Is the IB left wing/liberal?

[Jonathan13]

The IB, of course, claims that it is not a political organisation but there is a lot of evidence to the contrary. For instance the IB is totalitarian. Not only does it want to educate you academically but it wants to mould your personality, via CAS and TOK especially, to become an internationalist global citizen. It also seems to preach moral/cultural relativism; just look at the IB mission statement.

 

The International Baccalaureate aims to develop inquiring, knowledgeable and caring young people who help to create a better and more peaceful world through intercultural understanding and respect.

To this end the organization works with schools, governments and international organizations to develop challenging programmes of international education and rigorous assessment.

These programmes encourage students across the world to become active, compassionate and lifelong learners who understand that other people, with their differences, can also be right.

That last bit especially seems to promote postmodernism. It also does not count religious activities as CAS nor does it use BCE/CE in its history or philosophy textbooks. Finally in environmental systems and societies (ESS) and biology it teaches global warming as fact.

 

I could go on with the evidence that the IB is a political organisation trying to indoctrinate its students to be liberal left wing clones but I would like to know whether it is just my IB school misinterpreting the IB or whether this is the same world wide.

[Award Winning Boss]

What's your issue with treating global warming as fact? Do you deny climate change or something? 

 

If that's the mission statement from the IB then it's the same all throughout the world. I don't think it has an explicit political agenda myself. Perhaps you would see the global learner thing as political but I don't really.

[flinquinnster]

I honestly don't think that the IB is promoting an overt political agenda, and not one which is left-wing/liberal. And especially not one which is 'totalitarian', though I certainly felt at times that the IB was oppressing and dictating my life!

 

Simply aiming to influence a person beyond the strict definition of education as learning from books isn't totalitarian - honestly, most education systems aim to encourage some kind of holistic development. I could argue that the requirements for US college admission could be considered dictatorial in imposing an (over)belief in individualism and distinctiveness, by making applicants write so many essays about how special they are, and encouraging the pursuit of certain extra-curricular activities. Totalitarianism is distinct in that it is far more extreme - rather than the IB simply encouraging people to undertake certain activities and describe them in certain ways, it is to rigorously exclude and oppress other thoughts - more North-Korea style.

 

Moreover, IB - and especially through TOK/CAS and all other classes, when delivered well, is excellent at prompting students to question everything. Even notions like the benefits of a global outlook are challenged, e.g. in the Geography HL material if memory serves me right. I for one also think it's a bit disingenuous to describe the IB's general acceptance of some degree of uncertainty and subjectivity as postmodernism/relativism that is negative - though again, as much as I disliked TOK, I think that it does a decent job of allowing you the opportunity to debate and dissect these notions. 

 

Also, most of my textbooks did use BCE/CE simply due to the necessity of distinguishing between ancient and more modern dates. And as to global warming, I don't see either the harms of how it's taught in the IB. It may be to do with the pretty agonising level of detail the Physics syllabus devotes to it, but it's not asserted as some kind of grand doctrine but rather as due to a set of mechanisms acting on a large-scale. I will agree however there is the argument that time is better spent doing the more conventional areas of physics in more depth rather than spending so long on 'new' science, though I personally found the climate topics the most useful for a non-STEM career. I can't speak for the Biology or ESS syllabi though.

 

As much as the IB likes to have their elaborate mission statements, ultimately the grand visions it details are rarely executed like some rigid to-do list. Most schools feel free to ignore a lot of those 'international' links in the syllabus of subjects like Chemistry and end up taking pretty creative interpretations of the aims of IB in the reality of the classroom. In your case that might be the issue: your school using the IB as an excuse to press some kind of agenda. It does happen - consider situations in US states where in science creationism is taught but evolution not. But I hope that doesn't ruin your view of the IB as a whole. I hope we've proven that we've not been indoctrinated by the IB to become 'liberal left wing clones'.

[Sandwich]

Personally I don't think knowing about other cultures and wanting to be peaceful are 'left wing' concepts. Right wing doesn't mean war mongering and ignorant/isolationist (...unless that happens to be the attitude of that party). Right versus left is a different kettle of fish. The IB don't even write their own textbooks so any BCE/CE pedantry depends on whichever company wrote and published the books.

