It's interesting that in John's piece he says "many young people lose their faith when they get out of such a church environment". Isn't it an example of the remnants of brainwashing that we use the word 'lose' in that context when 'discard', 'reject' or 'overcome' would seem, IMHO, to be more appropriate.
Hometown, thanks for the link. It's in that link I read these words:
The agent (the brainwasher) must have complete control over the target (the brainwashee) so that sleep patterns, eating, using the bathroom and the fulfillment of other basic human needs depend on the will of the agent. In the brainwashing process, the agent systematically breaks down the target's identity to the point that it doesn't work anymore. The agent then replaces it with another set of behaviors, attitudes and beliefs that work in the target's current environment.
Doesn't that sound just like parents who have total control over the early beliefs of their children?
It certainly does but it doesn't sound like any Christian parent I know and if I did, I'd be reporting them to Child Services!!
Some of my closest friends are Christian parents with young children and I know of none who control their child's bathroom patterns or eating patterns as a means to break down their child's identity. Considering the number of Christian families around the world, do you really think this kind of behaviour goes on without anyone noticing or complaining...?
I wonder though, did your parents (assuming they were Christian) strip you of your identity and do you know of Christian parents who exert this kind of control over their children? If you do, please call the authorities!!
(Sorry to bug you again but could I get some hard data that supports your theories as previously requested?)
Gandolf,
Thomas i think you are really missing something, which is what brainwashing tends to do.Creates a type of tunnel vision !.
What is your evidence that I’ve been brainwashed? Neither you nor John have provided any actual hard evidence of brainwashing.
Jeff is in fact actually using some logic and good reasoning ,in that the presence and effects of evolution are quite plain to see.Its still actually happening around us all the time as well.
I think you’ve missed my point. Neither Jeff nor you could give me a reason to trust our reasoning skills which would have had to evolve over billions of years. If reasoning evolved, how can you know it evolved correctly? There’s no way to know that your thinking skills are correct.
Are the laws of logic objective standards? If so, please provide evidence for this, given atheism. If evolution did it, your thoughts are the result of time and space randomly having its way with matter. Your thoughts are just matter in motion. You can’t trust them. You must assert that chance, time, and matter came together to formulate true thought but you have no basis whatsoever for making this claim. Show me the evidence for this.
There is plenty of (evidence) to support evolution in this world.
Great. How did it get started? Prove how life came from non-life. Can’t? Then you believe that life came from non-life by faith with absolutely no evidence. Yet you rule out the existence of God before you even begin. Why?
I hope you realize that evolution itself has nothing to do with the debate over whether or not God exists. There are plenty of theistic evolutionists. The more important question is over abiogenesis. It seems that the general consensus among atheists is that they don’t know how abiogenesis occurred yet they know that it couldn’t have been an intelligent designer. Doesn’t that strike you as strange? It’s ruling out an option with no evidence for doing so.
Can you supply good (evidence) for your reason of belief in God/s ?.Or is it only by faith and what you have been taught that you believe ?.
What sort of evidence would you accept? Seriously. What kind of evidence would it take for you to believe in God? I need to know this first so that I know how to proceed. Most atheists I’ve talked to do not have reasonable expectations of evidence. What would you accept?
What reason would we have not believe it could happen when we can already see it does.
Again, you mistake the process of evolution as proof that God can’t exist. How does that logically follow? As I said above, evolution itself doesn’t have all that much to do with whether God exists or not.
Thomas said..."I think you’ve missed my point. Neither Jeff nor you could give me a reason to trust our reasoning skills which would have had to evolve over billions of years. If reasoning evolved, how can you know it evolved correctly? There’s no way to know that your thinking skills are correct."
And yet somehow Thomas believes in God/s.
"Are the laws of logic objective standards? If so, please provide evidence for this, given atheism. If evolution did it, your thoughts are the result of time and space randomly having its way with matter. Your thoughts are just matter in motion. You can’t trust them. You must assert that chance, time, and matter came together to formulate true thought but you have no basis whatsoever for making this claim. Show me the evidence for this."
So far we have a fair amount of evidence Thomas,that it seems thats how it might have come about.I never trust nothing completely!,please show me better evidence that suggests God/s were involved?.At least for now i think it can be said i assert more of what can actually be experienced and seen,would i be more objective to have faith and assertions in fairy tales?.
"Great. How did it get started? Prove how life came from non-life. Can’t? Then you believe that life came from non-life by faith with absolutely no evidence. Yet you rule out the existence of God before you even begin. Why?"
