evolution and ID in public schools

[Ducky]

When I say related, do I mean it is scientific? No I already told you I dont agree that it is scientific.

Then why do you want it taught in a science classroom if you admit it is not science?

 

[Ryokan]

Politically speaking, people in America don't like the fact that many of their kids are only being taught evolution in schools as the main theory of how the universe came to be.

And how does the theory of evolution explain how the universe came to be?

Answer : It doesn't. That's not what evolution is about at all!!!

Besides, what people in America like or doesn't like doesn't mean squat, science is science.

 

[Ducky]

And how does the theory of evolution explain how the universe came to be?

Answer : It doesn't. That's not what evolution is about at all!!!

Besides, what people in America like or doesn't like doesn't mean squat, science is science.

Well put.

 

[BJQ87]

I dont really care for my own good if it is taught or not. I am looking at this from a political and social viewpoint. I think it is something to consider since so many people are debating it and since it is a way to say "here is one theory many people believe, and here is another theory many people believe" Like i said before, to reduce influence over young minds towards atheism.

Here read this part of what I said before and try to understand what I was saying rather than doing your best to pick it apart. "This objection among theist parents is similar to the objection among atheist parents against prayer in schools. Both cases involve not wanting kids to be brainwashed towards opposing viewpoints, and wanting kids to be raised the way they think their kids should be raised. (Though if I had a kid I wouldn't be so controlling, i'd simply demonstrate my beliefs throughout his/her life processes and my kid would hopefully be attracted to my beliefs instead of me telling my kid what he/she must believe in...this would also allow the kid to make the belief his/her own.) But many parents do feel like they are being violated when their kids are being influenced by opposing viewpoints, in both cases of prayer in schools and evolution. It has little to do with science. It has more to do with the kids, and what is being taught in school, not necessarily the science class. The thing is, if you do introduce this theory, the best time is to introduce it would be in contrast to the scientific theory of evolution- which is taught in science class. It's not like they're going to teach ID in english, history, math, or music class."

 

[Ryokan]

Reasoning a creator in this case is just as consitent with reality, one chooses between there being a beginning to existence and there being an eternal existence. Some people reason the second because they can't imagine there being no existence whatsoever, unlike most other things that are consistent with reality you can't get a conception of it in your head, that is simply impossible.

And if some people reason that life on Earth was seeded by space aliens, should that also be taught in science class?

 

[Ducky]

I dont really care for my own good if it is taught or not. I am looking at this from a political and social viewpoint. I think it is something to consider since so many people are debating it and since it is a way to say "here is one theory many people believe, and here is another theory many people believe" Like i said before, to reduce influence over young minds towards atheism.

Here read this part of what I said before and try to understand what I was saying rather than doing your best to pick it apart. "This objection among theist parents is similar to the objection among atheist parents against prayer in schools. Both cases involve not wanting kids to be brainwashed towards opposing viewpoints, and wanting kids to be raised the way they think their kids should be raised. (Though if I had a kid I wouldn't be so controlling, i'd simply demonstrate my beliefs throughout his/her life processes and my kid would hopefully be attracted to my beliefs instead of me telling my kid what he/she must believe in...this would also allow the kid to make the belief his/her own.) But many parents do feel like they are being violated when their kids are being influenced by opposing viewpoints, in both cases of prayer in schools and evolution. It has little to do with science. It has more to do with the kids, and what is being taught in school, not necessarily the science class. The thing is, if you do introduce this theory, the best time is to introduce it would be in contrast to the scientific theory of evolution- which is taught in science class. It's not like they're going to teach ID in english, history, math, or music class."

And again, ID and Science are not at odds (unless you ask an ID proponant) about the origins of life. They are not conflicting theories. Evolution does not address how the universe began.

So, why should we teach an admittedly theist theory of God in science class?

Why should we teach anything other than science in a science class?


Edited to rephrase.

Science does not address the CAUSE of the beginning of the universe.

 

[BJQ87]

Besides, what people in America like or doesn't like doesn't mean squat, science is science.

Science is science I agree, but what people in America like or don't like matters a lot from a political and social viewpoint. Again, I could care less whether ID is taught or not for my own good, but for the good of the American people I have some speculation.

 

[Upchurch]

Science is science I agree, but what people in America like or don't like matters a lot from a political and social viewpoint. Again, I could care less whether ID is taught or not for my own good, but for the good of the American people I have some speculation.

Misleading the American people about how science works is good for them?

 

[Ryokan]

Science is science I agree, but what people in America like or don't like matters a lot from a political and social viewpoint. Again, I could care less whether ID is taught or not for my own good, but for the good of the American people I have some speculation.

Science is not about opinions, it's about facts.

If a large group og Americans thought that the USA had actually won the Vietnam war, should that be taught in history class? If a large group of Americans thought William Shakespeare was actually American, should that be taught in English class?

If a large group of Americans thought that whites are genetically superior to blacks, should that be taught in science class?

Or is it only your delusions that should replace facts in public education?

Damn, I'm glad I'm European!

 

[Ducky]

Science is not about opinions, it's about facts.

If a large group og Americans thought that the USA had actually won the Vietnam war, should that be taught in history class? If a large group of Americans thought William Shakespeare was actually American, should that be taught in English class?

If a large group of Americans thought that whites are genetically superior to blacks, should that be taught in science class?

Or is it only your delusions that should replace facts in public education?

Damn, I'm glad I'm European!

You got a spare room I can move into?

