Comments by "upabittoolate" (@upabittoolate) on "Christian 'Science' Book On Electricity" video.

@IVscythia Yeah. Bordering. And that's an extremely close border too. Psychological abuse isn't always easy to put your finger on. My parents made mistakes that might be considered abuse y modern standards but they were just gaffes in the '80s. A parent is allowed to teach his child whatever he sees fit. I get that part. But in this case, I think it's more of a case of intellectual crippling. That's bad per se, but I' mnot sure if it's an abuse. Hell, maybe the parents actually believe the shit.
1
That said, we have to ask ourselves what "abuse" really means in this context. This christian "textbook" sure ain't doing any kids any favors. But what favors were done for us? I argue that it's a borderline abuse. You say it's abuse, plain & simple. A larger question may be, "what's abuse?" There are varying degrees. Tis true. But I'm more inclined to think that primary education is just a basis; a point of departure. That's why I let the jesus freaks slide (at least on the abuse part).
1
Here's my thing: we can't take for granted that this, 1 clip is representative of all the homeschooling that the kid's getting. If science tells us anything, it's "Try not to make no assumptions. And don't make conclusions from 1 datum." I've known people that went to christian schools & managed to have level heads. Hell, don't rule out the kids being bold enough to challenge this nonsense. As for the original discourse, I can't up & call it outright abuse because this is way too abstract.
1
@IVscythia I feel you. I'm just saying we can't cherry pick 1 passage then say this is intellectual "abuse". 1, we're all intellectually abused if that's the criterion. 2, reaching kids bullshit isn't the end of the world. That's all I'm saying. Yes, it's a serious disservice to your student to attribute something we actually understand to "god". But to cal lit abuse means we kinda have to change the definition of the word.
1
I say it's "borderline" because we must be completely honest about a narrative of abuse. To illustrate my point, I'll use electrical engineers as examples since that's part of the topic. You probably think Edison invented the lightbulb. That's what we're taught by the American lexicon & later enforced in grade school. That's mostly true too. But we aren't told that the damned lightbulbs didn't work until Latimer discovered a good filament. What's that got to do with abuse? (cont'd)
1
Oh of course we can agree on that part. We both have 3-digit IQs & hs diplomas. For some reason, there's been a new movement that, for some reason, places premiums on stupidity. Would I choose that science book for my own child? No. But there are also many textbooks that don't give proper credit to Louis Latimer & GT Woods. As a scientist (in the philosophical meaning of the word) & a student of history, that's actually more offensive than the Jesus-freak buffoonery. That's just me though.
1
While I understand that there's no law against stupidity & that parents are allowed to teach their kids whatever they like, I think this is bordering parental abuse.
1
Y'know, I'm not totally against whacking a kid if he gets out of line. Recognize the bounds of reason but it's not always abuse. I'm old school. As far as intellectual abuse, I won't jump the gun because I'm not sure how this, singular, concept (this topic in this vid) effects the kid. It may very well be part of a larger practice of miseducation. But there's tons of people that are miseducated. I ain't sure though. It's up to the adult to distill what Ma & Pa taught him into his own reality.
1
@dookdawg214 Penis goes in. Baby comes out. There's no miscommunication there. Nobody can explain that.
1