Council of Europe to vote on creationism next week

[Totenkopf]

I still maintain that teaching non-science in a science class is immoral.

 

Questionable. Impractical or, perhaps, unwise would seem a better choice of terms.

[PoiuyWired]

I would tend to agree with everything you've said here, with the caveat that I'm not sure how this absolves educators of their duty to educate. I still maintain that teaching non-science in a science class is immoral.

 

QFE.

 

Definitely not in a science class. And for a class with the topic on religion, views of different religion should be shown, ID or even YEC Creationism can be mentioned. This is as far as public schools are concerned.

 

For private schools, its all good if they have a religion class on their chosen religion, in depth studies etc... as long as this is done NOT IN A SCIENCE CLASS.

[Rogue Warrior]

I do not need to explain making bomb threats on a plane, but the tone in America appears to be that atheism is condemned, Islam is certainly condemned, the country is dominantly Christian and Jewish, and led by a warlike and religious president.

[Darth InSidious]

I hope someone points out to them that true science isn't dogmatic before they embarrass themselves.

Quite.

 

Well, there are facts. Some people might tend to equate that with "truth".

For 'facts', see 'evidence'.

Not so much. There are hypothesis. There are experiments. There are observations. Predictions. All kinds of stuff.

Evidently, there are also pedants.

 

And since we're nitpicking, it's hypotheses in the plural.

 

Nevertheless, what it boils down to is evidence and theory.

[Achilles]

Quite.

I hope you get 'em. Good luck.

 

For 'facts', see 'evidence'.

That would seem to be beside the point don't you think? Are you saying that you don't equate "facts" with "truth"? This statement would seem to imply that you might equate "evidence" with "truth" and if that is the case then your previous comments would seem to contradict themselves.

 

Evidently, there are also pedants.

And how's that shoe fitting for you?

 

And since we're nitpicking, it's hypotheses in the plural.

Thanks. I can always count on you to check my spelling.

 

Nevertheless, what it boils down to is evidence and theory.

Indeed! And which, in your exhaustive examinations of science, have you found lacking?

[Jae Onasi]

If there's much more picking of nits, I'll declare this a lice-free zone.

 

Oh, the irony....

Found out talking to my kids on the way to school this morning that a couple people in our church who've been teaching some of the kids' Sunday School classes are YECs and have apparently taught the kids about dinosaurs co-existing with humans among other 'interesting' things. We go to a conservative church so I'm not surprised that there are literalists in the group. It just means we get to sit down and spend some quality time looking at theistic evolution and have a discussion on all that, and perhaps have a little chat with the SS teachers as well.

[Achilles]

and perhaps have a little chat with the SS teachers as well.

Is it ok that I found this funny?

[Jae Onasi]

Is it ok that I found this funny?

 

I soooooo need to get some sleep.....

[Darth InSidious]

That would seem to be beside the point don't you think? Are you saying that you don't equate "facts" with "truth"? This statement would seem to imply that you might equate "evidence" with "truth" and if that is the case then your previous comments would seem to contradict themselves.

Mmm...nope. I wouldn't equate "evidence" (also called 'facts' by some in previous phenomenon/noumenon rounds...can't remember if it was you or not who used the word in this meaning, but I thought it was...) with "truth", since evidence can be relative, circumstantial, inaccurate or unreliable, whereas 'truth' tends to be defined as absolute and totally accurate.

 

Indeed! And which, in your exhaustive examinations of science, have you found lacking?

Both. Phenomenon/noumenon gap again, I fear.

[PoiuyWired]

If there's much more picking of nits, I'll declare this a lice-free zone.

 

Oh, the irony....

Found out talking to my kids on the way to school this morning that a couple people in our church who've been teaching some of the kids' Sunday School classes are YECs and have apparently taught the kids about dinosaurs co-existing with humans among other 'interesting' things. We go to a conservative church so I'm not surprised that there are literalists in the group. It just means we get to sit down and spend some quality time looking at theistic evolution and have a discussion on all that, and perhaps have a little chat with the SS teachers as well.

 

So, the follow-up on that talk with YEC people at your kiddo's SS?

 

A side note, whatever you are feeling about the "alternatie-vity" of their teachings...

 

Imagine teaching a kind of creationist idea at public school, and some parents come from a different religion background that is not christian related. If its just science, it is at least a theory. But pushing a religious-related idea onto kids(esp those of other religion) is just not desirable.

 

Leath those actions at your local Sunday School, or religious lessons (and things like that in private schools)

[Achilles]

Mmm...nope. I wouldn't equate "evidence" (also called 'facts' by some in previous phenomenon/noumenon rounds...can't remember if it was you or not who used the word in this meaning, but I thought it was...) with "truth", since evidence can be relative, circumstantial, inaccurate or unreliable, whereas 'truth' tends to be defined as absolute and totally accurate.

I would ask you once again to clarify this, ~snipped~

 

Thanks for taking the time to respond.

[Ztalker]

Stop waisting government money on crap like this and let people decide form themselves what they believe in. Who is this group to judge other people's faith and what they believe in?

 

Edit: Just my point of view, and that of most christian school I've been:

-The stories of genesis/the creation were written down during the time the Israelites were held in Babylon. They were written to keep up the motivation, to once return to the promised land. This is fact, the bible says so itself. We just imply it, since parents have to choose for themselves if they believe it litterally or not.

-The real story starts with the stories of Abraham, Isac, Mozes.

-Furthermore, much attention is payed to the Roman Empire during the time of Jesus. Students can then 'hold on to that.

 

Genesis is read, we imply it's written down in a time of great dispair, and cannot be taken for fact.

[Darth InSidious]

1. the true or actual state of a matter: He tried to find out the truth.

2. conformity with fact or reality; verity: the truth of a statement.

3. a verified or indisputable fact, proposition, principle, or the like: mathematical truths.

4. the state or character of being true.

5. actuality or actual existence.

6. an obvious or accepted fact; truism; platitude.

7. honesty; integrity; truthfulness.

8. (often initial capital letter) ideal or fundamental reality apart from and transcending perceived experience: the basic truths of life.

9. agreement with a standard or original.

10. accuracy, as of position or adjustment.

11. Archaic. fidelity or constancy.

Hence an absolute term.

~snipped~

 

Evidence, however, being phenomenal, cannot, by its nature, be absolute.

[Ray Jones]

I would consider "mathematical evidence" or "empirical evidence" pretty much an absolute. Whereas the "truth" propagated by some persons/books/any media might as well be utmost relative.

 

 

However, with a logical, rational aspect, both "truth" and "evidence" are of the same absolute nature and go hand in hand. And that means "what is" and not "what fits".

[Achilles]

Hence an absolute term.

 

Evidence, however, being phenomenal, cannot, by its nature, be absolute.

*looks at #3 and #5* Hmmm....

 

I'm still not seeing how this thinking isn't a double standard.