 

Anyway the main reason I was going to reply to this was to say that most of this is all bull**** anyway. The IB achieves none of these things in any of its lessons, it's all just nice stuff written on their leaflets to make people think "awww, I'm raising a considerate & responsible young person!". Mission statements, learner profile, CAS and whatnot are all very lovely, but totally irrelevant to me learning about science, or differentiation, or analysing a novel, or learning Spanish and so on. The most they do is attempt to teach some kind of critical thinking in TOK, but even then their method via the TOK diagram is just really.. well, weird. Although if you're big on climate change denial, perhaps a bit of critical thinking would come in handy.

 

In conclusion, if they're indoctrinating us they're superbly crap at it, because none of their goals are really specifically achieved by anyone. People remain the same person after IB as they were before IB.

[yii yann]

 

The IB, of course, claims that it is not a political organisation but there is a lot of evidence to the contrary. For instance the IB is totalitarian. Not only does it want to educate you academically but it wants to mould your personality, via CAS and TOK especially, to become an internationalist global citizen. It also seems to preach moral/cultural relativism; just look at the IB mission statement.

 

 

The danger with "-isms" and "-tarians" is that when taken out of its original intended context, you get extremely inappropriate uses of the word. For example, you calling the IB "totalitarian" is about as meaningful as calling lemonade totalitarian: Not only does it want to quench your thirst, but it also wants to please your tastebuds by being sweet. 

 

Do you see what I mean?

 

Also seriously what is an internationalist.

 

I highly doubt the IB has some grand scheme to mould you into the next Al Gore. Most high school programs have a certain element of "awareness of global issues". I admit that the IB has a bit more of an environmental hippy vibe than the others, but that's just one of its quirks. Like how A levels are said to be purely examination focused and CBSE is said to be an exercise in reciting the textbook. Perhaps to some extent it might mould your personality into one that is more aware of global issues, but certainly not into becoming an environmental terrorist(?) or something. 

 

Once again, what is moral/cultural relativism? 

 

 

 

These programmes encourage students across the world to become active, compassionate and lifelong learners who understand that other people, with their differences, can also be right.

That last bit especially seems to promote postmodernism. It also does not count religious activities as CAS nor does it use BCE/CE in its history or philosophy textbooks. Finally in environmental systems and societies (ESS) and biology it teaches global warming as fact.

 

I could go on with the evidence that the IB is a political organisation trying to indoctrinate its students to be liberal left wing clones but I would like to know whether it is just my IB school misinterpreting the IB or whether this is the same world wide.

 

 

I can think of a few reasons why it would not want to count religious activities as CAS: 

 

1) There are very few religious activities where Creativity, Action or Service is involved. Of the few, a fraction are meaningful. When you look at that fraction, you tend to realize that with or without religious involvement, that activity would still be the same. An example: A guy in our school tried to pass off his Church's program to make its youth members give less privileged kids free academic support. At the end of the day however, Christ, the Holy Cross, Holy Ghost, etc didn't really affect the action of giving academic support. So, while he could declare the support itself under CAS, there's no reason to declare christianity's involvement in it. Do you see what I mean? 

 

2) If you allow religious activities, it's kind of hard to tell anybody that their religious activity is "wrong". 

 

3) There's more but I really do not want to start a debate about religion here. 

 

I think they do not use BCE/CE because it's kinda like the British knighting system. There is no British Empire, yet you've got The Most Excellent Order of the British Empire and stuff like that, which kinda bums out everyone who were annexed forcefully under the British Empire. Possibly the IBO decided not to use BCE/CE to avoid stepping on the toes of those who do not believe in Christ. Would you like it if I declared my birthday the start of a "New Era" and scribbled that all over your book, when clearly, you do not worship me? It's kinda close-minded, don't ya think?

 

Liberal and Left wing are somewhat feeble attempts by politicians to distinguish themselves from other politicians, when there frankly isn't much difference. Doesn't mean all right-wingers think Global warming is a hoax, doesn't mean all Liberals want to put a Muslim Extremist in power.

 

By the way, your definition of "evidence" is... creative, to say the least.

 

As others have mentioned, the IB makes several brave statements like these but at the end of the day, it's a pre-university qualification. No more, no less. Most schools do not attempt to link trigonometric integration and the war in Syria, I promise you. If you are "indoctrinated" by weak sauce like this, you are likely to be "indoctrinated" by any idiot on the road.

