MERGED -> Bush endorses 'intelligent design' + Politicized Scholars... - Page 10 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 08-05-2005, 06:17 PM   #136
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,297
Local Time: 07:18 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest


Basically, I think that Intelligent Design and Evolution should both get an introduction in public school, and then the child can explore on his own and make up his own mind.
Well why can't we have an introduction to Hindu world creation/destruction theory and to the Shinto theory of creation, and to the Buddhist theory, and on and on.

Something tells me these Christians who are pushing ID in schools would flip out if we really started giving all religions equal grounds in science class.

Nobody's equal until everybody's equal.
__________________

__________________
anitram is offline  
Old 08-05-2005, 06:47 PM   #137
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
VertigoGal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: I'm never alone (I'm alone all the time)
Posts: 9,860
Local Time: 07:18 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest


Basically, I think that Intelligent Design and Evolution should both get an introduction in public school, and then the child can explore on his own and make up his own mind.
In science class? And which religion's views should be honored? Should we just get rid of the Scientific Method and turn science class into a giant "Whatever you believe is okay" type thing. Should I be able to answer on a test that the Earth is flat because that's what I've been taught in my particular religion?
__________________

__________________
VertigoGal is offline  
Old 08-05-2005, 06:55 PM   #138
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 07:18 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by VertigoGal


In science class? And which religion's views should be honored? Should we just get rid of the Scientific Method and turn science class into a giant "Whatever you believe is okay" type thing. Should I be able to answer on a test that the Earth is flat because that's what I've been taught in my particular religion?
Teachers can simply say '"some people believe that a higher power created the universe", and I'd be happy with that. Then, the kids can go home and ask their parents.

But what I would not want is for my kid's teacher to present evolution as if it were a 100 % foregone conclusion.

I would never be a biology teacher, because I wouldn't want to have to teach the kids something that I think is false- I'm speaking specifically about the macroevolution of mankind.

I could be an astronomy teacher, no prob. Many astronomers through history have been Christians, and the Big Bang is a perfectly legit theory to explain how God created the universe.
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 08-05-2005, 06:57 PM   #139
Blue Crack Addict
 
Moonlit_Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo...
Posts: 19,271
Local Time: 06:18 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by anitram
Well why can't we have an introduction to Hindu world creation/destruction theory and to the Shinto theory of creation, and to the Buddhist theory, and on and on.

Something tells me these Christians who are pushing ID in schools would flip out if we really started giving all religions equal grounds in science class.

Nobody's equal until everybody's equal.
Exactly.

And even if we did get all the religions' theories in school, do you realize how much time that would take up? There's tons of religious theories out there, we'd never get anything else done during the day.

Angela
__________________
Moonlit_Angel is offline  
Old 08-05-2005, 06:58 PM   #140
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
VertigoGal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: I'm never alone (I'm alone all the time)
Posts: 9,860
Local Time: 07:18 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest


Teachers can simply say '"some people believe that a higher power created the universe", and I'd be happy with that. Then, the kids can go home and ask their parents.

I don't think that should be necessary, but I think it's a reasonable compromise. I don't think teachers should get into specific creation stories, Adam and Eve, etc. Perhaps a disclaimer at the beginning of the year that some people don't believe science would cover it?

__________________
VertigoGal is offline  
Old 08-05-2005, 07:09 PM   #141
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,297
Local Time: 07:18 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest


I would never be a biology teacher, because I wouldn't want to have to teach the kids something that I think is false
But you would require a biology teacher to teach something (ID) which they may believe is false?

I'd never teach it in a biology class. Never.
__________________
anitram is offline  
Old 08-05-2005, 07:12 PM   #142
ONE
love, blood, life
 
indra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 12,689
Local Time: 08:18 AM
What is so damned hard about keeping religion at home or in church (or whatever)? ID is religion. It doesn't belong in public schools.

ID is not science and should not be taught as if it is.

You want your kid to learn ID -- teach your kid that yourself or put him/her in a religious school which does teach it. But religion shouldn't be pushed on kids under the guise of science class.
__________________
indra is offline  
Old 08-05-2005, 07:16 PM   #143
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
VertigoGal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: I'm never alone (I'm alone all the time)
Posts: 9,860
Local Time: 07:18 AM
indra's really right, 80s. if you don't want your kids exposed to facts that contradict your religious beliefs, put them in a religious school. teaching evolution is not meant to impose a certain belief or contradict a religion, only to present the facts that are there.
__________________
VertigoGal is offline  
Old 08-05-2005, 09:40 PM   #144
Refugee
 
jphelmet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: cumming, ga usa
Posts: 1,387
Local Time: 07:18 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon


Or neither. The New Testament was written 40 years after his Resurrection, which, considering no mass communication or printing presses, would be like relying on oral tradition from the 19th century and then writing it down in 2005: the jist of it might be reliable, but the details are mythical and/or filler.

