By Stacie Boyls | Arts & Life Writer
Faith, at its core, should be resilient. It should withstand scrutiny, survive doubt and deepen through questioning. Yet in many of the most conservative religious environments, questioning is not welcomed — it is discouraged, feared or even punished. When faith demands unquestioning obedience and discourages exploration of other beliefs, it begins to resemble indoctrination rather than genuine spiritual conviction.
Indoctrination is not defined by what is taught, but how. Philosophers like Robert Audi describe indoctrination as the instillation of beliefs in ways that bypass rational evaluation. It discourages critical thinking and frames doubt not as a natural part of intellectual growth, but as moral or spiritual failure. The goal is not understanding, but compliance.
At its core, indoctrination relies on psychological manipulation. It conditions individuals to associate questioning with fear, guilt or social rejection, effectively narrowing their perceived freedom to think independently. When doubt is framed as sinful or dangerous, individuals are not freely choosing belief — they are being conditioned to avoid alternatives.
This process undermines rational autonomy, the human capacity to evaluate evidence and arrive at conclusions independently. Free will requires the ability to consider multiple possibilities without coercion. When individuals are discouraged or punished for exploring other perspectives, their belief is no longer the product of rational choice but of controlled influence. What appears outwardly as devotion may, in reality, be the result of psychological constraint.
Conversely, faith demands resiliency and constant rebuttal. It should withstand scrutiny, survive doubt and deepen through questioning. Yet in some of the most conservative religious environments, questioning is not welcomed — it is discouraged, feared or reframed as spiritual weakness. When belief demands unquestioning obedience and discourages exploration of other perspectives, it begins to resemble indoctrination or sinister manipulation.
The religious environments most susceptible to this phenomenon are considered fundamentalist religions. These include, but are not limited to, various sects of Christianity, Islam, Judaism and Mormonism.
Religious fundamentalism is defined in psychological research as a mindset that sees one set of sacred teachings as the absolute and exclusive source of truth. This ideology is empirically linked with cognitive rigidity and authoritarianism.
Studies using the Religious Fundamentalism Scale developed by Bob Altemeyer and Bruce Hunsberger show that individuals with higher fundamentalism scores tend to exhibit cognitive patterns associated with resistance to contradictory information and less openness to new perspectives, as well as stronger correlations with authoritarian personality traits.
A faith that survives questioning becomes stronger, not weaker. Questioning your faith fortifies your beliefs. Wrestling with doubt is the religious equivalent to eating your vegetables. You may not like it, but it is necessary for growth. Otherwise, your faith becomes anemic and you conform to the standards you are demanded to adhere to.
It is innately human to question things — to desire a rational explanation. And within a religious context that does not change. We are asked to rationalize and debate with God, not avoid questioning entirely. Using our human intellect to strengthen our own apologetics amounts to real faith, not blind obedience and sacrificial release of our rationalization.
The object of this article is not to scrutinize your personal upbringing, family or church; however, if your own questions were routinely shut down and reframed as a “lack of faith,” you might consider the uncomfortable reality that you were indoctrinated into your beliefs. This does not mean your beliefs are invalid. If anything, it should spark opportunities for deeper research. Ask the hard questions, talk to your pastor about uncomfortable topics, seek academic guidance and define your faith on your own terms.
Faith and religion are meant to be open forums, not insular systems that isolate believers from inquiry. If, as practitioners, we fail to recognize this distinction, we become more vulnerable to manipulation by authority figures who benefit from unquestioned obedience, religiously affiliated or not. If you are shamed for engaging with secular environments or researching other perspectives, you are not being allowed freedom of choice. After all, faith only carries meaning if you are the one who chose it. It cannot be chosen for you.
Faith should be a choice, not a constraint.