 

[Ryokan]

You got a spare room I can move into?

Sure, but be warned; I'm messy and I snore

 

[gnome]

I am not missing the point, am not confusing what scientific theory means. That I already have cleared up so drop it. The only disagreement you have is that it has to be scientific to teach it in science class, that they should teach it in comparitive religion class. I would definately agree with you if they actually had that class in public secondary education and below, we are not discussing college.

Why not propose a different class then, instead of advocating teaching something that isn't science in a science class?

 

[Ducky]

Why not propose a different class then, instead of advocating teaching something that isn't science in a science class?

I would hope whatever intelligent design class would exist would be an elective.


ETA: I want an FSM class.

 

[Rufo]

Several things are related to science. In fact, almost all knowledge is at least related to science in one way of another. If you would teach all things related to science in the science class, there wouldn't really be much but science class in the schools. That's why there are different classes in the first place.

In my opinion, evolution should be taught as science, ID as philosophy, and creationism as religion/mythology. But they are all important, in different ways.

I would hope whatever intelligent design class would exist would be an elective.

Why? It's not more stupid than any philosophy. People think, and some of them reach the conclusion that the world was probably created by some kind of being called a God, some reach the conclusion that it wasn't. And in philosophy it does matter how many people believe in something - since it's almost impossible to determine philosophical 'truths'. ID is a philosophical theory, and if it's good or bad is a matter of opinion. Of course, it shouldn't be taught to kids as 'truth', but as 'theory'. And let's not confuse this use of 'theory' with the scientific use.

Like i said before, to reduce influence over young minds towards atheism.

Why would the Theory of Evolution do that? If creatures evolve, does that mean there is no God? Or that God did not create the universe and life? Or even that God is not the father of Jesus, if we're talking about christianity? Why is this theory so scary?

If a large group of Americans thought that whites are genetically superior to blacks, should that be taught in science class?

I really, really, really wish I could think something else, but - yes. If the group was large enough. Science doesn't necessarily go forward, it can be forced backwards. Just look at what happened in the Dark Ages, when the common opinion was that the Earth was flat, despite that it had earlier been proved that the Earth was a sphere, and people even had calculated its size. Also, you can 'confirm' almost any scientific hypothesis if you choose to point out only the evidence that speaks for it. And, as I believe all on this forum knows all too well, when people want to believe something, they are very good at doing just that.

 

[Ducky]

Why? It's not more stupid than any philosophy. People think, and some of them reach the conclusion that the world was probably created by some kind of being called a God, some reach the conclusion that it wasn't. And in philosophy it does matter how many people believe in something - since it's almost impossible to determine philosophical 'truths'. ID is a philosophical theory, and if it's good or bad is a matter of opinion. Of course, it shouldn't be taught to kids as 'truth', but as 'theory'. And let's not confuse this use of 'theory' with the scientific use.

Because in public schools there should not be a required religion class. That's for the parents to deal with at home. Why do you want to teach religion in public schools? If there is a class, it would have to be something the kids/parents could opt out of.

You see, we pay taxes. These taxes fund our government which in turn has funded our schools. There's an agreement that the government will steer clear of religion.

That's why if the class is to exist, it should be an elective.

If you want religion in your school, send your kids to a private school.

 

[headscratcher4]

You mean we didn't win the Vietnam War?

Does this mean that Bin Ladin didn't sit down with Saddam and plan 9/11? What about all of those WMDs we found?

Oh my...

 

[gnome]

I just wanted to add, that among proponents of teaching ID in schools... the idea that ID is not science is in the minority. Most of them want ID to be called science and taught as science.

 

[headscratcher4]

I just wanted to add, that among proponents of teaching ID in schools... the idea that ID is not science is in the minority. Most of them want ID to be called science and taught as science.

Indeed, as do astrologers. Astroloty is an alternative theory involving physics, biology, cosmology, geography, etc. In addition, many Ameicans believe in it and actively follow-it. It should be taught as science, or, at the very least, astronomy and physics sections should have to tell students that alternative theories exist.

And, while it is not so popular now, Lysenkoist biology, based on materialist "science" and the control that man can exert over nature, was once all the rage in the Stalinist Soviet Union (still, I think, practiced to a degree in North Korea). It is an alternative "theory" to Mendel and other biologists...so, popularity be damned, it should be taught in biology.


My point is that changing the definition of "science" to fit popular notions and acknowledge them is a slippery slope that will glide you quickly into the dark ages.

 

[PatKelley]

Misleading the American people about how science works is good for them?

Keeps them from thinking too much.

 

[Ryokan]

I really, really, really wish I could think something else, but - yes. If the group was large enough. Science doesn't necessarily go forward, it can be forced backwards. Just look at what happened in the Dark Ages, when the common opinion was that the Earth was flat, despite that it had earlier been proved that the Earth was a sphere, and people even had calculated its size. Also, you can 'confirm' almost any scientific hypothesis if you choose to point out only the evidence that speaks for it. And, as I believe all on this forum knows all too well, when people want to believe something, they are very good at doing just that.

So if a large group thought whites were genetically superior to blacks, but all scientists disagreed with it, you'd still support it being taught in science class?

Are you actually saying that popular opinion should decide what is taught in science class, and not what is actually science?

Should the same be true of all the subjects in school? If enough people believe Kennedy was assasinated by the CIA, should that be taught in school?

I know I'm asking pretty much the same kind of questions that you replied to, but are you serious?