Melon
Not exactly. That is a very ethno-centric argument.

The idea that no one could keep it straight, and it was filled with errors would probably be true if it was written 40 years after the fact today. It's hard for us to fathom, but the idea that the gospels are reliable historical account is very possible.

Many rabbi at the time of Christ would memorize the entire O.T. Much pride was taken in accurately memorizing, and transmission through oral tradition (not the case in our society). Within 40 years there were still eyewitnesses alive, and the more "mythical" elements still could be checked out.

Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox


Was the Bible writeen to be a historical or scientific document?

NO

Why would you attempt to use it as such?
So the Gospel of Luke, when He says I am writing an orderly account of the things that happened, so you can know for certain...
He wasn't making a claim that he was writing a historical document?
Without going to far into it, if the gospels are stories made up, for the purpose of trying to start a religion (vs. being an historical account of what happened) than it is the single greatest work of fiction or (i think you could even say) literature ever.
The gospels would then be a "realistic fiction" - a genre that had never existed up to that time, and would not be seen again for about 1500 years. Fascinating, that a tax-man, doctor, and a couple of fisherman came up with a whole new genre (that then vanished for 1500 years), everyone of the followers at the time (who could have fact-checked this wonderful fairy tale) said it's cool- i'll just believe it and suffer horrendous persecution for a completely fictious story.
__________________
jphelmet is offline  
Old 08-05-2005, 09:54 PM   #145
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 07:18 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by anitram


But you would require a biology teacher to teach something (ID) which they may believe is false?

I'd never teach it in a biology class. Never.
Would you mind reading my answer to Vertigo Gal?
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 08-05-2005, 09:56 PM   #146
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 07:18 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by VertigoGal
indra's really right, 80s. if you don't want your kids exposed to facts that contradict your religious beliefs, put them in a religious school. teaching evolution is not meant to impose a certain belief or contradict a religion, only to present the facts that are there.
Gee whiz, does no one read my posts?

I said that what I don't want is them teaching macroevolution in mankind as if it as if it were a foregone conlcusion that it was factual.
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 08-05-2005, 10:04 PM   #147
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
VertigoGal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: I'm never alone (I'm alone all the time)
Posts: 9,860
Local Time: 07:18 AM
I don't think it's presented as a foregone conclusion, I think it's presented as a a scientific theory with facts to back it up. Intelligent Design shouldn't even be presented as a scientifically valid alternative, because there's no sound evidence for it.
__________________
VertigoGal is offline  
Old 08-05-2005, 10:11 PM   #148
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 10:18 PM
How is it not factual? we have the mitochondrial DNA evidence that demonstrates human migration and has shown the variation between Homo Sapiens and Neanderthals, and we can see the Homo genus in the fossil record, other linneages that are now extinct
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 08-05-2005, 10:14 PM   #149
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 07:18 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by jphelmet
Not exactly. That is a very ethno-centric argument.
It's not ethnocentric at all. Rabbis would not have memorized the New Testament, because they did not believe it. Likewise, early Christianity was disorganized in the early years, and it's very "convenient" that the New Testament texts all date after A.D. 70--the destruction of Jerusalem--where both the apostles and Paul would be dead. As such, we are dealing with third person texts masquerading as "first person." And there is already ample evidence that the Book of Matthew was riddled with "corrections" to make it conform to Gentile Christian theology.

Likewise, you find the same POV differences between the Pharisees' OT canon versus the Essenes' OT canon (Dead Sea Scrolls). And as for the OT canon itself, it was only formalized in the first century A.D. by the Pharisees and, even then, there's plenty of medieval Jewish scriptures that rip into its accuracy; hence, we have the Talmud.

So if you're trying to tell me that the people of 2000-3000 years ago didn't have prejudices and biases like we do today, I'll have to disagree.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 08-05-2005, 10:26 PM   #150
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 07:18 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by anitram
Well why can't we have an introduction to Hindu world creation/destruction theory and to the Shinto theory of creation, and to the Buddhist theory, and on and on.
Advaita Vedānta (branch of Hinduism) supposedly influenced Erwin Schrödinger in his discovery of quantum theory, just to note.

Melon
__________________

__________________
melon is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:18 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com