 

 

EDIT: I just saw your topic requesting Philosophy EE criteria for 2015. This explains a lot

Edited June 29, 2014 by yii yann

[peter wai]

Isn't it contradictory for you to say IB is 'liberal' on one hand, and 'totalitarian' on the other? At least from my understanding, being 'liberal' and 'totalitarian' are 2 very different things...

[John Hoose]

 

It also does not count religious activities as CAS nor does it use BCE/CE in its history or philosophy textbooks.

 

My school says that religious devotion and proselytising is not CAS - religious activities (raising money for a church, mosque...) still counts as an activity so the IB isn't attempting to be postmodern and dismiss religion.

 

Also, both MYP and IB in my school are against BC/AD and use Common Era notation (BCE/CE) - this is more or less standard in schools and academic settings. 

[Jonathan13]

 

 

It also does not count religious activities as CAS nor does it use BCE/CE in its history or philosophy textbooks.

 

My school says that religious devotion and proselytising is not CAS - religious activities (raising money for a church, mosque...) still counts as an activity so the IB isn't attempting to be postmodern and dismiss religion.

 

Also, both MYP and IB in my school are against BC/AD and use Common Era notation (BCE/CE) - this is more or less standard in schools and academic settings. 

 

Not really. Most if not all universities accept BC/AD. It is only hippy and liberal schools that do not approve of the idea of a power greater than their own institutions, like the IB for instance, that do not.

[John Hoose]

 

 

 

It also does not count religious activities as CAS nor does it use BCE/CE in its history or philosophy textbooks.

 

My school says that religious devotion and proselytising is not CAS - religious activities (raising money for a church, mosque...) still counts as an activity so the IB isn't attempting to be postmodern and dismiss religion.

 

Also, both MYP and IB in my school are against BC/AD and use Common Era notation (BCE/CE) - this is more or less standard in schools and academic settings. 

 

Not really. Most if not all universities accept BC/AD. It is only hippy and liberal schools that do not approve of the idea of a power greater than their own institutions, like the IB for instance, that do not.

 

Uni's and schools in islamic countries do not use BC/AD...

 

So you feel that by not using BCE/CE, the IB are attempting to try and disapprove of religion...

 

In one way I guess your right - the age of the planet in IB Physics is 4.54 Billion years. Biology accepts that Evolution is not theory but fact. So clearly, the IB is definitely choosing to go against this 'great power' and not just adhere to academic norms and facts. 

[Jonathan13]

 

 

 

 

It also does not count religious activities as CAS nor does it use BCE/CE in its history or philosophy textbooks.

 

My school says that religious devotion and proselytising is not CAS - religious activities (raising money for a church, mosque...) still counts as an activity so the IB isn't attempting to be postmodern and dismiss religion.

 

Also, both MYP and IB in my school are against BC/AD and use Common Era notation (BCE/CE) - this is more or less standard in schools and academic settings. 

 

Not really. Most if not all universities accept BC/AD. It is only hippy and liberal schools that do not approve of the idea of a power greater than their own institutions, like the IB for instance, that do not.

 

Uni's and schools in islamic countries do not use BC/AD...

 

So you feel that by not using BCE/CE, the IB are attempting to try and disapprove of religion...

 

In one way I guess your right - the age of the planet in IB Physics is 4.54 Billion years. Biology accepts that Evolution is not theory but fact. So clearly, the IB is definitely choosing to go against this 'great power' and not just adhere to academic norms and facts. 

 

BC/AD is the academic norm in the west. The part of the world with the most IB schools and good universities. Most religions do not deny the 4.54 billion year age of the planet nor evolution.

[yii yann]

 

 

 

It also does not count religious activities as CAS nor does it use BCE/CE in its history or philosophy textbooks.

 

My school says that religious devotion and proselytising is not CAS - religious activities (raising money for a church, mosque...) still counts as an activity so the IB isn't attempting to be postmodern and dismiss religion.

 

Also, both MYP and IB in my school are against BC/AD and use Common Era notation (BCE/CE) - this is more or less standard in schools and academic settings. 

 

Not really. Most if not all universities accept BC/AD. It is only hippy and liberal schools that do not approve of the idea of a power greater than their own institutions, like the IB for instance, that do not.

 

 

It's funny that YOU are talking about indoctrination. 

