Does a University education create sinners?

[Exalt]

I think there’s been a great deal of excellent discussion in this thread, so I’ll just add one little comment:

What bugs me the most is this: I have alot of older, orthodox family members. They know about my current beliefs, and how they very much lean towards the liberal - and instead of addressing me on those points, they blame my education. They blame my school instead of me. Gah!

It irks me like nothing else. It’s not my school that makes me have the beliefs I have; I chose them freely gosh darnit!

 

[SpiritMeadow]

Again - I am speaking in generalities here.

Nobody (least of all me) is saying “avoid education”.

The point is - A University education be it vocational (or more general) seems to lead people to a more liberal “understanding” of christianity. Since a University education is really only availible to those of us living in developed countries (and in the case of the USA - those with money), this implies that there are millions/billions more who would have this liberal understanding (rightly or wrongly) if given the same education.

btw: I think it is dangerous to speak of “truths” in general. It’s all just beliefs. Even the greatest scientific minds agree that it is impossible to remove the observer from the experiment. (ref. example of wave/partical duality and the nature of light).

I certainly am not in a position to say you are wrong, for it’s clear tthat conservative religious and political folks all rale at the universities as halls of liberalism. Clearly they are not liking what is coming out and fear it. That I cannot deny. However, apparently they don’t see that as any indication that they are wrong, but that somehow there is some evilness in learning that turns their rigidly conservative children into liberal bastions of equality.

I’m not sure you can extrapolate to what millions of others would become if given the opportunity to seek higher education. You may be right, but I would at least suggest that there may be many other variables that play into this alteration in outlook.

YOu point about truth is probably well taken. There are very few that I think are acceptable to all persons in all faiths and circumstances. I recognize that viewing a atom changes its movement. LOL. Still one must draw some line, No?

 

[SpiritMeadow]

I think there’s been a great deal of excellent discussion in this thread, so I’ll just add one little comment:

What bugs me the most is this: I have alot of older, orthodox family members. They know about my current beliefs, and how they very much lean towards the liberal - and instead of addressing me on those points, they blame my education. They blame my school instead of me. Gah!

It irks me like nothing else. It’s not my school that makes me have the beliefs I have; I chose them freely gosh darnit!

You must understand that this is very painful for your family. They have lived a good deal longer with these beliefs and it is far easier for them to believe that something was done TO you than to think about the idea that there might be something to what you believe today. Most people who retain very rigid views of the world do so for reasons that are not necessarily tied to logic, but to psychological needs that they are not even aware of. It is necessary for them,usually to retain such beliefs, and so your stance is quite threatening. They want to blame someone, and they certainly can’t face blaming the ideas themselves. Be patient, and accept that there may never be a meeting of the minds with you. As you get older, you can smile,listen, and discard what you don’t accept without bothering to tell them so.

 

[Pug]

Yes, math logic and traditional symbolic logic are entirely different beasts. You need to know quite a bit of math to do the former, which I suppose plays a role in somewhat lower registrants.

Generally, only math majors take it, but sometimes you’ll see philosophy folks there.

God Bless

Jon Winterburn

Okay, you hooked me. I borrowed Enderton’s A Mathematical Introduction to Logic from my local library and read the first 46 pages, skipping the section on induction. I’d say that book is teaching far more than what is sufficient for competent reasoning.

I’m not yet sure of its value outside the field of math. Perhaps the study of this type of logic enhances one’s awareness of what one is doing, resulting in a greater likelihood of catching errors in thought. Also, reading it would clearly enhance self-discipline by forcing one to patiently decipher something annoying like a long wff or a terse paragraph that contains little English (Note: this is not an indictment of Enderton. He seems a fine writer). The book isn’t focusing on being sure a person understands that if P is false, then P arrow Q is true no matter what Q is doing at the time. They do focus on learning stuff like this in a philosophy-style logic course, I assume. I think people need to know that type of stuff, at least intuitively.

 

[JonW]

Okay, you hooked me. I borrowed Enderton’s A Mathematical Introduction to Logic from my local library and read the first 46 pages, skipping the section on induction. I’d say that book is teaching far more than what is sufficient for competent reasoning.

I’m not yet sure of its value outside the field of math. Perhaps the study of this type of logic enhances one’s awareness of what one is doing, resulting in a greater likelihood of catching errors in thought. Also, reading it would clearly enhance self-discipline by forcing one to patiently decipher something annoying like a long wff or a terse paragraph that contains little English (Note: this is not an indictment of Enderton. He seems a fine writer). The book isn’t focusing on being sure a person understands that if P is false, then P arrow Q is true no matter what Q is doing at the time. They do focus on learning stuff like this in a philosophy-style logic course, I assume. I think people need to know that type of stuff, at least intuitively.

