I've been wanting to post a blog entry on this for quite a while but university's been awfully exhausting lately and I haven't had a chance to. A few days ago I stumbled upon an article on the subject and I've decided to actually chip in my two cents on the topic now that I have a few minutes to spare. There you go, the original article on the Telegraph website. It is a few weeks old, but as I've said I haven't had too much time on my hands lately.
For those who can't be bothered to read the article, it goes on about Dr Justin L. Barrett's "research" and bold statements. Dr Barrett - formally known as a psychologist and cognitive scientist, but de facto a Christian apologist - claims that, according to psychological experiments carried out on children, kids seem to possess an innate tendency to identify purpose or meaning in things. True. What is ignored in this reasoning, though, is the why. Barrett obviously needed to assume that such a tendency be actually a yearning for divine presence in our lives, but there is absolutely nothing suggesting any such thing. What kids do is form a basic assumption, a framework, on which to base their development. Dr Barrett, it seems, has studied kids desperately trying to find in them proof that his own personal belief was worth something but has never bothered to talk to kids and understand them. Anyone who has ever had any sort of contact with a young child will be familiar with that exciting - albeit sometimes annoying - phase kids start going through at about three to four years of age. The "why" phase. Their brain goes "look at that! There HAS to be a reason why that thing is like that! Let's ask mum!" That's really all the mystery there is to it. It's a phase, one kids slowly grow out of as they acquire more factual knowledge of the world. Barrett's assumption is that the natural world and man-made objects will innately appear as different to children and that couldn't be any more wrong. Quite the opposite. Their tendency to, at first, consider the natural world as equal to common objects created by man - therefore as having a first cause - is physiological and is exactly what pushes them to enquire about it, stomping parents with questions and absorbing notions where available. They have no reason to assume there is any difference between the universe and a telephone because they don't know any better - yet. It's an autocatalytic reaction and it's part of children's development. Hardly proof of a divine.
He also goes on to say that such a tendency inevitably leads kids to develop a belief in a superior, intelligent entity that imbued everything that exists with a purpose. Wrong. If anything, kids' curiosity is the essence of scepticism. Kids believe in Santa Claus. Kids believe in the Tooth Fairy. Kids believe in what they are exposed to - until they start getting dangerously curious - but kids do not develop complex theologies unless imprinted to adopt one first.
Ultimately, what the experiments have actually proved is that children possess:
Nothing more.
For those who can't be bothered to read the article, it goes on about Dr Justin L. Barrett's "research" and bold statements. Dr Barrett - formally known as a psychologist and cognitive scientist, but de facto a Christian apologist - claims that, according to psychological experiments carried out on children, kids seem to possess an innate tendency to identify purpose or meaning in things. True. What is ignored in this reasoning, though, is the why. Barrett obviously needed to assume that such a tendency be actually a yearning for divine presence in our lives, but there is absolutely nothing suggesting any such thing. What kids do is form a basic assumption, a framework, on which to base their development. Dr Barrett, it seems, has studied kids desperately trying to find in them proof that his own personal belief was worth something but has never bothered to talk to kids and understand them. Anyone who has ever had any sort of contact with a young child will be familiar with that exciting - albeit sometimes annoying - phase kids start going through at about three to four years of age. The "why" phase. Their brain goes "look at that! There HAS to be a reason why that thing is like that! Let's ask mum!" That's really all the mystery there is to it. It's a phase, one kids slowly grow out of as they acquire more factual knowledge of the world. Barrett's assumption is that the natural world and man-made objects will innately appear as different to children and that couldn't be any more wrong. Quite the opposite. Their tendency to, at first, consider the natural world as equal to common objects created by man - therefore as having a first cause - is physiological and is exactly what pushes them to enquire about it, stomping parents with questions and absorbing notions where available. They have no reason to assume there is any difference between the universe and a telephone because they don't know any better - yet. It's an autocatalytic reaction and it's part of children's development. Hardly proof of a divine.
He also goes on to say that such a tendency inevitably leads kids to develop a belief in a superior, intelligent entity that imbued everything that exists with a purpose. Wrong. If anything, kids' curiosity is the essence of scepticism. Kids believe in Santa Claus. Kids believe in the Tooth Fairy. Kids believe in what they are exposed to - until they start getting dangerously curious - but kids do not develop complex theologies unless imprinted to adopt one first.
Ultimately, what the experiments have actually proved is that children possess:
- a certain notion of causality, needed to make sense of this new, big, confusing world in our early developmental stages, when we lack actual knowledge.
- an impressive creativity.
2 comments:
As usual, great post. :) Kids are not born believers unless you teach it to them, and that's only because they believe anything you tell them at a very young age. Hell, I used to think there was a monster inside my nose that would bite my finger off if I picked my nose! Is that proof that there is a monster there, simply because an older sibling convinced gullible little me? LOL
Good post. The number of children that are indoctrinated into religion every day is the biggest obstacle to ever seeing a rational world, and insanity, such a the article you refer to, makes it just that much worse.
I think it's clear to any reasonable person children are born with curiosity and a natural ability to form cause and effect relationships. They want to reason out the world they live in and they ask questions to assist them. And there's the rub. Their first survival mechanism is to listen to their Mom and Dad. When these parents abuse their kids minds by teaching them that everything is caused, and was made by a magical superhero, it tends to take all the curiosity and reason out of life, and what results could more be associated with a mental illness than a natural human condition.
Cheers
Post a Comment