Quote:
Originally Posted by Sliver
This is a bit out of left field, but I find the treatment of religion a little weird at every level of education (I have a minor in religious studies from the UofC). I mainly focused on the nature of religion in my studies, but I was always looking for some sort of a "debunking" course that never existed.
I concede that it is important to learn about what people believe and why they believe it, but I was always surprised every lecture didn't end with: "But of course, all of this is ######ed nonsense and if you believe a virgin can give birth do a god's child you're not firing on all cylinders lulz lmao lol."
This is particularly true at the university level. It would be like if you went to a Chemistry class, and they instructor was lecturing you on alchemy. There would be an uproar! But with religion, we are supposed to be so sensitive to teachings that are untrue. I think a university class on religion should be dedicated to seeking out truths and/or untruths in religion; not being so sensitive that we have to check all reason at the door before we walk in the class.
Regardless, I think this Quebec initiative is good, but like I say, I'd really like to see religion taught in a more objective, logical manner. Blind faith can be poisonous as we've seen many times throughout history. It would be nice if there was a concerted, institutional effort to move beyond that.
/rant  |
With teaching religion as with anything they should probably stick to provable facts.
"It is a fact that Christians believe <xyz>"
"It is a fact that the Koran says <abc>"
"It is a fact that the belief that <jkl> held by group <qwe> contributed to historical event <rty>"
Those types of statements are provable and factual. Getting into stuff like: "Christians are wrong because god doesn't exist" like you suggest is probably not a good idea to teach at a university because its not a provable fact. Its the same reason they don't teach "Christians are right because god exists". If you want that type of discussion go to a church, temple, cult meeting, athiest internet message board, or whatever.
Something could be said for going through history to find links/contradictions to religious stories (i.e. "There has been no evidence found thus far to show a worldwide flood occurred at approx. 4000 BC") but to include stuff like "But of course, all of this is ######ed nonsense and if you believe a virgin can give birth do a god's child you're not firing on all cylinders lulz lmao lol." would be wrong. It all goes back to facts which you're able to prove.