Welcome to Gaia! ::

Alright, for those among us who haven't taken a psych course or been swindled firsthand by it, I'll explain Low-balling real quick:

The Lowball technique is often seen in car sales; The salesman offers a car to a customer at a really good price, and the customer decides to buy the car BASED on the low price. The salesman then goes to talk to "the boss" about the sale, and leaves the customer with the car. After making the decision to buy, the customer then automatically starts reinforcing the decision in their own mind. Perhaps they decide that they like the color after all, or maybe they come up with an obscure use for that random feature.
Eventually, the salesman comes back bearing bad news. "The boss" wouldn't allow him to sell that particular car for so low because "they'd lose money". Normally, seeing as how the price was the only reason to buy the car in the first place, you'd think the deal would be off, but no, the customer made a commitment, and reinforced it with after-the-fact reasoning. So, despite the not-so good deal, The customer falls back on their reasoning and buys anyways.

Imagine, if you will, a block which represents the decision to buy the car. Initially the decision is "held up" by a cingular central block that is the cheap price. Then, after the decision is already being held up, the customer rationalizes a bit, and a few other, smaller blocks: "obscure feature", "I could get used to that Mustardy color", "I guess I'd be supporting American manufacturers...", and "I MIGHT take up off-roading sometime..." are added, say, at the corners, further supporting the block that is the car's purchase.
Then here comes Mr. Salesman with his story, and in rolls the "Lowball" that knocks out the central price-strut. But hey, the decision still stands! the other, smaller blocks continue to hold it up. Granted of course, they were all dependant upon the low-price to begin with, but commitment is a powerful unconscious motivator.


How does this relate to religion, you ask? Well, lets visit another scenario.

Johnny is three years old. He's just developed enough to form concrete memories and has begun asking questions about the world around him. One day johnny asks his mother where everything came from, and, as a devout believer in the christian faith, she tells him "god did it". She tells him as truth what she believes on a matter of faith, and of course little johnny believes her, since she is his all-knowing maternal figure. As he grows up, Johnny is taught more and more about his family's religion and he believes it all to be fact as he goes along.
As Johnny begins to grow up, he looks out into the world for confirmation of the beliefs he was taught by his family, and he finds reasons that further justify his family's beliefs, however dependant upon his assumption of those beliefs' truth they may be.
At one point or another, Johnny develops enough mentally to realize that his mother and his family aren't infallible (perhaps around the post-conventional stage of moral development), and that things they tell him to be true aren't necessarily true just because they believe it. But by this point Johnny has already created his own reasons for his faith, his own little blocks holding up the decision of his belief, and his family's credibility no longer matters solely.

Through taking advantage of their children's youthful trust, families present their beliefs as fact, and the child's mental development facilitates their gradual growth into believers themselves, and thus hereditary religion is produced.


If every family told their children the truth, that they don't really KNOW, but that they believe whatever they believe based on faith, there would be alot more spiritual diversity within specific families.

religion shouldn't be a brain-washing process, it should be an informed personal decision made by the individual instead of a form of trickery.


To preempt the inevitable argument, yes I realize that many a religion believes that only their faith is the route to salvation or what have you, and that for many, this goal supercedes all others.

What I think people should ponder is just how important their faith is to their life, and how it might feel to think that the only reason you perscribe to that particular faith as opposed to the multitudes of others, is that you were tricked, lied to even. I don't think that would bode over well for those who can escape the self-justifying circular logic often employed for belief-threat reactions.

In your own beliefs, does the end justify the means in teaching your child spirituality? Or would you rather he/she found whatever faith was best for them on their own and for the right reasons instead of trickery?

my mother taught me the basics of christian faith. but when faced with a question about soemthing, like death for example she said honestly "i dont know". I believe in god, and in christianity, i guess not as devoutly as is i should, because i dont go to church and i question. but i was raised to always question. i believe that when u stop questioning and stop making assumptions is when u truly lose faith. i was not taught hypocrasy like most people i was taught tolerance. and i agree that people should have support to find the religion that speaks to them, with out condemnation and damnation.

