That reading makes considerably more sense than my original one.I believe he means the "God" of patriotism, if patriotism were a religion. Which would *be* the nation.
If it's brainwashing, it's a very poor method of brainwashing (both the prayers and the Pledge).See, I always assumed religions did that because, after being conditioned with ritualistic movements and words for long enough, the child is more willing to *swallow* the increasingly improbable theologies because his brain has been conditioned to be more accepting to it due to early programming.
In other words, brainwashing.
Apply to non-religious situations as necessary.
My point is more that we don't just suddenly spring the issue of patriotism on children once they hit a certain (advanced) age, and I don't think we should. I don't think we should expect much in the way of patriotism from them, but that's because they're not adults.
I refuse to believe that all patriotism is irrational, as is implied by that statement.But it's been agreed that patriotism is irrational
This is very similar to what I've been arguing. Get out of my head!Who said they have to have rigorous discussion of the Pledge? They can still be exposed to the Pledge as an introduction the the education that they will be gaining once they reach the ability to think abstractly.
Since I've been pounced on for my math examples, let's try a history example (which seems relevant): Students in high school and college are expected to be able to draw their own conclusions about the morality Revolutionary War.
Saying that kindergarteners should not be at least exposed to the Pledge is akin to saying that since 5 year olds can by no means have a rigorous discussion about this topic, we had better not teach them anything about the Revolutionary War. Or about war at all. Or soldiers. So when they reach the formal operations stage, they can rationally draw their own conclusions about the morality of the soldiers' tactics. Of course, if we take this tact, we might as well keep them out of school until about 5th or 6th grade, because we can't expose them to ANYTHING until they reach the formal operations stage.
How does your view change if we consider the Pledge a piece of culture instead of a piece of literature?Also, I am arguing FOR teaching the math. I am positing that students should be exposed to the Pledge, as a piece of literature, in their education. I explicitly disagree with using the Pledge as a daily forced mantra.
We certainly don't expect everyone who learns about the Salah to participate, but that doesn't mean the Salah is a piece of literature instead of a piece of culture. The niche it fills is about as important, if not more so, than its text.