Jump to content





Photo
- - - - -

Creationism in Private Schools


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
226 replies to this topic

#37 Sapper

Sapper

    Healthy Scratch

  • Joined: 08-November 09
  • posts: 3,041
  • Reputation: 601
SUPPORTER

Posted 25 June 2012 - 12:09 PM

Wait, you mean the acknowledgement of religious theories didn't turn you all into zealots?

Impossible! :wacko:

Everyone knows you can't even talk about the existence of religion or you'll mess with everybody's head!


Well, the discussion was mainly about evolution. I don't know who became atheist after the discussion or who remained religious but still acknowledged evolution.

My parents made my sister and I go through confirmation class in 7th grade at a Presbyterian Church. When we were taught, there was little mention of religion from any of the teachers. They just wanted to show that the Bible was meant to teach morality and wanted us to become good people in the way society describes 'good'.

The only time we got really into Religion was when this one teacher would make us play Bible Jeopardy and we had to come up with insane references from certain books.

#38 Mr. Scot

Mr. Scot

    Football Historian

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • posts: 48,232
  • Reputation: 15,722
SUPPORTER

Posted 25 June 2012 - 12:11 PM

Oh plenty of people have pre-conceived notions, no question... but if someone truly believes something and their belief is by nature contrary to what they are studying, which do they follow?

Obviously not all christians believe in the literal interpretations of genesis, and obviously some scientists can study science without mixing in their own personal religious beliefs, but that no doubt makes it harder for them to be completely objective in my opinion.

Nothing wrong with stating it, but that statement is really a religious issue... it has no more place in a science class than stating "some people believe that aliens seeded the earth with life"... OK, some people believe it... so what? Should that be said too? What beliefs should be stated in science class? Seems that if you give all of that equal billing with science, then class would get mighty long...


Not really true. There are non-religious theories of intelligent design out there as well.

Would you suggest that a scientist deny that any and all alternative explanations - regardless of who or how many people believe them or what other interpretations of evidence exists - are completely and utterly impossible?

If so, is that teaching science, or orthodoxy?

#39 Cat

Cat

    Terminally bored

  • Joined: 20-May 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 9,051
  • Reputation: 1,484
HUDDLER

Posted 25 June 2012 - 12:12 PM

If "everyone" has to believe it, then how do you justify teaching evolution?

Or does it only have to be believed by "the people that matter"?

Heck, if "everyone" has to believe something for it to be acceptable, how do you teach social studies at all?


Who said everyone has to believe it? I don't think I'm sure what you're saying.

Maybe you are questioning why experts in the field of studies are the ones who determine what should be taught in school....??

#40 Mr. Scot

Mr. Scot

    Football Historian

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • posts: 48,232
  • Reputation: 15,722
SUPPORTER

Posted 25 June 2012 - 12:14 PM

Who said everyone has to believe it? I don't think I'm sure what you're saying.


You did.

No but wtf should a school be made to waste time mentioning that not everyone believes exactly what's being taught? Seems like a waste of time.


If we can only acknowledge those things that "everyone" believes and not even allow that alternative theories exist, then "education" starts to look an awful lot like indoctrination.

#41 Cat

Cat

    Terminally bored

  • Joined: 20-May 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 9,051
  • Reputation: 1,484
HUDDLER

Posted 25 June 2012 - 12:16 PM

Not really true. There are non-religious theories of intelligent design out there as well.

Would you suggest that a scientist deny that any and all alternative explanations - regardless of who or how many people believe them or what other interpretations of evidence exists - are completely and utterly impossible?

If so, is that teaching science, or orthodoxy?


Dude every time this thread comes up you say the same stuff. And you never get the basic point that ID and creationism are NOT SCIENCE. Scientist don't deny that god could have assisted in creation etc. It's just simply NOT SCIENCE. You can't prove or disprove it, you can't test it, it's not a natural event. It's NOT SCIENCE

#42 Cat

Cat

    Terminally bored

  • Joined: 20-May 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 9,051
  • Reputation: 1,484
HUDDLER

Posted 25 June 2012 - 12:19 PM

You did.



If we can only acknowledge those things that "everyone" believes and not even allow that alternative theories exist, then "education" starts to look an awful lot like indoctrination.


Um reread what I said. You are misunderstanding it.

