Granted, there is a bit of an overlap (since both truth and indoctrination involve the imparting of information), but fundamentally, these are really two different concepts. The way I see it, the goal of truth is to disseminate facts upon another, while indoctrination’s goal is to disseminate opinions upon another.
Societally speaking, disseminating truth takes on a positive connotation, while disseminating indoctrination takes on a negative one. Truth can categorically prove its wares, whereas indoctrination cannot. Indoctrination depends more on receptive, often gullible subjects.
Two great examples of this “truth versus indoctrination” slippery slope can be found in the subjects of religion and politics. Regarding these subjects, at what point does truth slip (bend) into a form of indoctrination and indoctrination get promoted into a form of truth? Yes, good question.
Let’s start with religion. What truths can be proven about religion? Is it not always a touchy-feely, indoctrination kind of thing, totally dependent on “our feelings?” Logically speaking, there really is not a lot of logic to it... if any.
For example, let’s take a major focal point of Christianity: Can it ever be proven, be an objective truth, that Jesus lived, died on a cross, then came back to life three days later? No, it cannot. Logically speaking, that’s impossible. Yet, as children, that’s what we are indoctrinated with. For most of western society, that belief grows with us and psychologically within us, as we grow into adults, and pass it along to our own progeny. Sure, Jesus might have actually lived. And sure, he might have been crucified. So far, so good (or good enough). But then the story takes a strange turn, heads down the slippery slope, and believing his coming back to life after three days slips us into bizarr-o (indoctrination) territory. A case where possible truth gets turned into indoctrination. And it’s not just Christianity; I’m sure all the other orthodox religions do the same thing with their children. Such are the indoctrination stories with no objective truth, passed on from generation to generation to the especially receptive/gullible.
Let’s take on politics now. What better example can there be than the current-day “big lie” being perpetuated by the majority of republicans; the big lie being that Donald Trump won the 2020 presidential election? Votes have been counted and recounted, in some cases even more than twice. Yet the lie persists, even in the face of contradictory factual evidence. Like with religions, have Trump’s supporters now slid down that slippery slope, been indoctrinated to believe the big lie? Personally, I think so. And it gets worse, more ingrained, the more they hear about it (i.e., the power of suggestion/repetitiveness at work).
___________
Lots of philosophical questions there, along with my “opinions” 😉, and I know things can get really complicated. Few things are ever cut-and-dried (probably only objective truth ;). But here are the basic questions I’d like to discuss…
Q1: Whether politics or religion or any other subject matter, is indoctrination just subjective wishful thinking in the face of no facts? What part of my analysis did I get wrong?
Q2: What do you see as the main difference between truth versus indoctrination? IOW, at their most fundamental, what are they? Define them in basic terms.
Q3: Do you think anyone has ever tried to indoctrinate you? If yes, who/when? Did you ever manage to reject it? Or do you still embrace it? Does/Did it give you a sense of identity; like you belonged to a like-thinking collective? Tell us about any indoctrination experience(s) you’ve had.
Thanks for posting and recommending.
No comments:
Post a Comment