Brainwashing Children to 'Suppress' Design Intuition

ICR article image.

The indoctrination of children with a mob spirit-under the category of “social adjustment”-is conducted openly and explicitly. The supremacy of the pack is drilled, pounded and forced into the student’s mind by every means available to the comprachicos of the classroom, including the contemptible policy of grading the students on their social adaptability (under various titles). No better method than this type of grading could be devised to destroy a child’s individuality and turn him into a stale little conformist, to stunt his uniformed sense of personal identity and make him blend into an anonymous mob, to penalize the best, the most intelligent and honest children in the class, and to reward the worst, the dull, the lethargic, the dishonest.

Still more evil (because more fundamental) is the “discussion” method of teaching, which is used more frequently in the humanities than in the physical sciences, for obvious reasons. Following this method, the teacher abstains from lecturing and merely presides at a free-for-all or “bull session,” while the students express their “views” on the subject under study, which they did not know and have come to school to learn. What these sessions produce in the minds of the students is unbearable boredom.

But this is much worse than a mere waste of the student’s time. They are being taught some crucial things, though not the ostensible subject of study. They are being given a lesson in metaphysics and epistemology. They are being taught, by implication, that there is no such thing as a firm, objective reality, which man’s mind must learn to perceive correctly; that reality is an indeterminate flux and can be anything the pack wants it to be; that truth of falsehood is determined by majority vote. And more: that knowledge is unnecessary and irrelevant, since the teacher’s views have no greater validity than the oratory of the dullest and most ignorant student-and therefore, that reason, thinking, intelligence and education are of no importance or value. To the extent that a student absorbs these notions, what incentive would he have to continue his education and to develop his mind? The answer may be seen today on any college campus.

p.13 Comprachicos

http://www.slideshare.net/crdixon/aynrandthecomprachicos

That was the new excuse for not correcting kids spelling in second grade. All these papers hung on the wall outside the classroom with happy faces. Not one didn’t have spelling and grammar errors.

The left is very big on “critical thinking skills”.

That means: sit down, shut up, toe the party line, and just accept secular humanism/Marxism as the only truth.

Mustn’t permit blasphemy/heresy from the tots. Those high priests of idiocy can’t allow that.

"Why is natural selection so hard to understand and accept? What can we do to make it easier?”

"Natural selection" is not hard to UNDERSTAND; any idiot can understand the basic concept. It is hard for many to ACCEPT because it only seems to explain the most superficial aspects of evolution.

“Memorize this, kids!”

So basically pre-schoolers are smarter then Ph D's!

"This way, even kids can understand that animal designs which look like they were built with a goal in mind actually arose by natural processes that had no goals and no mind."

In other words, "It is crucial that we teach children that they live in a meaningless universe with no purpose. The goal of education is to turn children into nihilists."

The public’s lingering believe in design is NOT why the US has been struggling in science in recent decades.

Well, as Dennis Prager explains correctly-—the longer children are in the “educational system”, the dumber they become (the more Common Sense is destroyed).

G.K. Chesterton stated it better a hundred years ago-—the only reason for public “education” is to destroy Common Sense in children.

"children in preschool and early elementary school show teleological biases to explain the origins of natural objects’ properties by reference to functions."

Just sorta thinkin out loud here.

But doesn't Darwinian evolution ITSELF have a teleological bias? It's supposed to be survival of the *fittest*....FITTEST...superlative..."the most fit". Isn't that teleological?

In other words, adaptation by natural selection is directed toward an end--to survive and reproduce. Now of course, that goal is not an ultimate end but a transitory ones as environments become arid, niches change, etc.

But it is still a goal, no? It is still an end, no?

I agree with both statements.

Do the “intellectuals” know how evolution came to be taught in schools?
To sum it up, a teacher name John Scopes, started teaching evolution (which was against the law at that time) in class in Tennessee and a lawsuit was brought against him and the ACLU jumped on board to defend him and brought in a tooth that supposedly was from an extinct missing link which later turned out to be a hog tooth. Scopes was better represented in court and won the case and we now have evolution brainwashing in our schools today. Ask any professor if they can identify any “changes in kind” and watch them flounder and uh you to death. Sorry I am not ascended from a monkey or lungfish.

Animal designs that resemble each other may also be a signature of a common creator. How many different Corvettes or Mustangs out there have different year models that resemble each other yet are slightly different and not the same?

“Not one didn’t have spelling and grammar errors.”

huh?

Finally, they present “six natural selection concepts” with realistic drawings of fictional insect-eating mammals with trunked noses called the “pilosas.” Some have thick trunks and others have thin trunks. Thick-trunked pilosas, “experienced sudden die-off because of the effects of extreme climate change on the location of their food source.”

Wait wait wait a second here. Does this REALLY disprove a teleological end?

Let's not forget something here. Variation in offspring is --dare I say it--the specific end, purpose, and rationale behind sexual reproduction. It's the whole reason sexual reproduction exists--to provide variability in offspring to mitigate against shifts in the environment.

So how in Sam Hill does this example argue against teleology?

A male and female pilosa mate. That mating generates 6 different offspring--precisely as it was meant to. The "extreme climate change" happens and all but the thin-trunked pilosas die off.

The change may be random. But the fact that there WAS a pool of thick-trunked and thin-trunked pilosas to choose from was NOT random. It was specifically provided for in the genetic mixing/recombination in pilosa reproduction.

“Before the children heard the story, the experimenters asked them to explain why a different group of fictional animals had a particular trait. Most of the children gave explanations based on intentional design.”

