Geprge wrote: "...Or do you think parents should be given state guidelines on the background of what world-view they should or should not educate their children?..."

human interest wrote: Actually yes, we might end up with less troubled or mixed up kids in our society. Might end up with less troubled people altogether.

The state has too much power already. It can take us and put us in uniform to kill people we have nothing personally against. Giving the state the power to prescribe state guidelines on the background of what world-view people should or should not educate their children extends the power of the state. The logical consequence of such an idea is concentration camps or re-education centres for those who do not have ideas conforming to state approved guidelines.

We might end up with less troubled people. I doubt that bees or ants are troubled with the ethos of the hive. To me it is essential for humans to be educated with the idea that any guidelines laid down by the state, the church, the parents, the community or any other authority should be open to question.

David Nicolls,
I think neither Christians nor anti-Chistians should have a monopoly on what is “fairness in the way children are educated“. You obviously have a very narrow idea of what a Christian education in a family (e.g. of 21st century academics) is all about. I would not call Christian education indoctrination any more than I would call an education based on values acceptable to atheists moral corruption or something like that, because - if for no other reasons - in both cases one should avoid such sweeping statements. So please let us leave it at that, and just agree to disagree on these matters.

human interest,
I take it that your answer to my question is a “yes”, and I could not comment on it better than david f, except that for a person like me - who went through a Stalinist (and post-Stalinist) system - the idea of the state setting guidelines on what parents can and cannot teach their children brings back some very unpleasant memories, to say the least.

david f,
I agree with everything you wrote except that only students, but not small children, should be educated that guidelines laid down by the teacher or parent are open to question. To give a trivial example, students of mathematics, but not small children, should be taught that commutativity of multiplication is “open to question“.

george and david f.

Oh yes, I didn't really think that one through to it's logical consequence!

Who protects the children from the parents whose worldview is distorted and causes emotional and physical harm to the child then?

George wrote:

"I agree with everything you wrote except that only students, but not small children, should be educated that guidelines laid down by the teacher or parent are open to question. To give a trivial example, students of mathematics, but not small children, should be taught that commutativity of multiplication is “open to question“."

I agree with your exceptions. Mathematical advances have been made by questioning postulates. Your example is not trivial. Multiplication is not commutative in certain mathematical areas. Advances in mathematics have been made in questioning postulates. Questioning of Euclid's parallel postulate has led to spherical geometry which we use in navigation over a surface such as the earth and hyperbolic geometry which is the geometry of Einstein's relativistic universe.

human interest wrote: Who protects the children from the parents whose worldview is distorted and causes emotional and physical harm to the child then?

Dear human interest,

If you trust the state to set guidelines then you assume the state has the right to decide what worldview is distorted and causes emotional and physical harm to the child.

I don't trust any state to set such guidelines even a democratic state. In a real democracy the view of the state is the view of the majority of its people. A majority can be wrong. A real democracy must not only express the view of the majority but must also grant the right to dissent from that majority.

In order to achieve that we must not present official world views but educate students with the ideals of critical thinking and questioning.

George has lived under a state with an official world view. I haven't, but I think he is right in what he speaks of. I had an uncle who was imprisoned as a Bolshevik by the czarist police. In 1921 he was most happy to leave the USSR and come to the US.

Davidf wrote: "but educate students with the ideals of critical thinking and questioning."

Exactly.

And this can only be achieved in an inclusive worldly system of education; one that embraces all thought.

We have a wealth of philosophy accumulated over many centuries, that one ideology should preside over all others is as limiting as it is simply prejudiced. I note George's sniping at the suggestion that his religion is not the original font of all wisdom, that, in fact there have been and will continue to be people whose clarity of thought and wisdom will continue to guide us as we (hopefully) evolve towards an enlightened and open society.