You see, thats the clincher, its trickery disguised as justifiable tradition. Parent's don't think of it as trickery, they just think that their faith is so strong that they can say that they "know". It's hard that way because the parents are lying to both their children AND themselves.

Just because its a trick thats worked for centuries and corners both parties into a line of justifying pseudo-logic, doesn't change the nature of it. The child's religion isn't their own because they never had a choice. Not realistically

Life's a dance you learn as you go
Sometimes you lead, sometimes you follow
I was raised as a Muslim but my parents don't know much about the religion but they do believe in God and they believe he is there. They made me grow up with the religion and look how I turned out xd (look at my siggy)

Ok, first off, I never said that spiritual diversity within families would be a GOOD thing persay, im just saying that the only reason families always seem to be of the same religion is because of the classic trickery.

And yeah, you're right, technically speaking theres NOTHING you can't doubt other than the fact that you exist. Empiricism however isn't limited to only things you've tested yourself, as there are cases where limited trust is viable, hence the scientific community actually ever getting anywhere.

Also, belief and knowledge in this case are quite separate, since there is absolutely no evidence for or against, say, the existance of god, or WHICH god for that matter, and thus any cognitive label of "knowledge" is mistaken, as it is all relegated to PURE faith/belief based in subjectivity which shouldn't be thrust upon someone objectively.


No matter how family dynamics work, the morality involved in not allowing a person to choose their own faith by taking advantage of human brain development is still on the 'not-so-good' end of the spectrum.

Yes, you're right, the religious aspect isn't a conscious sleazy trick in the same way that the car sales example went. The point was that it takes advantage of the same psychological pitfalls that people are prone to.

For many families its not a conscious lie being told. The parents confuse knowledge with strength of faith, and thus the misleading occurs. I guess then one thing I have to argue in addition to the rest is for parents to think a bit more carefully about their own thought processes and actually know the difference between things they think are facts and things they believe with strong faith.

Hehe, yes, and after you do that, you'll feel the sudden urge to buy a car from me *rubs hands greedily* yes.


anywho, the point of parents thinking about it is for them to simply see something for what it is, for better or for worse, and possibly to want to do something different because of it. The rest is up to them. Maybe they would want to simply present their religion to their children in different terms, teaching their children about the beliefs instead of inadvertantly taking advantage of their kid's development. Perhaps instead they would decide that the method isn't worth the result and allow their children to actually have a say in what they believe. Either way, there's no good reason why the whole affair should go unquestioned, and any knowledge gleaned from doing so is worth the effort and the rest is up to them.

Wow, how original, a post explaining the concept of religion as a tool for brainwashing children. Unfortunately for this theory the fact is, many little Johnnys who grow up with their parents drinking and fighting all the time and ridiculing little Johnny whenever he asks about a God end up having a faith in God stronger than any child who grew up in an environment that would suggest a religion. Take about two thirds of my friends for example (most of the remaining third being atheist).

On the flipside, when I was a child I was friends with three children whose parents were fanatically "Christian" but obviously didn't quite get what Jesus is about, you know the type. One of the brothers, 17, just moved into a different province to live with his "boyfriend" he met on the internet (who he told everyone was his girlfriend, apparently knowing secretly otherwise all along), and the other now has psycopathic death-wishes for his parents. The girl, I have no clue what happened to her (she was the oldest).

And then there's the whole baptism thing. Every day grown men are baptised because they have chosen to either return to their faith stronger than ever, or want to confirm their newfound faith in an established religion. Many adults from every walk of life are blessed with the realization -- in some form -- of God during their lifetime.

The problem here is that you obviously consider religion "bad", which it isn't. But since religion is "bad", then when people pass on their faith to others it becomes "brainwashing". However, if you agree that religion is "good" then it can't exactly be "brainwashing" when it is passed on to others. I mean you don't brainwash and control people with GOOD. You do it with fear and pain. But the Christian faith is NOT one of fear and pain, it is one of love and fulfillment, and that is why we pass it on to our children. We do not FEAR God; we REVERE Him!

And that's all I have to say about that