US schools teaching religious beliefs in science

[dancho]

US schools teaching religious beliefs in science

Originally posted by PyRo99@Dec 24 2004, 12:10 PM
Depends. If they're denying them education for a reason, then sure go 'head.

I mean, in all honesty. I could learn what I learned in school, on the internet, instead of going to school for 11 years now. And after sixth grade, its all, repition, and detail everything.

I mean seriously, when are you going to use who Rapahael the painter was, especially when you're not going into an arts field, or even a historical field. Its useless to me, especially learning about the Native Americans, every single year.

​

You got that right. Formal education is mostly nonsense. Check out what John Taylor Gatto has to say on the subject.

http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/

As far as evolution is concerned. the objections raised to it are valid within the specific context of the philosophy of science. No matter how "sensible" it appears to be, you can't say that it's a "fact" without proof. When educators cross that line (encouraged by well-meaning but misguided academics) they end up teaching the opposite of science-- belief based upon the dictates of authority.

 

[Unintentional]

US schools teaching religious beliefs in science

Yes, evolution is mostly matter of faith. So is intelligent design. What is the difference between one religion that teaches evolution and one that teaches intelligent design? The die hard closed minded people who teach evolution with the exclusion of all evidence to the contrary have created their own religion. The high priest are the aethists and the ranking clergy are the scientist who agee with them. I guess you can teach religion in school if doesn't involve a Christian god with morals who hold people accountable.

I don't mean to sound harsh or mean to those who insist evolution is a fact. Please don't take my comments personally. I reserve my hostility to those whose mind are closed and refuse to examine both sides.

The big problem in Kansas is and was that REAL scientists who are objective in their opinions, objected to the school board of Kansas specifically telling teachers that they could not criticize the theory of evolution. Now, if you have a theory that can not be criticized doesn't that make it dogma? The Kansas school board also altered the teaching of scientific theory from being "guided by evidence" to "finding natural solutions". The Kansas school board seems very intent on turning the theory of evolution into a religion. Let's see: you can't criticize it, you MUST find natural solutions and not be guided by the evidence (i.e. disregard evidence that leans away from a natural solution). Hmm

If you have come to your conclusions after viewing both sides (or three or four sides of this argument) then I completely respect you and your opinion.

If you have come to your conclusions for some other reason, say to prop up your theological presuppositions, then I have no respect for you. If you say Darwin has to be right because there is no god or you say intelligent design is right because there is a God of the Bible then you may both share the same contempt I have for you.

If you currently have an open mind or have a conclusion but are still open to discussion then I will heap all the love I have on you. @);-

 

[XDrFirefly]

US schools teaching religious beliefs in science

My theory....

It's like a giant video game. Things happened because "something" tries to breed things together. Or "something" just gets the new patch and updates the game and whoo hoo more levels, and new things to play around with. Throw in a little bit of free will, couple kazillion years (on fast speed of course), and something called mating. We have the perfect theory.

I think if that was taught in school all the kiddies would understand it.

So, remember folks we are just someone else games...


Merry Holidays

Dr FF

 

[Tippy]

US schools teaching religious beliefs in science

I think we need to keep science and the various philosophies of creation separate - at least in the public school setting.

I don't mind that Creationism is touched upon - but not in science class. Creationism should be mentioned as one of the stories of how mankind got here - as wells as the Greek Myths, the Buddhist way of thought - and all of the other mythological tales. That is fine - because that is a part of the world we live in and to deny children the knowledge isn't doing them any favors.

However, if it is NOT science - it should NOT be taught in science class.

How does one know the difference?

Simple - if one has gone about gathering facts and results and uses them to form an opinion - that is science.

On the other hand - if one has an opinion and then goes about gathering selective facts to support it - that is a 'story'.

The thing about science is that it is always evolving (no pun intended), but if evidence surfaces tomorrow proving Darwin absolutely wrong - then science will change.

However, no matter what evidence is presented - even if it proves Christianity wrong - Christianity will not change.

That is why it is called 'faith'. Because you have to make a mental leap in order to believe it. Faith - the believe in things unseen and unproven.

Science - the result of things seen and proven.

Both have their place. Not competing and not in the same classroom.

 

[Unintentional]

US schools teaching religious beliefs in science

"As for the question of science versus religion: I am issuing an injunction that religion must stay at least 100 yards away from science at all times." - the Judge on "the Simpsons"

 

[dancho]

US schools teaching religious beliefs in science

Originally posted by Tippy@Dec 25 2004, 03:57 PM
I think we need to keep science and the various philosophies of creation separate - at least in the public school setting.

