A group of York students has won the opportunity to have their very own I-phone application developed after winning The App Challenge final, held at the Ron Cooke Hub on Wednesday, January 18.
YUSU Welfare officer Bob Hughes has warned students to be vigilant after a student loans phishing scam has been revealed.
Her Majesty the Queen will be visiting York on Maundy Thursday, 5th April, as part of the 800th anniversary of York’s Charter for the traditional “Royal Maundy” ceremony.
A flood caused by a heating system “failure” forced the university IT services to shut down many essential systems on Sunday night, causing problems for many students on the eve of their exams and assignment due-dates.
Stein was encouraged to run the pioneering project after volunteering at a similar camp in Michigan in 2007. It will run at the end of July.
The five day camp is being hosted by Camp Quest, an organisation established as an alternative to the Boy Scouts of America where all members are required to sign a "Declaration of Religious Belief".
Although the camps have become increasingly popular in a number of US states, the camp organised by Stein will be the first to run outside of North America.
Stein stated how after attending a camp in Michigan she researched summer camps in Britain and was surprised by how many had a distinct religious affiliation, compared to none that catered for non-religious children who wish to discuss rational humanism with other non-believers.
She told The Yorker: "We aren't about converting children or trying to tell them what is right or wrong, rather we seek to promote critical thinking, philosophy and science in the context of those without religious belief. Our aim is educational - we are not an indoctrination scheme trying to push some 'atheist agenda' to abolish all religion."
Stein added: "There are few social networks for the children of nonreligious parents, in the same way that children may make friends at church or Sunday school, and this is part of what that attempts to be: a way in which children can meet to discuss their ideas, have fun and know that they are not alone."
The camp will see children participate in traditional outdoor pursuits but combine these with discussons about religion and non belief. A significant activity of the week is an ongoing discussion in which children, using unicorns as a metaphor for God, are encouraged to attempt to disprove their existence.
Stein explained that this activity is designed not to totally disprove the existence of God but to introduce children to "logical fallacies in a fun way".
The project has already attracted media attention. An article in The Independent described the project as the "godless alternative for non believers" and expressed the opinion that it adds to a "growing pantheon of US-style holiday getaways in Britain", comparing the camp to evangelical bible schools and ‘fat camps’ already imported from America.
Stein graduated from York last summer with a degree in Psychology, and is currently pursuing a masters in Religion in Contemporary Society at Kings College London. Whilst at the university, she wrote an article about her experiences at the camp in Michigan for The Yorker, which was picked up by an atheist website and received a vast number of hits.
For more information, visit the Camp Quest UK website.
This whole idea looks completely pointless.
I hope the same people who criticise the indoctrinal bible schools criticise this pointless idea. How about just having a camp without the influence of any religious belief (or opposition to religious belief), this is indoctrination - nothing more and nothing less, waste of time and money.
exactly, agreed.
I could name a good 20 camps that I know of which aren't religious... I'm not exactly sure how this is the "first" of anything unless you have to be an athiest to attend, in which case their comments seem to suggest that isn't the case?
I've been to Christian camps and non-Christian camps. The key difference is that Christian camps spend about an hour reading the bible a day or something along those lines... I'm not entirely sure how many "non-religious children who wish to discuss rational humanism" there are in the UK? And what age-group..? I doubt there are 10 year olds who wish to discuss Nietzsche..?
I'm not criticising the idea or saying it's pointless but am wondering what the purpose of the camp is supposed to be since there are plenty (majority, perhaps) of non-Christian "camps" or "summer schools" or whatever other words people want to give for similarish concepts? JR
Hooray! My Yorker password still works!
A lot of the criticism the camp has attracted has been from people who claim it's a waste of time and think that it's sufficient to have a purely secular camp with no reference to religion. This would be to miss the point of Camp Quest entirely.