Pug! Good on you! Enderton is one of the best intros to mathematical logic. You picked a good one. I hope you don’t stop there. Chapters 2 and 3 are where it gets good. You’ll wanna learn some elemetary model theory and the ever-popular undecidability results to see what the point of the mathematical approach is. Yes, you are correct, mathematical logic is math, and questions about the intuitiveness of the conditional sentential connective are often glossed over, but that isn’t necessarily important to mathematicians, since for their purposes they’re just using it as a symbol in their alphabet. Moreover, I think most math students will have encountered the conditional in an earlier class in which they encountered set theory, elementary logic, number theory, combinatorics, and proof writing for the first time. It gets hashed out there, usually called something like Introduction to Advanced Mathematics, etc. As I recall from my own math logic class, our professor mentioned it in context, and nobody seemed to have a problem with it since we had all encountered it before, so we moved on.

Anyway, I am very gratified that my post moved you to pick up Enderton. I sincerely hope you continue with it and, if you do, make sure to do at least some of the exercises. That’s how one learns math. Also, message me if you have any questions. Math logic is a lot of fun.

God Bless

Jon Winterburn

 

[KathleenElsie]

While I wouldn’t say that a university education creates sinners, it certainly can help. I think if we look at the data, we see a negative correlation between education level and faith. Especially among the Ph.d’s. Also, in a secular university, we really lose an objective base for morality, and so in many ways, you get to believe what you want to believe. Although traditional christian values seem to be looked on with suspician.

It might not create sinner. It just IMHO tends to blur the line between sinful and moral decisions. I would like to believe that the majority of the faculty do not have an agenda. But, from what I have found and observed the most vocal of the faculty are not even remotely conservative/

 

[KathleenElsie]

I think it depends on your area of study. I’m a chemistry grad student at the University of Georgia and I never came in contact with moral depravity of faculty or anything like that. No if you go into the liberal arts I’m sure its different. Also I would say that my public university is pretty open to both sides of most social issues. We have Pro-Life and Pro-choice demonstrations here. What I would say is that my university allows all forms of demonstrations. Gays and Lesbians, Evangelical Preachers, Marijuana Legalists, and Troop Supporters can all be found out talking about their message outside the student center.

As long as the person being preached at or demonstrated against has FIRM Faith an open campus can be a good thing.
But remember GODs words pertain to the TRUTH not faction.
Rejoiceth not in inequity, but rejoiceth with the truth;

love bears all things
believes all things
hopes all things
endures all things
love never ends

---

PAX

 

[KathleenElsie]

To defend our beliefs intelligently? It really depends on where you study, I suppose, and also what you mean by “beliefs.” A University education certainly aims to help us defend knowledge, but “belief” is another story. I believe that many Universities (not all) actually teach us to question our beliefs. This can be both positive and negative. On the positive side, some who begin to question their beliefs will take the steps necessary to logically and rationally verify the reasonableness of those beliefs. On the negative side, some who question their beliefs may simply discard them as “childhood stories” when they discover that there comes a point where faith is required.

Believe me, I am all for a University education. I have multiple degrees myself, and am pursuing a Masters right now. I do believe in the value of education, but it does have its “dangers.” I feel a little silly even using that word, but it’s the best I can come up with at the moment.

I believe PITFALLS come to mind. Yet, DANGERS is not so far off.

 

[KathleenElsie]

I think it’s just a period of life.

Then they get married/get a job/have babies and figure it out.

I believe the majority of of do move away from this period of life. But then IMHO politicians tend to remain stuck in this self indulgent period:shrug: .

 

[Fidelia]

It would seem that a disproportionate percentage of those undertaking higher education have standpoints which differ from the traditional interpretation of the church. Universities always seem to be “hotbeds of political activism” - to cite and overused phrase. Gay groups are more vocal, support for pro-choice is the rule not the exception, even Christian groups advocate things which would never fly in a Catholic church. I won’t even mention the parties.

Now before people chime in with anecdotal evidence, and mention the Pope’s undeniable academic credentials – I am speaking en generalities here.

Is it just youthful exuberance? A general period where young people rebel? Or does higher education attract those prone to sin and depravity. Are they exposed to ideas, and thoughts from left wing academics which merely pollute a young mind, or are they merely thinking for themselves for the first time after years of formal schooling?

