3 ms·

Exactly. It's a good idea, but there are way too many opportunities for its implementation to be heavily skewed towards some bias or belief. If you believe some

Exactly. It's a good idea, but there are way too many opportunities for its implementation to be heavily skewed towards some bias or belief. If you believe something is true because it is in some religious text, it'll be very hard for you to teach children to question any news which appears to condradict it, even if that news is factually (and technically) correct.

mcculley 8y ago
I was thinking that, for religion, the most politically acceptable path is to teach as many religions as practical to children. If they know the details of many religions at an early age, they might be inoculated against one of them being presented as the truth.
- craftyguy 8y ago
  That's likely what I'd do for my own child(ren) but there's absolutely no way that would happen in a school dominated by teachers who practice one particular religion, or in a district/state governed by followers of one particular religion.
  - mcculley 8y ago
    I'm less interested in changing public policy than I am in developing a course that is targeted to children. A lot of explanations of memetics are designed for older readers. The problem is that marketing for politics and religion gets in well before children have a defense for it. I am wondering what a course in memetics designed for children looks like and how it could be made effective. Deployment/distribution is a separate problem. Certainly such a course/book would be illegal in many countries. It would be rejected in many places in the United States.
- nsxwolf 8y ago
  You're describing using the government in a capacity to directly undermine the religious teaching authority of a child's parents. That's probably not legal if that's actually the stated goal of your plan, and it's not going to sit well with parents.
  - mcculley 8y ago
    Certainly it would be legal, that the First Amendment is incompatible with the First Commandment is not legally challenged. Lots of schools teach about the world's religions in some way. One cannot understand world politics without describing religion. I'm not saying such a course would be politically viable, nor am I interested in interfering with the indoctrination by those parents already infected. I am exploring ways to protect those who have a choice.

mcculley 8y ago

I was thinking that, for religion, the most politically acceptable path is to teach as many religions as practical to children. If they know the details of many religions at an early age, they might be inoculated against one of them being presented as the truth.

craftyguy 8y ago
That's likely what I'd do for my own child(ren) but there's absolutely no way that would happen in a school dominated by teachers who practice one particular religion, or in a district/state governed by followers of one particular religion.
- mcculley 8y ago
  I'm less interested in changing public policy than I am in developing a course that is targeted to children. A lot of explanations of memetics are designed for older readers. The problem is that marketing for politics and religion gets in well before children have a defense for it. I am wondering what a course in memetics designed for children looks like and how it could be made effective. Deployment/distribution is a separate problem. Certainly such a course/book would be illegal in many countries. It would be rejected in many places in the United States.
nsxwolf 8y ago
You're describing using the government in a capacity to directly undermine the religious teaching authority of a child's parents. That's probably not legal if that's actually the stated goal of your plan, and it's not going to sit well with parents.
- mcculley 8y ago
  Certainly it would be legal, that the First Amendment is incompatible with the First Commandment is not legally challenged. Lots of schools teach about the world's religions in some way. One cannot understand world politics without describing religion. I'm not saying such a course would be politically viable, nor am I interested in interfering with the indoctrination by those parents already infected. I am exploring ways to protect those who have a choice.