You do not understand science or religion. Religion is not something that is believed despite any fact, through an act of will. Religion is the result of a higher, more significant kind of understanding, derived from higher, more important facts. If all that it actually consisted of was a crazy church and a bunch of rules, it would not survive at all. Instead, it survives, and outlives all attempts to destroy it.

Science is not a game where theories are created using "facts" as evidence. It's not a court of law. "Truth" is not derived from evidence. Science is based upon observation, only. Models, theories, and beliefs are OF science but they are not science. There is a HUGE amount of literature on this subject. "Science Without Laws" is a good book by Ronald Giere, for starters.



Merry Christmas.

 

[Eutychus]

US schools teaching religious beliefs in science

Originally posted by Unintentional@Dec 25 2004, 04:15 PM
\"As for the question of science versus religion: I am issuing an injunction that religion must stay at least 100 yards away from science at all times.\" - the Judge on \"the Simpsons\"

​

And just why would a judge make such a ruling? If a religion may be defined as a system of thought that speaks to the subject of origins and man's responsibilities in light of those origins, then science qualifies as a religion. "Man is the measure" and behavior is regulated as acceptable or not by man. As Dostoevsky noted, "Without God, all things are permitted". How can the two be separated by any kind of barrier when they address the same subjects?

Science will not necessarily change should evidence arise tomorrow that there is no basis for evolution because regardless of how the equation plays out, there will always be someone who is willing to misinterpret the results. The science crowd is very proud of all the work that went into its ivory tower. And I am not saying that recent or traditional interpretations of scripture have the answer down pat either. I am of the mind that when God explains once and for all how he accomplished the universe, both sindes in this debate are going to be very surprised.

 

[phase12]

US schools teaching religious beliefs in science

Though I am a Christian, I don't think religion should be taught in science classes either.

I do not think, however, there is a reason not to touch upon the ever "evolving" concept of intelligent design, which apart from everyone's incorrect assumption as simply being rooted in religous circles, also encompasses the fact that there are underlying set systems and laws for everything in the universe. This does NOT, require a belief in God. Without such laws, there would be no science, including the theory of evolution, which thus far, is still far incomplete, though the evidence is impossible to ignore.

The intolerance of scientists and biologists in ignoring other possibilities meets or exceeds much of the intolerance religous leaders are so often accused of.

 

[PyRo99]

US schools teaching religious beliefs in science

Then where does it end? If they are allowed to speak of the evolutionary cycle, which was derived by the Christians, then couldn't English teachers talk about the Bible?

Though you may not think that they should keep them out, it will only create further problems down the road. Why should a Jehovah's Witness be subjected to Christian beliefs? Thats right, they shouldn't.

And if you don't realize, you are influenced, by your teachers on such topics such as politics and religion. And if were teaching Christianity in school, then I will get on my pompous horse and teach other things as well, such as Islam, Judiasm, Hinduism, Buddhism, just the organized ones.

Many teachers are not coy about their "teachings", and are downright blunt about it.

I should know, I am in the public schooling right now.

 

[Tippy]

US schools teaching religious beliefs in science

Originally posted by dancho@Dec 25 2004, 04:25 PM


You do not understand science or religion. ?Religion is not something that is believed despite any fact, through an act of will. Religion is the result of a higher, more significant kind of understanding, derived from higher, more important facts. If all that it actually consisted of was a crazy church and a bunch of rules, it would not survive at all. Instead, it survives, and outlives all attempts to destroy it.

I understand your position but I respectfully disagree. For example - Gallelio was threatened with death from the church if he did not renounce his scientific finding that the earth was round. Throughout history - religion has existed "in spite" of evidence that it is false.

I am not saying there is no God. I certainly do not know - and, in fact, I believe in one, but organized religions, like Christianity and Islam have many beliefs that have been proven wrong, by science, and yet they will not accept that and change.

Science is different in the sense that it DOES change when the facts change. Scientific theories are adjusted all the time when new data is presented.

Science is not a game where theories are created using \"facts\" as evidence. It's not a court of law. \"Truth\" is not derived from evidence. Science is based upon observation, only. Models, theories, and beliefs are OF science but they are not science. There is a HUGE amount of literature on this subject. \"Science Without Laws\" is a good book by Ronald Giere, for starters.



Merry Christmas.

​

You are correct - truth is not always derived from evidence. But it is more often derived from evidence than it is from myth.

Science gives us the understanding (always progressing) of the universe and how we react to it. Mythology (Christian) gives us a two thousand year old book where sticks turn to snakes and snakes talk, where bad folks become pillars of salt - where people who do not have sex - get pregnant.

Because of that - I dont' believe Creationism should be taught in a science class. I would allow it to be taught alongside other religious tenets although.

I am not opposed to people believing in whatever faith they choose - I just do not feel that we need to promote those beliefs in public school science classes.

That should be reserved for science.