What are you trying to imply?? The idea that higher education only attracts and causes more sin and depravity is one of the most ridiculous things I have ever heard and honestly i find it offensive. I am a recent graduate of a university, and FYI, I met the most conservative and Catholic people I know there, and the only reason I know any theology at all is because I went there. You say you are speaking in generality, and not to cite anecdotal evidence. Well, sorry but I just gave you anecdotal evidence, and on top of that, I am pointing out that drawing a conclusion from a generalization does not make a valid argument (I learned that in college). You invalidated your own argument.

 

[Salonika]

What bugs me the most is this: I have alot of older, orthodox family members. They know about my current beliefs, and how they very much lean towards the liberal - and instead of addressing me on those points, they blame my education. They blame my school instead of me. Gah!

It irks me like nothing else. It’s not my school that makes me have the beliefs I have; I chose them freely gosh darnit!

Sadly some things don’t change! That could have been me speaking three in the 1960’s. I found it a put down then and I would find it a put down now if I changed a long held view and was told it was either because of a book I read or a seminar I went to. That would ignore all the searching and re-evaluation I had done. I might be intrigued with a new idea or an alternative view but I won’t make it mine without testing it.

 

[thomfra]

What are you trying to imply?? The idea that higher education only attracts and causes more sin and depravity is one of the most ridiculous things I have ever heard and honestly i find it offensive. I am a recent graduate of a university, and FYI, I met the most conservative and Catholic people I know there, and the only reason I know any theology at all is because I went there. You say you are speaking in generality, and not to cite anecdotal evidence. Well, sorry but I just gave you anecdotal evidence, and on top of that, I am pointing out that drawing a conclusion from a generalization does not make a valid argument (I learned that in college). You invalidated your own argument.

Did you perchance take reading at school? Read the question a bit more carefully, have a think about it. Then respond.

 

[Pug]

A recent poster mentioned anecdotal evidence. That made me think it would be nice if we had some figures on this thread, not generalities. Is there some scientific study out there of American Catholics that indicates that the faithful Catholics have a certain education level and that the unfaithful ones have a different education level? And would that be meaningful, anyway?

For an example of a possible consideration, does that study account for that Catholics were immigrants and that it takes awhile for an immigrant group to work its way into the higher education system? What studies are there, and are they persuasive/conclusive with respect to the question in this thread? Further, do the studies only show association or are the truly demonstrating causation?

I guess I want to know, what empirical evidence is driving this thread?

 

[Fidelia]

A recent poster mentioned anecdotal evidence. That made me think it would be nice if we had some figures on this thread, not generalities. Is there some scientific study out there of American Catholics that indicates that the faithful Catholics have a certain education level and that the unfaithful ones have a different education level? And would that be meaningful, anyway?

For an example of a possible consideration, does that study account for that Catholics were immigrants and that it takes awhile for an immigrant group to work its way into the higher education system? What studies are there, and are they persuasive/conclusive with respect to the question in this thread? Further, do the studies only show association or are the truly demonstrating causation?

I guess I want to know, what empirical evidence is driving this thread?

That makes a lot more sense than drawing a conclusion from a generalization.

Also, the liberal problems mentioned by the OP are not unique to Universities. They’re all the issues of the present day in modern culture- politics, gay ‘marriage’, pro-choice- that’s all over the place.

 

[true_believer]

As a university student, I would have to say that college does not CREATE sinners. Every person in the world already is a sinner whether or not they have attended college.

I would agree that some of the things you mention, like an abundance of leftist ideals and a lack of Church influence do come out of universities because the whole idea of higher education is to use your own critical thinking skills to explore the ideas of others and to then decide for yourself what is true and what is not.

I don’t want to generalize, but it seems that many of those without a college education are conservative because they never had their beliefs challenged - they never had a chance to really take both sides of an issue at full value and then figure out which side was right. Instead, too many people in the world just follow what they have been told to do all their lives.

Universities don’t turn people into sinners, they merely open up the eyes of students to other possible truths than the ones they have been spoon fed for their entire lives.

Finally, I do acknowledge that many students make poor decisions while in college - whether that is partaking in underage drinking, binge drinking, ect. or whether that is having premarital sex. Whatever the case - the reason these things happen is because for many students it is their first true taste of freedom from parents, and as youth they often feel the need to take a walk on the dangerous side. I don’t condone the behaviors of my fellow students who fall into such sins, but at the same time, I do not think that their conduct should be blamed on the institutions of higher education which they attend.

 

[Fidelia]

As a university student, I would have to say that college does not CREATE sinners. Every person in the world already is a sinner whether or not they have attended college.