[Thrashmaster]

I think we should do an OPVL on the original post... But perhaps the limitations section would be way too long.

 

Your point about it teaching relativism is something I can agree with, especially in ToK, where my teacher actually announces multiple times per class how everything is on a scale of grey, now black and white. 

 

However, I do think you are looking at this the wrong way. I don't see a way an organization like this could be completely unbiased and not offend anybody. For example, if they taught that global warming wasn't fact, this thread would be calling it right wing. If they taught that there isn't a consensus, they'd certainly have other things that people would argue with them about until they stopped teaching those too. And then, if they can't teach anything, what's the point?

 

I think the IB is doing a great job at staying as close to unbiased as possible. They do have an agenda, as they say in their mission statement, and if you feel it is too close to postmodernism, and you don't like postmodernism, then don't take the IB. Besides, the IB evens says that it 'encourages' those things, not that it is a requirement. They're not being totalitarian, and if encouraging people to be "active, compassionate and lifelong learners" is wrong, I don't want to be right.

[Sandwich]

Well I'm confused, surely BCE/CE = the non-religious version just talking about common eras? So the IB are sticking with the religious script and using AD/BC. Which directly refers to the birth (or death, I can't remember) of jesus. Although this is really quite a stick-up-your-bum level of pedantry at this point, it's hard to have very strong feelings about which letters are used to mean the same thing

 

All of which continues to overlook the point that the IB don't write their own textbooks, so really we have no idea what (if anything) 'the IB' wants. Similarly they don't decree the details of what does or doesn't count for CAS, that's up to your CAS Co-ordinator. Raising money for your religion is okay with some and not with others. Personally I'm with the latter group, and find raising money in order to extend the ring of conversion or whatever pretty distasteful, but that's just me. I am not a CAS Co-ordinator...

[Andy Sebastian]

Are you aware, Jonathan, that the IB program refuses to use the word "genocide" on its history exams because conservative elements in certain nations where it maintains a presence continue to deny responsibility for such atrocities, and that it instead asks you write about "the treatment of minorities"?  This doesn't reflect the behavior of a totalitarian leftist political machine.

 

 

The IB, of course, claims that it is not a political organisation but there is a lot of evidence to the contrary. For instance the IB is totalitarian.

 

The IB program's flexible cirriculum is precisely the opposite of totalitarianism.  Different schools are allowed to offer different courses so long as they satisfy a few basic criteria - ie, some will teach Euoprean history while other will teach American history.  Individual teachers essentially plan their own lessons and go off on their own tangents.  Seminars/debates are emphasized far more frequently than in a standard or AP classroom.  Not to mention, of course, that a significant portion of our english and history classes is dedicated to writing about the horrors and evils of totalitarian regimes with the eloquence you need to ace that written assignment - where do you get the impression IB is "totalitarian?"

 

 

 

Not only does it want to educate you academically but it wants to mould your personality,

 

An education that does not mould your personality is a pretty useless education.

 

 

via CAS and TOK especially,

 

TOK is one thing, but CAS?  CAS is just glorified community service - my entries were such "international global citizen" activities as doing push ups or reading books.

 

 

to become an internationalist global citizen.

 

Given the name of the program, this is hardly surprising.

 

 

 

 

It also seems to preach moral/cultural relativism; just look at the IB mission statement.

 

The International Baccalaureate aims to develop inquiring, knowledgeable and caring young people who help to create a better and more peaceful world through intercultural understanding and respect.

To this end the organization works with schools, governments and international organizations to develop challenging programmes of international education and rigorous assessment.

These programmes encourage students across the world to become active, compassionate and lifelong learners who understand that other people, with their differences, can also be right.

 

 

 

 

Where did you make the leap from "can also be right" to "right and wrong are completely relative"?  The assertion that other persons may be correct in their beliefs, in addition to being a pretty self evident statement, suggests precisely the opposite.

 

 

 

 

 

 

That last bit especially seems to promote postmodernism.

 

Which part?  Becoming active, compassionate and lifelong learners?  Acknowleding your own fallibility?  Listening to other people?  Where here do you see postmodernism?

 

 

 

It also does not count religious activities as CAS

 

 

 

It also doesn't typically count political activities, despite its supposedly being a leftist propoganda machine.  My coordinator also refused my driving lessons as CAS, despite that having absolutely nothing to do with a leftist political agenda.

