rosborne979 wrote:snood wrote:It is because I've met and know of many such people that I believe there need be no deleterious effect from having creationism and darwinism both on the same daily teacher's agenda.
So you're saying that because nobody is harmed (directly) by including "Creationisms" in public school, that it's ok to spend school time on it.
Then I guess you wouldn't mind having Islamic, Buddhist and Borneo island, Creation scenario's included either then. Do we have to represent every view?
Rosborne and others seem to ascribe to the idea that if they don't have an opponent, or if their opponent isn't giving them any easy targets, then strawmen will suffice - as long as they can make a grand show of knocking them down.
I didn't say "nobody is harmed" by having Creationism in the classroom - I'm saying the fact that I've met people who are grounded in science and also have no internal conflict in being people of faith at the same time, leads me to believe students could survive the controversy.
No one on this thread is talking about "representing every view" - simply including both the idea that the universe is not a cosmic accident but a creation of a being with a design, and the idea that it is the result of several incidental combinations of matter (and please don't get in a bunch if I haven't properly worded the scientific idea of how the universe came to be). Since this thread is only about those two historically battling views, your suggestion I'd want every marginal view included is disingenuous.
ebrown wrote:
Quote:I am afraid that injecting religious and cultural ideas into a science classroom inevitably hurts the science.
Evolution is accepted by the scientific community because it was developed and tested using a very rigorous scientific process. Creationism is based on cultural beliefs derived from a specific religious text.
Science classes should be devoted to teaching science.
And there it is again - the insistence that creationism not be taught as a science, or "in a science classroom". Is it just me, or do some people keep making this impassioned argument against ABSOLUTLEY NO resistance? I say again - tell the students it isn't science, but that millions of people believe there is a Creator who made us. This is not in my view a dangerous idea for our children.
..and edgar wrote:
Quote:Well, I've suggested giving creationism a room removed from the science, but if I understand correctly, snood wants them mixed so the students have an option to learning science. If true, that's a good scenario for the Middle Ages, but not the 21st Century.
I guess I should take it as a sign that my views are having some effect, the fact that so many keep going out of their way to misstate them. When I say I'd prefer the two ideas are taught in close proximity, is that the same as saying they should be "mixed"? If so, I hope edgar is never a bartender. People can "learn science" and learn about creationism too, and never suffer half the drama on this thread.
rosborne:
Quote:We need to differentiate Snood's argument. He isn't asking for Creationism in Science class any more (if he ever was). He's making a slightly different argument which seems to be something along the lines of "teach the controversy" in some type of sociology or logic class. But I'm not sure I understand the point of such a thing exactly (waiting for Snood to explain in more detail).
Well, at least you appear to be trying. You don't see the point in teaching, in open classrooms to our children, both of two opposing schools of thought (belief, whatever - don't get bogged down here) which have together been the cause of one of the most polarizing controversies of the last century? Well, I don't see the point in NOT introducing both ideas about how the universe came to be - or in NOT giving both fair hearings.
)
