A method-based corruptionist account of indoctrination: A reply to Rebecca Taylor and John White

Date of Publication

2023

Document Type

Bachelor's Thesis

Degree Name

Bachelor of Arts Major in Philosophy

Subject Categories

Philosophy

College

College of Liberal Arts

Department/Unit

Philosophy

Thesis Advisor

Mark Anthony L. Dacela

Defense Panel Member

Robert James M. Boyles
Napoleon M. Mabaquiao, Jr.
Elenita D. Garcia

Abstract/Summary

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

Abstract Format

html

Language

English

Format

Electronic

Keywords

Knowledge, Theory of; Brainwashing; Education—Philosophy

Upload Full Text

wf_yes

Embargo Period

4-27-2023

This document is currently not available here.

Share

COinS