I would agree that some of the things you mention, like an abundance of leftist ideals and a lack of Church influence do come out of universities because the whole idea of higher education is to use your own critical thinking skills to explore the ideas of others and to then decide for yourself what is true and what is not.
absolutely right.

I don’t want to generalize, but it seems that many of those without a college education are conservative because they never had their beliefs challenged - they never had a chance to really take both sides of an issue at full value and then figure out which side was right. Instead, too many people in the world just follow what they have been told to do all their lives.
that is an excellent point. a person’s faith matures in stages, and in order to have a fully matured faith, there must be a period of challenge, or even doubt, and then the mature faith is even stronger than before.

Universities don’t turn people into sinners, they merely open up the eyes of students to other possible truths than the ones they have been spoon fed for their entire lives.

Finally, I do acknowledge that many students make poor decisions while in college - whether that is partaking in underage drinking, binge drinking, ect. or whether that is having premarital sex. Whatever the case - the reason these things happen is because for many students it is their first true taste of freedom from parents, and as youth they often feel the need to take a walk on the dangerous side. I don’t condone the behaviors of my fellow students who fall into such sins, but at the same time, I do not think that their conduct should be blamed on the institutions of higher education which they attend. /quote]

great post! I’d love to know what university you go to.

oops I think I messed up the quote html or whatever. I never took computer science- lol.

 

[rusty20]

University education can open you to new ideas and beliefs opposite from yours. The difference is how you react to this. I began college as a poli sci major, and i will end up a double major, including theology. College and my peers made me realize my faith is much more important to me than it had been through high school and early college. Rather than participate in the ‘evil things’ that take place at most colleges, I have been turned away and turned back ot Christ.

For me, University has helped my faith. But it just depends on how you let it affect you. It can be good or bad…

 

[mattjak28]

as a university student, i am qualified to say that you are hard pressed to find a wider pool of diversity in thought, conduct, and morality. that said, within this sea of multiplicity there are bound to be those with attitudes contrary to the catholic church’s. there are gay alliances, pro-choice rallies, and a beautifully vast array of religious organizations that evolve out of my campus alone. I think have found a few benifits of being exposed to these groups, some of which I do not agree with.

1. regardless of ones moral code, it can only be of the most luminous benifit to acquire knowledge of the “out-group”. for example, while you may not condone homosexuality, by talk with a gay pride group or attending a function, you are bound to climb upon higher grounds of intimate understanding to WHY they do differently than you, such as what their life experiences were, or their sensation/emotions of forming a gay relationship. now, if your own views are correct, then no doubt they will stand up to this new insight, but fortification will come through the ability to better comprehend the motivations of the “other” which is the necessary step for steps toward resolution of moral conflict.
2. they, having seen your willingness to listen, will be more inclined to dialogue productivly. any wsidom you may offer will be more readily accepted after you have established yourself as a friend and fellow concerned human being, not merely an opponent.

more than ever, there is nothing to fear from new perspective. it will build upon the sturdy schemas you already have formed and help renovate or demolish those that are laced with error. even Catholics are error-prone.

 

[buffalo]

as a university student, i am qualified to say that you are hard pressed to find a wider pool of diversity in thought, conduct, and morality. that said, within this sea of multiplicity there are bound to be those with attitudes contrary to the catholic church’s. there are gay alliances, pro-choice rallies, and a beautifully vast array of religious organizations that evolve out of my campus alone. I think have found a few benifits of being exposed to these groups, some of which I do not agree with.

1. regardless of ones moral code, it can only be of the most luminous benifit to acquire knowledge of the “out-group”. for example, while you may not condone homosexuality, by talk with a gay pride group or attending a function, you are bound to climb upon higher grounds of intimate understanding to WHY they do differently than you, such as what their life experiences were, or their sensation/emotions of forming a gay relationship. now, if your own views are correct, then no doubt they will stand up to this new insight, but fortification will come through the ability to better comprehend the motivations of the “other” which is the necessary step for steps toward resolution of moral conflict.
2. they, having seen your willingness to listen, will be more inclined to dialogue productivly. any wsidom you may offer will be more readily accepted after you have established yourself as a friend and fellow concerned human being, not merely an opponent.

more than ever, there is nothing to fear from new perspective. it will build upon the sturdy schemas you already have formed and help renovate or demolish those that are laced with error. even Catholics are error-prone.

And on top of being duped we pay big bucks for it. I hear people say the college experience is important. Just where did education go?

 

[mattjak28]

buffalo, although you quote me, I don’t see how your post sits specifically in realtion to my own. it seems to be a comment on the overall thread more than anything. I take it you disagree with me? care to elaborate on where my faults may lie? thank you.