Hacker News Reader

Comment by dwater | Hacker News Reader

When I searched for the definition of indoctrination I get this:

"The process of teaching a person or group to accept a set of beliefs uncritically."

What I see in your examples does sound like teaching a set of beliefs, but there is nothing that I see where it is done uncritically. For example, there are stereotypes in our society about what genders and races are good at STEM and which are not. If a word problem reverses those stereotypes, do you think that encourages or discourages the reader to think critically about their own biases?

View on HN

I would suggest this not be done in math class, lest you go down this path [1]:

"Before the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution there were 48 students in class one in Qunli Elementary: During the six years of obliteration by revisionism on the educational system, 13 students dropped out. All 13 students were from the worker or poor peasant families. Compute how many students from the worker or poor peasant families dropped out and how many were retained due to the obliteration by revisionism?"

[1] https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.98...

Wow -- your example is real (page 12). Thanks for that fascinating article.

> "The process of teaching a person or group to accept a set of beliefs uncritically."

> there is nothing that I see where it is done uncritically.

I mean, how is it going for those criticizing CRT-ification of education? It doesn't seem like its advocates are actually interested in criticism of the dogma.

> how is it going for those criticizing CRT-ification of education?

From what I can tell in our local area it seems to be going about as well as they hoped.

First they rail against about some weird graduate-level field most people have never heard of that isn't related to anything taught in our elementary schools. Then they interpret the eyerolls from the other parents and patient administrators attempting to keep the conversation focused on relevant topics as attacks on their freedom and they get to play the martyr.

It's hard to say whether the teaching is uncritical without actually being present in the classroom. If to "counter racialized or gendered ideas" is implemented by insisting anything other than 50/50 representation across all occupations is evidence of discrimination and that any suggestion to the contrary is sexism, then yeah that's definitely uncritical. I'm not sure how prevalent those kind of simplistic teachings are, but they do exist.

> but there is nothing that I see where it is done uncritically

And you yet you immediately say:

> there are stereotypes in our society about what genders and races are good at STEM and which are not

Your post is a good example for why it is very difficult to make any critique of the DIE "teachings" in a public / classroom setting. DIE only makes sense if front of a mob.

If you disagree, you are against the DIE (diversity, inclusion and equity) virtuous teachings. Unlike other theoretical fields, to understand is to agree with DIE and its apparent virtues.

And DIE should stay away from any serious academic setting, especially young students, because it's a widely discredited field: https://areomagazine.com/2018/10/02/academic-grievance-studi...

> DIE

Usually spelled DEI, for the obvious reason that "dei" isn't an English word meaning death.

Dei also means God in some context, so who cares.

That's also about not calling attention to its cult-like characteristics. DIE is a little too on the nose for a group that demands conformity and unpersons those that dissent.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com