If you push any belief without explanation or full understanding, you produce mindless followers, which in our opinion is just as bad if they are atheist as if they are religious. Our purpose is not to tell the children that there is no god/s, but rather ask them WHY they think so, and what they think is there instead. Children really respond to this and find it hugely rewarding.
We are also running a few Philosophy for Children sessions, which don't exactly discuss Nietzsche, but aim to introduce the children to philosophical questions and debate in an encouraging atmosphere. I feel (and this is now not necessarily representative of Camp Quest) that schools do not encourage critical thinking and philosophy enough, so this is an attempt to do so.
Plus, the camp is FUN!
I wonder how many 10 year old children wish to read a book that threatens eternal damnation for non-believers.
Great idea, any child who is religious at that age has been indoctrinated, plain and simple. Let them decide for themselves.
Nice to be anonymous, ain't it.
I think that's great, Samantha. I studied philosophy at this university under John Issitt for a few weeks when I was about 14 and I thoroughly enjoyed it. I just hope that you're not attacking religion but rather encouraging general discussion and debate. One of the things that I don't like about large sections of Christianity is that it does end up a little like what #5 is suggesting, where the child believes simply because they've been told to. Discussion can only be a good thing.
I'd still debate that this is the first nonreligious camp though 
At least it's nonreligious, not antireligious. Good luck with it!
#5: that book has a solution to the problem of our sin which is open to all. by a person choosing not to have God in their life they are choosing separation from him, and he allows them their wish. Your comment is analagous to you wanting to jump off a cliff and saying that a book is threatening you because it warns that you will die a nasty death if you jump.
Regarding indoctrination, the same argument can work the other way around as well. You could say a child who specifically does not believe in God at that age has been indoctrinated by atheism (which is itself a Godless religion, after all it has a set of core beliefs including that God does not exist, and at least one atheist society is registered as a religion - i can't remember which). Both arguments underestimate the child, you cannot assume that just because a 10 year old believes something strongly that they have been forced to.
Calling atheism a religion is like calling bald a hair colour.
Atheism is blatantly not a religion, even if aspects of it are legally classed as such or there are similarities. The definition of "a religion" would involve theism. Hardcore atheism may well be religious in nature, by deliberately having a set of values or whatever attached to it but a religion has the connotation of belief in a higher power.
Either way, that point is outside of the argument that #7 was making - and I agree. If a 10 year old is able to call him/herself an "atheist" then that is as indoctrinated or not as a 10 year old "Christian". The child can either think about God properly or not and it's a two-way thing. And anything that encourages deliberation, discussion and intellectual debate is good - anything thatclaims to be and then pushes that debate into a biased discussion or indoctrination of some description is not good.
#8,#9: The definition of religion is arguable (correct me if I'm wrong but I think Buddhism is usually considered a religion and isn't theistic). Obviously it varies, but atheism has a set of core beliefs taken on faith about both the metaphysical and physical, and a belief system built up around it which it's members use to interpret the world, just like other religions/faiths. There are no grounds on which to distinguish it from any other religion/faith (even if it's members generally don't like these labels).
Note I am referring to atheism roughly as those who believe there is no God, along with the beliefs that usually accompany this (i.e. if a 10 year old said "I'm an atheist", that would be my interpretation).
Anyway as you said Jason, my point about indoctrination stands.
"A significant activity of the week is an ongoing discussion in which children, using unicorns as a metaphor for God, are encouraged to attempt to disprove their existence"
I would interpret this use of a given metaphor as a method of indoctrination. Are they encouraged to think and discuss whether a unicorn is an appropriate metaphor for God or are they expected to take it on faith? Do they even understand what other people believe God is if he is not taught about? Is such a metaphor, with its connotations of myth and inexistence, not purposely suggestive on the theologically uneducated that God is similarly non-existent? Does this not intentionally foster the incorrect belief that theists are as uneducated and unintelligent as those who believe in unicorns and fairytales, even though both atheism and theism are metaphysical beliefs that cannot be tested?
You must log in to submit a comment.
Report