Caporegime
I think I learned a fair bit tbh. I'd also argue that most of what I learned wasn't directly about any specific religions but rather methods of learning, understanding and debating. None of which I employ on here 
Teaching of Evolution being removed in Turkish schools
Despite some of the things posted that might seem to make sense in my experience (which is pretty extensive for reasons I don't particularly want to go into):
Only about 30-40% of children brought up within an actively religious household, where it is taught to children from a young age, will become actual believers - a higher percentage will continue to take part in that fellowship, etc. partly due to it often being non-trivial to leave (this can be from being the equivalent of being as difficult as coming out as gay, etc. through to some groups using family against people who would leave i.e. exclusive brethren groups who will ban interaction between family members still in their midst and those that leave).
The ability to reason, intelligence, etc. has a far lower correlation between those that leave and those that stay and those that do and don't become believers than people want to believe :s amongst the most devout within a Christian group some of my family/relatives attend include more than one director-general of UK government organisations, head teachers, engineers, several that are recognised in the scientific community and other professionals like architects, etc. many doing jobs where critical thinking and reasoning, etc. are essential skills.
While the numbers would (and are) going to be significantly diminished without the influences on family at an early age most religions would still survive without that holding up their numbers.
While the numbers that turn to religion at a later point in life are relatively small it isn't entirely insignificant and happens for a variety of reasons - granted the loss of a loved one, etc. can be a major factor in when that happens.
Only about 30-40% of children brought up within an actively religious household, where it is taught to children from a young age, will become actual believers - a higher percentage will continue to take part in that fellowship, etc. partly due to it often being non-trivial to leave (this can be from being the equivalent of being as difficult as coming out as gay, etc. through to some groups using family against people who would leave i.e. exclusive brethren groups who will ban interaction between family members still in their midst and those that leave).
The ability to reason, intelligence, etc. has a far lower correlation between those that leave and those that stay and those that do and don't become believers than people want to believe :s amongst the most devout within a Christian group some of my family/relatives attend include more than one director-general of UK government organisations, head teachers, engineers, several that are recognised in the scientific community and other professionals like architects, etc. many doing jobs where critical thinking and reasoning, etc. are essential skills.
While the numbers would (and are) going to be significantly diminished without the influences on family at an early age most religions would still survive without that holding up their numbers.
While the numbers that turn to religion at a later point in life are relatively small it isn't entirely insignificant and happens for a variety of reasons - granted the loss of a loved one, etc. can be a major factor in when that happens.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 31 May 2009
- Posts
- 21,456
Do those figures apply to CoE in England?
I doubt they apply to Free Presbyterianism in Northern Ireland, or to the followers of Islam.
I doubt they apply to Free Presbyterianism in Northern Ireland, or to the followers of Islam.
Especially when a religion has a high integration with society its difficult for people who aren't actual believers but grow up in it to be free of it.
Take a look at the average church gathering for instance its easy to assume most believe in God the truth is likely far more complex.
This. There's no place for "RE" on a school timetable.
Educating kids about "religions" needs to be consigned to history lessons.
But it isn't going to start any time soon so consigning it to the history books would be premature.
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2012
- Posts
- 8,339
tbh rising numbers of vocal and nonvocal atheism would indicate religion is on a downturn in western society.
Without a doubt, but religion is still important to many people in the UK and many more around the world. It also has a significant impact on many people's lives and laws past and present. So I can see a purpose to still teaching about it. For the vast majority of non faith schools it is an option subject so is only studied past Y9 by students that choose to do it.
Still isn't history yet. When it is, teach it as history.
About 1/3 of all schools are faith schools, so even with the adjusted figures, less than the % of religious people.
Some of the funding for faith schools come from the faith so if we remove faith schools we probably need to increase funding too. The current government aren't a big fan of increasing funding for schools...
That's not far off what I was actually thinking. PSE when taught properly is a very useful subject, adding a section about religions and other cultures would be better than RE IMO.
Only a very small number of people are going to become religious after learning about it in RE so consigning it to history is going to do very little in making religion history.
RE is almost as much about learning different cultures as it is religious specifically, and it useful when you consider most people will have a good understating of one religion anyway. Teaching people about others usually makes people less isolationist and more inclusive. Ignorance is a scurge in many walks of life.
RE at my school barely touched on religion, some cultural exposures but largely was more dominated for some reason by more hippy like environmental and anti-nuclear themes :s that was awhile ago though - I think there are certain elements though these days that have to be taught that are of a more specific religious nature.
I think there is a bit of a hidden element to this - some ascribe it to some form of enlightenment and/or the rise of reason, education, etc, but Western society over the last few decades has changed to become more open, with more secularity within the structure of society and government, etc. not sure I'm describing this very well - which means that people have had more chance to live their life the way they want to and better chance to leave the confinements of a religious background and so on. I don't think the level of vocal or non-vocal atheism has changed as much as the appearance of change would seem to indicate in that respect and amongst many of the younger generations that have increasingly grown up further distanced from religion there is a complete apathy towards it rather than a rejection of it.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 15 Oct 2015
- Posts
- 1,480
As some people here have been talking about RE (I assume that is Religious Education) I thought I would show how my RE was in high school/college (in Sweden). I would say that generally Sweden is a quite non-religious country, we are prothestantic though according to text books and those kind of stuff, but very few people (specially in younger ages) seem to be actually religious. Some people do tend to classify them as Christians, but they at the same time seem to show very little understanding of said religion. Anyway, when we had RE in school it was teaching quite basic information about the five main religions, at least in the beginning. We were told the main symbols for each religion, main holidays and why those holidays were celebrated and also some comparrisons between the religions. I don't think anyone ever felt it was being used as to bring us into a certain religion (as people seem to believe it is used nowadays).