 

 

nor does it use BCE/CE in its history or philosophy textbooks.

 

My Palmer history textbook uses the BCE/CE dating method, but I suppose my social studies department could have slipped that under the totalitarniam IB powers that be.

 

Finally in environmental systems and societies (ESS) and biology it teaches global warming as fact.

 

Global warming is a mainstream scientific theory supported by vast quantities of peer reviewed empirical evidence.  The scientific consensus is such that every single scientific organization on Earth has vouched for its veracity.  If anything, the political correctness I found in my physics class leaned the opposite way; the teacher felt obligated to exaggerate the controversy just enough to avoid accusations of political bias, when the topic really had basolutely nothing to do with politics or ideology.  If the IB program taught anything other that what was necessitated by the scientific data, which seems to be your desire, it would most certainly be a political organization.

 

I would point out that your appealing to the golden mean here reflects the same moral/factual relativism you just accused IB of perpetuating. 

 

I could go on with the evidence that the IB is a political organisation trying to indoctrinate its students to be liberal left wing clones but I would like to know whether it is just my IB school misinterpreting the IB or whether this is the same world wide.

 

Certainly the IB program tends to lean left, as do most public schools and universities.  Granted, I live in the United States, where our standards of left and right are different from those of Europe.  It's very possible that our teachers' ideological bent would be centrist by the standards of France or Sweden.  IB is an international program, after all.

 

Where your argument loses its credibility is where you try to extrapolate from this not at all uncommon ideological bent a systematic political agenda.  Just because an English teacher is liberal doesn't mean the promotion of liberalism is the principle or even an important objective of classroom instruction, and just because a philosophy teacher is a democrat doesn't mean the primary purpose of the classroom instruction is to churn out registered democrats.

 

Edited July 3, 2014 by Andy Sebastian

[Sandwich]

I'm not sure if it's our school or IB but, if you could read one or two novels from our curricula, you would easily notice the propaganda and the ideologies trying to be imposed.

 

You do know that:

A) novels are fiction not fact

B) the novels are selected from a huge list of all sorts of novels by your teachers

 

Also that nationalism isn't the opposite of being a 'global citizen' (which is admittedly fuzzy as a concept), and if your teacher penalised you for saying that purely because of the sentiment you expressed (rather than that you've got confused comprehension or failed to demonstrate your language skills) then your teacher is wrong. It's not in the mark scheme so I highly doubt they did anything about it.

 

You select your own CAS hours so if you've complaints about those perhaps you should ask yourself some searching questions (...) and TOK is... TOK. It's kind of pointless and has no agenda beyond trying to justify itself as a randomly created subject. At most it gets people to wonder where their facts come from (although you do have to worry about them if they never considered this before TOK).

 

You can't allege this sort of stuff with no actual evidence. If the IB actually did any of these things you might have a point, but you seem just confused. For instance reading works of fiction and interpreting them as propaganda rather than make-believe... I mean it's like the people who say Harry Potter is teaching children witchcraft and devil worship in the USA. It's rather missing the entire point of fiction.

[Emilia1320]

IB, as international organization is clearly liberal (or at least this is my experience over things), which in my opinion is solely great thing. I haven't noticed any "left wing" ideologies thou, altough I don't know very much about politics so yeah

I like that IB uses BCE notation, (at least our IB does) because IB isn't bound to any religion - nor it should be. It's solely good that IB keeps our education far from religions. I actually had an audience with my headmaster, and I got liberated from every Christian event our school hosts from now on, based on that I'm IB student and IB is neutral ... So I have only good experiences from IBs approach.

Edited January 18, 2015 by Emilia1320

[Sandwich]

 

I think you are missing the point I want to mention here. Global citizenship is clearly clashing with nationalism as these are two diverse perspectives; a global citizen thinks that a more integrated global community in terms of culture, language and economy would benefit the world itself whereas nationalism is much more conservative and defends a cultural, linguistic and historic connection between a country's citizens. These are not likely to have something in common at all and have different characteristics.

 

Also, I think any IB student is wise enough to see that TOK is trying to shape people to gain a globally considering perspective (as you can see the textbook is filled with opinions of people around the world). This is supposed to be an epistemology lesson, but the textbook is very limited, it only covers some certain parts of it and fails to represent them objectively. As a Muslim, I'm not allowed to write my worship as an activity. If IB is meant to be considering all perspectives, why does it disregard any religious opinion?