There WAS intentional design--in the pilosas variability in the first place. The intention was for the pilosas to have a wide genetic base that could successfully cope with changes in environment. IF there wasn't intention, then the pilosas would all be clones of one another and would have ALL died.

You might as well say there's no intentional design in a diversified portfolio because of the randomness of the economy.

A larger context for this story may be explored by a review of the following:

(Excerpts from a series entitled, "Lessons on Liberty," by a Co-Editor of "Our Ageless Constitution" (1987) & "Rediscovering the Ideas of Liberty." The "Lesson" contrasts the Founders' Ideas of Liberty" which the Founders intended would be taught to rising generations, with the Counterfeit Ideas being promoted in the so-called "public schools" of America for decades.)

IDEAS OF LIBERTY:
(from America’s Founders and Presidents)
“The God who gave us life gave us liberty at the same time; the hand of force may destroy, but cannot disjoin them.” (Jefferson - 1774)
“Statesmen may plan and speculate for Liberty, but it is Religion and Morality alone which can establish the principles upon which Freedom can securely stand.” (John Adams - 1775)
“The Sacred Rights of Mankind are not to be rummaged for among old parchments or musty records. They are written, as with a sunbeam, in the whole volume of human nature, by the Hand of the Divinity itself, and can never be erased or obscured by mortal power.” (Alexander Hamilton)
“Without God, there could be no American form of government, nor an American way of life. Recognition of the Supreme Being is the first and the most basic expression of Americanism. Thus the founding fathers saw it, and thus, with God’s help, it will continue to be.” (Dwight Eisenhower)
“The same revolutionary beliefs for which our forebears fought are still at issue around the globe, the belief that the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state but from the hand of God.” (John F. Kennedy - 1961 Inaugural)
“…it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey his will, to be grateful for his benefits, and humbly implore His protection and favor….”(George Washington)
“Now the virtue which had been infused into the Constitution…and was to give it…the stability and duration to which it was destined, was no other than…those abstract principles…proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence—namely, the self-evident truths of the…unalienable rights of man…the…sovereignty of the people, always subordinate to a rule of right and wrong, and always responsible to the Supreme Ruler of the universe for the rightful exercise of that sovereign…power.” (John Quincy Adams, on the occasion of The Jubilee of the Constitution - 1839)
"Today, across our nation, we see consequences of decades of gross neglect and outright censorship of the Founders’ ideas from textbooks and from our public discourse. We have allowed counterfeit ideas to dominate the public square, and the Founders’ principles have been crowded out. Unwittingly, many teachers and other unknowing officials have participated in the agenda of an unelected mind-controlling elite whose tyrannical actions have robbed generations of Americans from reading or studying the ideas that made America free. Like termites, they have eroded our foundations as effectively as if they had burned the books. Yet, not once have they been willing to call it by its rightful name—censorship. Once, in America, stifling ideas about the Creator and Creator-endowed liberty was considered unthinkable. . . .
"The ideas of liberty must be passed on from generation to generation if liberty is to survive. These ideas, when they are allowed to be examined freely, will prevail, because their appeal is to reason and to the love for liberty that is deep in the human heart. John Adams warned: “The people of America now have the best opportunity and the greatest trust in their hands, that Providence ever committed to so small a number…if they betray their trust, their guilt will merit even greater punishment than other nations have suffered, and the indignation of Heaven.”

COUNTERFEIT IDEAS:
(from some of those whose views have dominated national educational policy)
“The idea of God is the keystone of a perverted society. The true root of liberty, equality and culture is atheism.” (Karl Marx)
Our thinking is enlightened “in the degree in which we cease to depend upon belief in the supernatural.” (John Dewey, father of ‘progressive education’ and 1st President of American Humanist Society)
“…democracy is a human faith and movement, unencumbered by supernatural preconceptions.” (John Childs, a protégé of John Dewey at Columbia)
“…the majority of our youth still hold the values of their parents, and if we do not alter this pattern, if we do not resocialize ourselves to accept change, our society may decay.” (John Goodlad, 1971 Report to President, Schooling for the Future)
“As in 1933, humanists still believe that traditional theism, especially a faith in the prayer-hearing God, who is assumed to love and care for persons, to hear and understand their prayers, and be able to do something about them, is an unproved and outmoded faith.” (Humanist Manifesto II, 1973)
“…the most important factor moving us toward a secular society has been the educational factor. Our schools may not teach Johnny to read properly, but the fact that Johnny is in school until he is sixteen tends to lead toward elimination of religious superstition.” (Paul Blanshard, The Humanist, March-April, 1976)
“It [the Nat’l. Education Association’s publication list] includes the delegitimizing of all authority save that of the state, the degradation of traditional morality and the encouragement of citizens in general and children in particular to despise the rules and customs that make their society a functional democracy. The NEA is drifting into exceedingly dangerous waters, and probably carrying more than a few teachers and pupils with it.” (Chester E. Finn, Jr., Ass’t. Sec. Of Education & Prof. Of Education & Public Policy, Vanderbilt Univ., 1982)
--------------
“Now, my countrymen, if you have been taught doctrines which conflict with the great landmarks of the Declaration of Independence…let me entreat you to come back. Return to the fountains whose waters spring close to the blood of the Revolution.” (Abraham Lincoln)

One day parents will have to answer to God for sending their children to schools such as this.

Animal House photo: John Blutarsky M055John-Belushi-Whiskey-Posters.jpg