A method-based corruptionist account of indoctrination: A reply to Rebecca Taylor and John White
Clicks: 1
ID: 287047
2023
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
0.0
/100
1 views
0 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Ranked #3,430 of 3,757 articles by views in Malay Journal
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 3,757 in total.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
In 2017, John White replies to Rebecca Taylor's work on indoctrination. His work details three differences: (1) Taylor believes in an outcome-based view of indoctrination, White prefers an intention-based view. (2) Taylor proposes “close-mindedness” as the outcome of indoctrination, White proposes “preventing reflection”. (3) Taylor proposes that the dyadic relationship is necessary for indoctrination. White argues that indoctrination is primarily policy-driven. In response to Taylor and White’s first difference, I provide an account of indoctrination based on Ian James Kidd’s “Epistemic Corruption.” Kidd defines this as when the epistemic character of an agent is harmed by being exposed to different conditions that inspires, develops or enhances the practice of epistemic vices. I argue that, in order to sufficiently define indoctrination, it should be viewed as epistemically corrupting, and should follow its conditions (i.e. no necessary outcome and intention). Doing so would prove that Taylor and White’s accounts are insufficient. I defend my claim by discussing epistemic corruption and its conditions, providing thought experiments that show indoctrination without intention or outcome, and proposing my method-based corruptionist account of indoctrination, established through Kidd’s framework. I define indoctrination as “an epistemically corrupting teaching practice and process that enables systems to instill beliefs on learners without question, could lead to closed-mindedness and occurs regardless of intentionality and outcome.” My account resolves Taylor and White’s two remaining differences. I also defend my view from possible objections. I conclude that Taylor and White’s accounts are insufficient because indoctrination should have no required intention or outcome.
Keywords: Epistemology, Indoctrination, Education, Edification, Epistemic Corruption, Method-based
| Reference Key |
persistent_1760660433_68f18bd1d48c5
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Carreon, Josef Lorence D. |
| Journal | Malay Journal |
| Year | 2023 |
| DOI |
DOI not found
|
| URL | |
| Keywords | Keywords not found |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.