goliwog said:
To begin with phscological work by kohlberg and Fowler has shown that Morality and faith develops in 6 stages. This is not at all religious but it is a cognitive process which occurs in all humans even athiests. Faith development begins as a young baby , children who develop faith will cry when there parents leave them children who do not develop faith will not or will show a lack of emotional behaviour when seperated from parents (for an example) Now because moral and faith development is cognitive , if it does not complete its course it creates a lack of intelegence in other levels of lifestyle. This is why faith and morality needs to be explained. It doesnt matter from what faith but religion is needed to enhance development in teens.
Spirituality is not hocus pocus, it is a form of intelegence which develops in the non declarative memory system. If this system is not stimulated (which it will nbot be in mainstreem classes) it may lead to cognitive deficiancy. People need a reason for their actions , those who lean towards athiest logic and philosphical needs are already catered for in humanities and sciences. But without chapliains only athiests are catered for.
Issues with your claims:
- Fowler's stages seem to address the way in which we deal with 'troublesome truths' such as found in the realms of morality, aesthetics, meaning and so forth. Certainly the term 'faith' is used, but I don't see why they are religion specific. I have dealt with ALL of the relevant issues in the context of philosophy.
- Where is the research to show that a lack of religious education / chaplain availability leads to cognitive deficits?
- Also, what are the cognitive domains in question (that are at risk) and what are the kinds of experiences needed to stimulate/develop them?
- Be careful about crossing the line between being descriptive and normative. That a given faculty
tends to follow a given progression does not mean that it
should follow this progression. For a simple reductio consider any hypothetical theory about the development of unpleasant qualities (e.g. a tendency towards violent thoughts).
- Not all cognitive functions are 'good'. Certainly, one could argue that they evolved and so confered some advantage upon us and therefore we should try to bolster them given their advantageous nature! But be careful here - they simply conferred a
reproductive advantage. They don't necessarily subserve other non-reproductive moral ends. Also, they were advantageous
at a certain point in our evolutionary history. What worked well in tribes won't necessarily work well in international society. In fact, this issue has been raised for moral reasoning (see Greene's
dissertation, section 5.4). It may turn out that the culture wars that stem from the strength of our moral convictions produce our downfall.
goliwog said:
Also it is not in any way forced ... so if you dont want to have a chaplian you dont have to have one.
We have plenty of schools which really need more qualified psychologists who don't get funding. The offering of funding for chaplains (a) advantages religious institutions which tend to be private and so likely have less need for extra funding (note that it could amount to subsidising a staff member that would have been hired anyway) and (b) have the potential to be exclusionary if they are drawn from a particular religious sect.