So whats the options ?we dont (yet) quite know how it all happened so lets just believe stories made up about god/s?.That would seem intelligent to you?.
Its your assertion that i totally rule out existence of God/s Thomas,but like proof of most everything else in this world ! surely we should be seeing some good evidence soon.The idea of God/s didnt only happen with the last shower of rain,thousands of years we have waited for evidence for some little amount of decent proof.Should we continue with faith in pink unicorns too?.
"I hope you realize that evolution itself has nothing to do with the debate over whether or not God exists. There are plenty of theistic evolutionists. The more important question is over abiogenesis. It seems that the general consensus among atheists is that they don’t know how abiogenesis occurred yet they know that it couldn’t have been an intelligent designer. Doesn’t that strike you as strange? It’s ruling out an option with no evidence for doing so."
Thomas there is many ideas being looked into but at least we have some evidence for possible proof of certain things such as isotopes carbon iron sulfur etc.With so many things in this world having shown at least some available evidence,is it really so excessively expectant to think some evidence of God/s should have possibly arrived by now?.After all the theory of God/s have been studied for some time.We actually have some decent evidence for many things yet no decent evidence for God/s long supposed to exist,doesnt that strike you as rather strange?.
"What sort of evidence would you accept? Seriously. What kind of evidence would it take for you to believe in God? I need to know this first so that I know how to proceed. Most atheists I’ve talked to do not have reasonable expectations of evidence. What would you accept?"
After us humans waiting for thousands of years is a need for at least some real evidence of God/s really so unreasonable?.Tell me Thomas how long do you intend on having some faith in pink unicorns,without some real evidence arriving.If you dont believe in pink unicorns is it only because bibles havent been written about them ?,if not then what reasons exist at the moment for your non belief.As i suggest my disbelief of God/s at the moment is likely for much the same reasons,and maybe not so unreasonable at all.
"What is your evidence that I’ve been brainwashed? Neither you nor John have provided any actual hard evidence of brainwashing."
Thomas when we hear your good reasons with evidence for belief in God/s,we will know it cant ever have been a matter of any brainwashing.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/brainwashing?qsrc=2888
I personally have doubts that brainwashing must always include "complete control over the target (the brainwashee) so that sleep patterns, eating, using the bathroom and the fulfillment of other basic human needs depend on the will of the agent."
But i personally think it would be a fair bet that often most likely at least verbal threats and suggestions of torture would be used.
What greater threat is there than suggesting (eternal) suffering in some place called hell?.
And torture is suggested to not need to always be physical http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/torture?qsrc=2888
This http://people.howstuffworks.com/brainwashing.htm seems to suggest brainwashing is only about "The agent then replaces it with another set of behaviors, attitudes and beliefs that work in the target's current environment"
Which seems to suggest nobody without prior behaviors attitudes or beliefs etc ,could ever be brainwashed.
Maybe without prior beliefs being present,its not so much about brainwashing but more about mind control.
Gandolf,
I said, “Neither Jeff nor you could give me a reason to trust our reasoning skills which would have had to evolve over billions of years. If reasoning evolved, how can you know it evolved correctly? There’s no way to know that your thinking skills are correct.”
Your answer is:
And yet somehow Thomas believes in God/s.
This is a non-answer. I’ll ask again: How can you know that reasoning evolved correctly? What is your evidence? Have you none?
So far we have a fair amount of evidence Thomas,that it seems thats how it might have come about.
Just think about the implications of that. If logic developed over time that would mean it is still evolving. Meaning that things like truth, facts, and evidences would also be changing over time. Nothing is set in stone. Again, how could you know that it evolved consistently and right? How can you know that the way you reason is actually leading you to the truth (if there is such a thing as truth!). The fact is that you couldn’t know that in any way without using your reasoning skills which ends up being a circular argument.
I never trust nothing completely!
Except for that statement, right? It’s like saying I can’t type a word in English. It’s self-defeating because I just did it.
please show me better evidence that suggests God/s were involved?
It goes something like this: Laws of logic are immaterial, transcendent, and universal. Atheism as a philosophical system is completely unable to account for how an immaterial, transcendent, and universal law is possible in an evolved universe.
Laws of logic are immaterial: they can’t be tasted, touched, heard, seen, or smelled. If this is true, then that means there could be other things which are immaterial and impossible to empirically test.
Laws of logic are transcendent: they are not dependent upon the universe. They are not found in matter or inside trees. Logical absolutes would exist if the universe didn’t exist. Now if logic evolved, that would make logic relative to each individual which means that logic can’t really be used to prove anything at all.
