One can easily conclude that the concepts of faith and religion were acknowledged by humans out of the desire to fill a certain empty void they felt in their hearts and minds. In the past, religion has often served as an explanation for life and the universe, as well as morals. With the growth and evolution of science, humans generally do not deem the coarse explanations provided by religious texts as necessary. However, primarily, science cannot answer the need of moral guidance or logic in relation to human nature.

That leaves the question of what does. The answer seems to be philosophy. When examined, moral philosophies can triumph science and religions, due to their greater exactness and clarity, and ability to cover the entire spectrum of human existence, which is often not found in Holy Scriptures.

It is impossible to live a pleasant life without living wisely and honorably and justly, and it is impossible to live wisely and honorably and justly without living pleasantly…

- Epicurus (the 5th Epicurean Principal Doctrine)

Natural justice is a pledge of reciprocal benefit, to prevent one man from harming or being harmed by another."

- Epicurus (the 31th Epicurean Principal Doctrine)

This brings me to the issue of school and religion.

Now that we have made it so religion can hardly even be addressed in most public schools, where/what/how do we end up providing students with a moral compass? What if we ultimately "replaced" the role of religion in modern society, specifically in public schools, with basic philosophy? One might say, why don't we teach both? Well, on one hand, some concepts and theories presented in philosophy can directly contradict religion. But, on the other hand, plenty of schools of thought and dogmas contradict one another, yet we still teach them at once. 

Now, don't be mistaken; I'm not saying we make lessons on Descartes or Hume for elementary school students. What I'm saying is that, from younger ages, we can begin to teach the basics; things like how to form an opinion, an argument, where theories come from, and what logical fallacies are. Then, students, as they grow, can move on to learning about different schools of thought. The goal here would be to teach kids how to think, not what to think. They'd learn how to approach dilemmas; both related to their mind and actions, and daily life. They could learn more skills regarding interpreting and thinking about a variety of questions, and how to approach both moral and conceptual enigmas. Would it not be far more useful to breed a youth that can actually process information and choose to accept or reject options...compared to being spoon-fed theories that they don't have the skills to wrap their minds around? It's even possible that religion be incorporated, objectively, almost to provide a basis of comparison. Thus, the tone of teaching religion would be more like "this is what it has to say, and it only applies if you choose to follow/believe said religion," rather than presenting it as absolute truth.

We'd give kids all the thought tools they need, preparing them to then make their own informed decisions.

It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.

- Aristotle

To some, this may seem slightly absurd, or you may be wondering why it's even necessary that some form of a "moral compass" be provided in school… However, it seems that after some problems that occur in schools, ranging from (unfortunately) typical bullying, to extremes of shootings, or the basic attitudes and culture of the society, many have come forth to say that a universal moral compass should be provided from a young age, as sometimes such a thing may be lacking in students' households, and society and life in general.

I'd have to say that a clear example of this is the aftermath of the Columbine Massacre in 1999. Afterward, some parents of the victims essentially claimed, "This is what happens when you remove God from schools." But, interestingly, if you look closely, the perpetrators were often bullied for being "different" especially in terms of mentality/values. The two teens also happened to have taken an offered philosophy class, and based on their own writings, had moral compasses of some sort; both seemed to go by philosophy and schools of thought set forth by Hobbes, Nietzsche, Emerson, Kant, and Thoreau, among others. With their thoughts, knowledge, and perception, they were considered outcasts, and evidently, over time, seemed to display an attitude of "existential narcissism” due to the majority of people around them being unaware of such schools of thought and information.

So, this might make you wonder...what if such seeds of philosophy were planted in all students’ minds, from a young age, and flourished through their school years, ensuring that students’ minds may be developed and advanced more similarly? Could it ultimately make everyone be far greater critical thinkers? Could it turn around the way we interact with one another and perceive each other? Might it just be the thought revolution, we, especially the currently desensitized and practically megalomaniac youth, require to be a truly intelligent and efficient generation?