Psudeo-science has no place in a classroom.
Psudeo-science has no place in a classroom.
I saw an article about this very subject in Time magazine a couple of months back.
They raised almost the same identical points we all did in our Bible debates....proof vs not proof.....logic vs faith.....
To be honest, most school debates end up boiling down to one thing.....political correctness. I am a diehard opponent of the idea, so to me it's counter productive. The separation of church and state was not intended to make people stupid.
How come one sect of the population has to be able to "deal with" the teaching of something they don't agree with, but then when any little thing is mentioned or even now-a-days UTTERED that remotely has to do with "religion" people freak out and start reciting from the Constitution????? Why is it OK to teach one and not the other? Political correctness is why.
Because one is SCIENCE and is NOT. Evolution is proven, you might not accept it but that's the way it goes. Intelligent Design is not testable and cannot be proven one way or the other, even if it were true I.D. is not science and therefore has no place is a science class.Originally Posted by Jaimecbr900
There have been many "proofs" presented throughout the ages in history about Christianity too. People like you may not accept that either. Science is largely based on theory at it's core. Many many "Science" concepts have evolved and totally changed throughout just our lifetime, let alone history. So, why is it that suddenly it's the only way to measure things? If it were, don't you think it would never change?
Yes, Science is largely accurate about lots of things. But it is also proved itself wrong or misinformed many times too. So who's to say that I.D. is any different? Why not present it to the students and let THEM decide which one makes more sense to them?
50 yrs ago, "Science" said Cancer couldn't be conquered. Is that the same viewpoint today? That's just in 50 years.....How about in 2000 years? Why is it that because of political correctness people can't express themselves in a way they choose to? You now are having debates about taking out WORDS out of HISTORICAL documents and pledges because of the stupidity of political correctness. How's that for pidgeon holing our future leaders?
The separation of church and state in our Constitution was not intended to make pagans out of everyone. It was meant to not let one run over the other. It seems to me that the "state" part has gotten wayyyyy over the center line already. Why is there no bitching about that?????
You just answered your entire question right there. Science works because it innately has an error correcting mechanism. Science is not science if it does not have the possiblity of at some point being proven false. I see so many Christians pointing to the former misinformation of Science as proof not to trust it, when in fact that's the beauty of it. Science actively tries to prove itself wrong to get at a better resolution of truth.
Look at it another way, if we include Divine intervention as a cause for something then there would be no true sciences. We could dismiss interactions as God's work. Science is not a religion is does not teach truths, it's a mechanism to understand how the world works. Science class are not there to teach students what's true and what's not, they are there to teach them how to perform science. Like it or not Evolution is the basis of modern biology and must be known if you are too understand how it works. Intelligent Design adds nothing to the curriculum.
Very good point, but how come part of that "resolution of truth" can't include divine intervention as a possible answer?
Look at it another way, if we include Divine intervention as a cause for something then there would be no true sciences. We could dismiss interactions as God's work. Science is not a religion is does not teach truths, it's a mechanism to understand how the world works. Science class are not there to teach students what's true and what's not, they are there to teach them how to perform science. Like it or not Evolution is the basis of modern biology and must be known if you are too understand how it works. Intelligent Design adds nothing to the curriculum.
Again, a very good point. Divinity is pretty black and white. It wouldn't leave much room for it to evolve itself. Although, if that I.D. being taught can be taught using not only one religious point of view but many. The only common denominator the majority of religions have is a Supreme being.
I don't know. I've got to admit that you've got me to thinking.
Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe Science is Science and I.D. is more Phylosophy. The only thing is that Evolution is taught as part of Science though. So in order to counter balance it, I.D. would have to be taught in a Science curriculum. Hmmmmm....
Because it's not a scientific principle, divine intervention is not in the realm of science.
It's not really an issue of religion. If they are advancing I.D. as a scientific theory, then it needs to be held to scientific standards. Here's how dictionary.com defines science in this context...
Now was I.D. arrived at through observation? Can there be an experimental investigation? The answer of course is no. God is simply not a scientifically valid answer for why things happen, regardless of it's truth. I realize that might be hard to accept on it's face, but if you think about it you'll probably see why.The observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena.
Good.
Evolution is science, arrived at through observation and experimentation. It's been open to scientific debate and passed muster to become accepted. I.D. can make none of those claims.Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe Science is Science and I.D. is more Phylosophy. The only thing is that Evolution is taught as part of Science though. So in order to counter balance it, I.D. would have to be taught in a Science curriculum. Hmmmmm....
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