Laws of logic are universal: they apply to everyone regardless of whether or not everyone chooses to use them.
Therefore, laws of logic are immaterial, transcendent, and universal. How does atheism account for something that is immaterial, transcendent, and universal? It can’t do so. Therefore, atheism should be abandoned in favor of another viewpoint that would be more consistent. God has revealed himself as immaterial (cannot be empirically detected unless he chooses to), transcendent (self-existing and beyond this world), and universal (his presence applies to everyone regardless of whether they like him or not). It follows logically that it is highly possible that God exists rather than him not existing.
Gandolf (continued)
At least for now i think it can be said i assert more of what can actually be experienced and seen,would i be more objective to have faith and assertions in fairy tales?.
So your basis for truth is your personal experience? If so, then what about the billions of people who have claimed to experience God? Further, what is your proof that I believe in fairy tales? I know atheists like to say things like “fairy tales” and “pink unicorn” and “big sky daddy” because it probably makes them sleep better at night and it is an attempt to discredit theists by poisoning the well, but I hope you realize that these are not arguments. Instead of just asserting something to be so, why don’t you prove it to be so?
So whats the options ?we dont (yet) quite know how it all happened so lets just believe stories made up about god/s?.That would seem intelligent to you?
First prove that the stories are made up. Secondly, my question was why you rule out the possibility of a god before you begin with no evidence. Again, why? Does that seem intelligent to you? Third, you should admit that you have faith that abiogenesis didn’t involve any god(s) because you actually do not have any proof of this.
It’s interesting that you think it is more intelligent to simply assert that life came from non-life knowing full well that you haven’t the slightest idea of how that happened but you do know that it couldn’t have been a god. How is that being an open-minded, free-thinker? A true free-thinker would have to come to this question and admit that since we don’t know how that happened, every option is on the table. Agnosticism would be a more honest position than atheism. Perhaps you are an agnostic? You certainly don’t sound like one.
surely we should be seeing some good evidence soon.The idea of God/s didnt only happen with the last shower of rain,thousands of years we have waited for evidence for some little amount of decent proof.Should we continue with faith in pink unicorns too?.
Does this not strike you as a bit ironic? You are saying how ridiculous it is to believe in God because he has had thousands of years to give the kind of evidence you want. That’s ridiculous to you. But you also say at the same time that we should be seeing some good evidence soon for abiogenesis. Aren’t you doing the same thing you’re accusing me of? You don’t see the evidence for God nor for abiogenesis, yet you know God doesn’t exist but you have faith in abiogenesis. Do you not see the irony?
Which makes more sense:
1) God couldn’t exist but we still don’t know how abiogenesis happened.
2) God could exist because we still don’t know how abiogenesis happened.
I would hope you would say #2 but it doesn’t sound like that’s what you are saying.
is it really so excessively expectant to think some evidence of God/s should have possibly arrived by now?
Again, what evidence would you expect to see? Be specific and maybe I can point you in the right direction.
Further, if God truly exists, why would you presume that our finite minds should be able to determine what God should or shouldn’t be doing?
We actually have some decent evidence for many things yet no decent evidence for God/s long supposed to exist,doesnt that strike you as rather strange?.
I think there is plenty of evidence. I’d just like to know what types or kinds of evidence you would expect to find. You sound like you’d only accept empirical forms of evidence yet you don’t hold your own viewpoints to that same standard.
Tell me Thomas how long do you intend on having some faith in pink unicorns,without some real evidence arriving.
Here’s the difference: I have real evidence for the existence of God. I do not have real evidence for the existence of pink unicorns. What kinds of evidence would you accept for proving God? Be specific and we can finally move forward.
I asked, “What is your evidence that I’ve been brainwashed?”
Your answer: Thomas when we hear your good reasons with evidence for belief in God/s,we will know it cant ever have been a matter of any brainwashing.
Translation: you have zero evidence that I’ve been brainwashed and you operate under the assumption that the only ones who are brainwashed are those who don’t believe the same things you do. Is that close-minded or open-minded? Maybe you should stop claiming that anyone who doesn’t see things like you is brainwashed since you have no evidence of this.
Ive been away for a few days but Thomas its really no use our discussing matters as according to you we cannot ever be sure our reasoning might have evolved correctly at all.
L.o.L ! im still puzzled how you say such things yet still personally have your beliefs in God though :)
For me it tends to suggest discussing such matters as logic any further with you to be rather illogical :)
And with regards to answering all of the rest of what you have said i simply just cant be bothered at the moment.
Post a Comment