#43 Mr. Scot

Mr. Scot

    Football Historian

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • posts: 48,232
  • Reputation: 15,722
SUPPORTER

Posted 25 June 2012 - 12:19 PM

Dude every time this thread comes up you say the same stuff. And you never get the basic point that ID and creationism are NOT SCIENCE. Scientist don't deny that god could have assisted in creation etc. It's just simply NOT SCIENCE. You can't prove or disprove it, you can't test it, it's not a natural event. It's NOT SCIENCE


Ah yes, the old argument that if it isn't what I believe, if it doesn't fit my interpretation of the data, then it's not really science. Gotcha. That sure must make arguing easy.

And of course, scientists never disagree or go back and find that old theories were incorrect after all, right?

If nobody can believe anything else other than what we already say we know, why do people even bother still studying or experimenting?

#44 Cat

Cat

    Terminally bored

  • Joined: 20-May 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 9,051
  • Reputation: 1,484
HUDDLER

Posted 25 June 2012 - 12:22 PM

Ah yes, the old argument that if it isn't what I believe, if it doesn't fit my interpretation of the data, then it's not really science. Gotcha. That sure must make arguing easy.

And of course, scientists never disagree or go back and find that old theories were incorrect after all, right?

If nobody can believe anything else other than what we already say we know, why do people even bother still studying or experimenting?


That wasn't my argument at all actually.

#45 Darth Biscuit

Darth Biscuit

    Dark Lord

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 34,988
  • Reputation: 9,103
HUDDLER

Posted 25 June 2012 - 12:25 PM

Not really true. There are non-religious theories of intelligent design out there as well.

Would you suggest that a scientist deny that any and all alternative explanations - regardless of who or how many people believe them or what other interpretations of evidence exists - are completely and utterly impossible?

If so, is that teaching science, or orthodoxy?


Non religious theories of ID? Show me... never heard of this.

No, I would not suggest that anything be denied, and that's not what I said... but where do you draw that line? What evidence or proof is there of any other theories? Is there evidence of creation? Is there evidence of alien seeding? Is there evidence that pigs can fly? If so, show it and discuss it... if it's just someone's belief, leave it in the philosophy and religion class.

#46 Mr. Scot

Mr. Scot

    Football Historian

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • posts: 48,232
  • Reputation: 15,722
SUPPORTER

Posted 25 June 2012 - 12:25 PM

Same old stuff, honestly.

We don't dare allow that there is anything other than the orthodoxy. We can't even acknowledge that there are people who disagree or who believe in things like religion because to even whisper such things means our children might somehow become brainwashed into believing them. We must deny even the very existence of opposition. This is the only way to ensure our children get a proper education.

Oh, and we must also teach tolerance for other people's ideas.

#47 Mr. Scot

Mr. Scot

    Football Historian

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • posts: 48,232
  • Reputation: 15,722
SUPPORTER

Posted 25 June 2012 - 12:30 PM

Non religious theories of ID? Show me... never heard of this.

No, I would not suggest that anything be denied, and that's not what I said... but where do you draw that line? What evidence or proof is there of any other theories? Is there evidence of creation? Is there evidence of alien seeding? Is there evidence that pigs can fly? If so, show it and discuss it... if it's just someone's belief, leave it in the philosophy and religion class.


They're out there. You can look it up. I'm too lazy at the moment.

Would you deny that intelligent design has a pretty broad base of supporters?

Bottom line for me: All you have to do is teach that the core idea exists. You don't have to explore specific theories. Granted you could go into those that have broad support (same as you would with any other theory) but just the acknowledgement of the general idea would be enough for me.

Granted, others may go further, but that'd be all I'd want. And frankly, I don't see why something as simple as that is such a big deal to people.

#48 cookinwithgas

cookinwithgas

    Grey Poupon Elitest Trash

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • posts: 24,880
  • Reputation: 2,571
SUPPORTER

Posted 25 June 2012 - 12:38 PM

Can I invent a core idea and sue schools to get it presented? I've got a great "theory" involving spontaneous generation of flea larva that the House of Griffindor is involved with; the kids are going to be absolutely riveted by it. We won't have to explore scientific theories, and there are similar things out there on the internet that I'm too lazy to look up right now even though I'd just have to Google it