Miss Take Posted August 13, 2007 Posted August 13, 2007 For anyone interested, The Enemies of Reason is about to start on C4, presented by Mr Dawkins.
The Bastard Posted August 17, 2007 Posted August 17, 2007 I think I'll start giving copies of "The God Delusion" in exchange for copies of the "Watchtower" and the rest. Christianity might be seen as a good moral system, but it's deeply flawed to say that it's based on real events, or that the new testament has any relevance as factual eyewitness testimony. The gospels were written in Turkey over a hundred years after the event, by people seeking to differentiate the cult of Jesus from the rest of the messianic cults that were around at the time. The Jesus cult turned out to be the one successful one, based on scriptures making a massive over-aggrandisment of a Koresh-like cult figure by people who never knew him. We're fairly behind on the IOM in that church and state are still linked, even when it's become a minority belief. Being required to swear to tell the truth on the Bible in court is a classic example - mind you, some so-called Christians apparently don't take it that seriously either.
Gladys Posted August 17, 2007 Posted August 17, 2007 I am amazed that schools still teach religion alongside science, without clearly defining which is a belief and which is proven. I am quite happy for religious theories to be taught, but as only that. With the general attitude towards religion now, I am quite disturbed that children are being taught the Genesis theory as fact, yet expected to understand evolution as fact also. If I was a child I think I would say 'Your theory on how the earth evolved is at least confused, at best contradictory, how do I understand long division?'.
DjDan Posted August 18, 2007 Posted August 18, 2007 I am amazed that schools still teach religion alongside science, without clearly defining which is a belief and which is proven. I am quite happy for religious theories to be taught, but as only that. gee.... what about the problem of scientific theory being taught, without clearly defining which is a theory and which is proven? bet you don't have a problem with that.
Slim Posted August 18, 2007 Posted August 18, 2007 gee.... what about the problem of scientific theory being taught, without clearly defining which is a theory and which is proven? Read what you just said, can you see how stupid it is? What unproven science do you think is daught Dan? Gladys, I think you're out of date with modern religious corriculum, kids today are tought many religions not just christianity, and very few schools teach creationism as a science.
VinnieK Posted August 18, 2007 Posted August 18, 2007 Gladys, I think you're out of date with modern religious corriculum, kids today are tought many religions not just christianity, and very few schools teach creationism as a science. Aye. Even in my third year at ballakermeen (about fourteen years ago now) we were taught about Islam, Budhism, Judaism and Sikhism. Granted we first had to sit through two truly dreadful years of listening to folk songs about Jesus and being forced to watch videos on how listening to heavy metal will turn us into satan's playthings, or how atheism is a homosexual communist plot to destroy the planet, but a gesture was at least made.
DjDan Posted August 18, 2007 Posted August 18, 2007 gee.... what about the problem of scientific theory being taught, without clearly defining which is a theory and which is proven? Read what you just said, can you see how stupid it is? What unproven science do you think is daught Dan? Evolution. It's clearly taught as a fact... when yet, it's nothing more than an 'idea' or in other words... a theory.
Gladys Posted August 19, 2007 Posted August 19, 2007 gee.... what about the problem of scientific theory being taught, without clearly defining which is a theory and which is proven? Read what you just said, can you see how stupid it is? What unproven science do you think is daught Dan? Gladys, I think you're out of date with modern religious corriculum, kids today are tought many religions not just christianity, and very few schools teach creationism as a science. Not out of touch at all, I have two children going through the education system at the moment. My comments were based on a conversation I had with my then 6 or 7 year old about creation and whether I believed there was a God who created everything. He was surprised that I didn't believe in God, so I draw my conclusions from that; had he been taught that this was one of many systems of belief, or had he been taught that this is what 'we' believe and other religions believe differently. Either way, to me it is a bit like teaching children about fairies as though there is some validity in the 'belief' and then expect them to get to grips with topics which are difficult to understand but really don't have a belief at their core to validate them. For example, long division, multiplication and grammar are difficult concepts to understand, but you don't have to believe in them to make them valid topics for teaching. I think we would all accept that they are what they are. Yet teaching in any form of any religion must have the big proviso that these are unproven beliefs, to be respected and not derided, but understood to be opinions. Why is school time being devoted to religion at all? I would rather the time be spent on 'good world citizen' teaching than on religion per se. I would much rather my son came home understanding, in simple terms, how his actions can affect some other child half way around the globe and how systems of belief can be good (i.e. set up a moral, ethical framework within which most reasonable people can operate without detriment to others) but can also be very destructive, particularly when they are unwilling to accept anything other than blind observance.
DjDan Posted August 19, 2007 Posted August 19, 2007 So you deny Evolution is a fact? that's funny. I deny evolution... as it is not a fact. As it is an idea, and nothing more... I deny it.
Slim Posted August 19, 2007 Posted August 19, 2007 Evolution.It's clearly taught as a fact... when yet, it's nothing more than an 'idea' or in other words... a theory. We get this FACT bullshit here quite a lot, particularly with conspiracy nutters, and it demonstrate's a fundamental misunderstanding of how science works. There are no facts, there are no 100% certainties and this is one of the many areas that show science to be closer to understanding of how the universe works than any religion can be. Religions do claim 100% fact in their understanding, which is why they've had to go back and change their mind so often... Anyway, evolution. What you're not talking about is facts, what you're talking about is supporting evidence. In the case of evolution, the supporting evidence is so overwealming, that it is rightly taught as the way things probably happened. Not only was the evidence strong to support evolution when Darwin originally made is discovery, but crucially many other discoveries since then support his theory, for example the advances in mapping DNA. Another way to look at evolution is to say that it's not been disproved. There is no overwealming evidence to suggest the alternatives are true, unless you know of some?
ans Posted August 19, 2007 Posted August 19, 2007 Another way to look at evolution is to say that it's not been disproved. There is no overwealming evidence to suggest the alternatives are true, unless you know of some? You're clearly forgetting that Bible thing. Oh wai.....
ans Posted August 19, 2007 Posted August 19, 2007 I deny God... as it is not a fact. As it is an idea, and nothing more... I deny it. You see how the door swings both ways with that one?
Lurkah Posted August 19, 2007 Posted August 19, 2007 To be fair, evolution isn't a fact as has been pointed out. It's a theory, albiet a pretty well understood and generally accepted best-fit description of observed evidence. But that's the key difference between religion and science, science is work in progress. Science isn't right and wrong, it's just on a path to be ever more right as time goes on. Religion basically ignores all new evidence other than unsubstantiated annecdotal evidence (God spoke to me!) and instead points to the One Truth because it's in a book. Religious folks tend to point at science and try claim it's a belief system like their religion, seeking to use the "but that's all YOU are" argument. Excepting of course this just betrays their lack of understanding about what science is.
Charles Flynn Posted August 19, 2007 Posted August 19, 2007 According to a recent paper in Nature, 40% of American physicists, mathematicians and biologists believe in a personal God. Even Stephen Hawkins mentions God: "Then we shall… be able to take part in the discussion of the question of why it is that we and the universe exist. If we find the answer to that, it would be the ultimate triumph of human reason - for then we would know the mind of God." Just thought I would add this to the debate.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.