 

Novels are fiction. No disagreement. The ideas in novels are not fictional. They are definitely effective on an individual's mind and determines his/her standing on the political spectrum. Harry Potter might not have any point at all besides witchcraft, but don't tell me someone would read The Grapes of Wrath without sympathising proletarian. (no offense to Steinbeck)

 

 

Firstly, I don't think thats what global citizenship means. It is a fuzzy enough definition, but I think saying we all need to integrate our cultures, languages and economy is taking it a bit too far. All it means is recognising the role of other people's cultures, languages and economies and our differences, and having some knowledge about how the rest of the world works as well as our little bit of it. There's absolutely nothing stopping somebody "defending" their own culture, language and history but also recognising the other cultures languages and histories of the rest of the world. It doesn't mean somehow assimilating them, it just means knowing about them and taking consideration of them. Take the EU for instance - I am a European citizen but I am opposed to European cultural, linguistic and economic integration beyond just trade. In Europe culture, language and history of each individual country is exceedingly important and very clearly defined across borders. However the fact we're European citizens improves all our lives - we can travel between countries, learn about each other, trade with each other and profit from it. There are plenty of controversies, sure, like immigration caps and certain policies, but the EU is actually a political union as well so it brings all this stuff with it. Whereas being a 'global citizen' is just a perspective on the world, not a political/economic/cultural/anything union. There is a lot to be gained from travelling, learning how other people do things and exchanging stuff. It doesn't mean you have to lose sight of your own.

TL;DR you can have 'nationalistic' views but still be a 'global citizen', they aren't really dealing with the same thing.

 

Re: the TOK point of considering other people's views, I hardly think that's 'left wing' or a 'crime', it's just human decency to be able to listen to perspectives on something and understand where other people are coming from. It doesn't necessarily change what you yourself think, but it helps you understand and deal with other people better. Like I understand that people in certain muslim countries in the world think that women should have their faces entirely covered so men don't ravenously come pouring out of the doors to rape them. I can consider this view but still think it's a load of crap. Or I might understand another person's view and actually then find it better than my own way of thinking - but you don't have to, it's up to you. If you want to shut your ears to other people's opinions, lives and rights then be my guest, but it doesn't make you "right" or "left" wing, just very close-minded and potentially not a nice person to know.

TOK actually has faith as one of its "ways of knowing" (although I personally disagree with it) so you can talk about being muslim all you want. If you're implying you can't count worshipping as CAS, that's hardly discrimination, worshipping just doesn't happen to be creativity, action or service to the community. That's what CAS is about.

 

As for whether somebody could read the Grapes of Wrath without empathising with the characters - you can read any novel anywhere on the political spectrum and take from it what you want to take from it. Perhaps some people do read it and feel no sympathy for the Okies at all, I think how you feel about these things tells you a little bit about yourself. It's not brainwashing, it's called educating yourself and broadening your horizons. You could equally read a book about the evils of communism (Animal Farm for instance) and find yourself disagreeing with some of the injustices that happened in that book and seeing how a society that seems so balanced can actually end up being fatally flawed. Reading books can often help you figure out what you personally think about something. It's not brainwashing, it's just the process of thinking in your own head. Most of us reject injustice and suffering in any form, so when we read about it we feel sympathy for its victims.

[Emilia1320]

I'm not sure if it's our school or IB but, if you could read one or two novels from our curricula, you would easily notice the propaganda and the ideologies trying to be imposed.

 

Also that nationalism isn't the opposite of being a 'global citizen' (which is admittedly fuzzy as a concept)

 

I think you are missing the point I want to mention here. Global citizenship is clearly clashing with nationalism as these are two diverse perspectives; a global citizen thinks that a more integrated global community in terms of culture, language and economy would benefit the world itself whereas nationalism is much more conservative and defends a cultural, linguistic and historic connection between a country's citizens. These are not likely to have something in common at all and have different characteristics.

 

Also, I think any IB student is wise enough to see that TOK is trying to shape people to gain a globally considering perspective (as you can see the textbook is filled with opinions of people around the world). This is supposed to be an epistemology lesson, but the textbook is very limited, it only covers some certain parts of it and fails to represent them objectively. As a Muslim, I'm not allowed to write my worship as an activity. If IB is meant to be considering all perspectives, why does it disregard any religious opinion?

 

Novels are fiction. No disagreement. The ideas in novels are not fictional. They are definitely effective on an individual's mind and determines his/her standing on the political spectrum. Harry Potter might not have any point at all besides witchcraft, but don't tell me someone would read The Grapes of Wrath without sympathising proletarian. (no offense to Steinbeck)

Why would religious worship count as activity anyway? Its not sport, nor art, nor it benefits anyone :/

I think one of the best sides of IB is that it doesn't support religions. Enough bad has been done and is being done in the name of them to give IBO heavy enough reasons to not support them. Plus they tell about tales that have no evidence showing they are true. As long as that's being remebered they can be compared to fiction books, but too often they are told as the truth. Plus, you don't build shrines for Frodo Baggins for instance.... I just can't see why is this madness still happening. Why are children like I used to be taught about God and some other fictional characters as a fact? The biggest lie I have ever been told, and I would love a reason.

.... And all of this is just my personal viewpoint, please see that

[Vioh]

 

Well, I think that depends on the worshiper's point of view. For me, it is like playing football or playing the guitar. I find relief doing it. In addition, some certain worships raises awareness like helping poor people therefore it's community service up to a point. There's no reason to ignore it.

 

I definitely respect your opinion, but the IB teaches us to respect other's view, why it doesn't respect religious people? I would call this double standards.

 

 

Worshipping cannot possibly be considered as an activity in CAS. It's definitely not action because you can't gain any muscles from that. It's not creativity, because what do you create when worshipping? And you definitely don't contribute anything to society just by worshipping. Also, the CAS program requires students to do something new, and you definitely are not doing something new by going to the Mosque and worship. This is because you will worship God anyway, with or without the CAS program. Thus listing 'worshipping' as a CAS activity would destroy the purpose of the CAS programs.

 

Next thing that I want to point out is that it's not the case that anything related to religion is forbidden to be used as a CAS activity. My friend, for example, was allowed to play drums for the church as a CAS activity. This is because the name of his activity is 'playing drums', and not 'going to the church'. Also, the IB is trying to treat religion the same way as it treats all other political agendas. For example, if your activity is to raise money for the church, or for a political party, then that activity cannot be considered as community service. This is because you are not really helping the community in general, but rather you're just helping the community that supports your own political/religious agenda (i.e. you are contributing to the community because of a personal purpose).

 

Now, since I've made myself clear about your confusion with CAS, can you give me one example showing how IB discriminates religious people? Like Sandwich has explained above, IB really only teaches people to be aware of different ideologies, but not to discriminate against someone who holds a certain ideology. I always think of IB as a democratic playground where everybody (either left, neutral, or right) has a voice. the IB does not stop you from becoming a leftist, nor rightist, nor a religious person.

[Vioh]

I think I've made a pretty good example of how IB ignores religious activities. I did not mean to go to the Mosque for worshipping, there are various type of worshipping such as donating money to poor people as I stated above. Please explain how that activity cannot be counted as a service for CAS. 

 

I also didn't say anything about IB preventing people to state their ideas, but it affects people's ideas by the curricula it specifies for the diploma. People may not want to be dictated to write a TOK essay on the prescribed titles rather than a topic they choose by themselves. Thus, it would even enable further freedom of speech if that's what we desire.

 

 

What do you mean by donating money to the poor? Do you mean taking out your pocket money and donating it to the poor? If that is the case, then it's obvious why it's not allowed. Because donating your own money cannot be considered as an 'activity'!

 

I don't see any bad thing about IB teaching us to become more aware of others' ideas. If you call forcing people to recognize other people's cultures as the evidence for IB 'dictatorship', then I'm sorry, but you're wrong! Also the thing you said about the TOK essay makes no sense. How does that relate to the freedom of speech? lol. It's an educational program for goodness sake! Teachers set out criteria, and students are supposed to fullfill them. It's exactly the same as every other educations, including high school as well as university education. And in case you haven't noticed, unlike many high-school programs, the IB often forces students to think of the topics for themselves. Just look at Math IA, design lab reports, history IA, English IA, and possibly IAs of all other subjects.