97
   

Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

 
 
Chumly
 
  1  
Wed 3 Jan, 2007 10:57 am
spendius wrote:
There is no human capacity to prove or disprove the existence or otherwise of an intelligent designer.
That wholly depends on whether you are willing to accept the edict of the reasonable man in light of the likelihood of an omnipotent multidimensional anal suppository controlling all dog's bowel movements!
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Wed 3 Jan, 2007 11:05 am
Chum wrote-

Quote:
spendius wrote:
I do not see how a school teaching evolution theory can have any room for teaching any sort of belief-based morality.


Since I have seen no evidence of an absolute morality, I contend all morality is based on some type of subjective belief. Given that morality is unquestionably taught in the same schools as is taught evolution, it's odd you can't see how this is accomplished.


There is no evidence of an absolute morality. Morality is based on the imposition by authority of certain beliefs which that authority thinks of as having utility in the circumstances it is in which is often the protection of its own position or, more ideally, the protection of the society it rules. Monogamy was imposed much to your disgust no doubt. The imposing authority has no need to hold the belief itself. It only imposes it by various methods.

I accept that morality is taught in the same schools as evolution theory but it is inconsistent with it intellectually.
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Wed 3 Jan, 2007 11:11 am
Foxfyre wrote:
Albert Einstein Quotes

You forgot this quote, which is crucial and puts the ones you did quote in proper perspective:

Albert Einstein, in a 1954 letter, wrote:
"It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it."

Thus, in the quotes you presented, Foxfyre, Einstein's usage of the word "god" is different than that of most other people. He uses it as shorthand for `the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.' He doesn't use it to mean something that answers prayers, punishes sins, rewards some with eternal bliss in paradise, and condemns others to an eternity in hell.
0 Replies
 
wandeljw
 
  1  
Wed 3 Jan, 2007 11:25 am
Foxfyre wrote:
Spendius writes
Quote:
The debate as I see it is to do with the social consequences of teaching evolution theory in American schools.


We could limit the debate to that, of course, but Wandel didn't specify that when he started the thread.


I myself do not consider you off-topic, Foxfyre.

There are two types of intelligent design theory: biological intelligent design (where there is an education controversy) and cosmological intelligent design (what you have been mainly discussing).

I have no objection toward a discussion on cosmological intelligent design.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Wed 3 Jan, 2007 12:02 pm
wande wrote-

Quote:
I have no objection toward a discussion on cosmological intelligent design.


Neither have I. So long as it is the discussion you are talking about and not cosmological intelligent design. It's good fun. But cosmological intelligent design is meaningless. It simply flatters some human egos to think it has meaning.

The same applies to biological intelligent design. Neither concept is falsifiable or provable and thus have nothing to do with science. It is a religious belief to think otherwise. Either way.

Thomas-

Einstein does preface his remark with an "If". And I'm surprised he used the word "admiration". It might be construed as an admiration for his own revelations. How is stuff admirable?
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Wed 3 Jan, 2007 12:09 pm
The consistent failure to address the social consequences of beliefs and specifically the belief in evolution theory suggests a mighty fear of the issue which is in no way minimised by the very understandable nature of such a fear.

In the early days of this thread the asserted negative social consequences of Christian belief were often brought forward to justify attacks on that belief.

Why the silence then on the social consequences of the eradication of the belief?
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Wed 3 Jan, 2007 12:10 pm
Thomas wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:
Albert Einstein Quotes

You forgot this quote, which is crucial and puts the ones you did quote in proper perspective:

Albert Einstein, in a 1954 letter, wrote:
"It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it."

Thus, in the quotes you presented, Foxfyre, Einstein's usage of the word "god" is different than that of most other people. He uses it as shorthand for `the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.' He doesn't use it to mean something that answers prayers, punishes sins, rewards some with eternal bliss in paradise, and condemns others to an eternity in hell.


You may be right. I don't pretend to know Einstein's mind and heart. But after reading in context much that he has written and has been written about him, I believe Einstein came to accept a concept of a supreme being that many people call God. I do think he held to a George Burns "Oh God" kind of theology in which this supreme being set up a system that works and then expects humankind to live within the system that works without direct involvement/intervention of the supreme being himself. That would make Einstein more a Deist without a 'personal relationship with God' but nevertheless with an awareness of God.

This is my own conclusion. I don't require anybody else to accept it.
0 Replies
 
wandeljw
 
  1  
Wed 3 Jan, 2007 12:32 pm
RUSSIA UPDATE

Quote:
In Russia, a test of God vs. Darwin
(By Erika Niedowski, Baltimore Sun, January 3, 2007)

ST. PETERSBURG, RUSSIA - This nation's first-ever lawsuit on Charles Darwin's theory of evolution began with a biology textbook, a bunch of bananas and a man dressed in a monkey suit. And it only got more tangled from there.

The student who brought the case, saying the teaching of evolution offends her religion, has accused her school of trying to flunk her as punishment for speaking up.

The principal has suggested that the girl and her family are not being driven by devout beliefs, but by a push for publicity.

And people on both sides - including the Russian Orthodox Church and one of the textbook's authors - are locked in a debate that touches not only on Darwin's observations on the origin of species but on atheism, Marxism-Leninism and the fall of civilizations.

The case revolves around 16-year-old Mariya Shraiber, who says her biology text presents a one-sided version of life's origins based on Darwin's theory and is dismissive of the view that God made man. The lawsuit challenges Darwin's theory as anti-religious, atheistic and unproven. It quotes the textbook as referring to biblical teachings as "legends" and calling it "stupidity" to assume that God created the world.

"It's quite disrespectful," said Mariya, who has short fingernails painted bright pink, multiple earrings in each ear and a fondness for poetry. "I believe we have the right to learn not only the theory of evolution, but creationism as well."

Education officials counter that the book, used by the vast majority of Russian high school students, presents various views and that the secular state is in the business of teaching science, not religion.

"I don't think it created a problem worth a lawsuit," said Andrei Polozov, principal at School No. 148 in St. Petersburg, known as Cervantes Gymnasium. "If a student disagrees with this or that, he's most welcome to express his point of view."

The lawsuit, which names the municipal education committee and federal education ministry as defendants, seeks amendments to the textbook. It also asks for something that Mariya's lawyer, Konstantin Romanov, says is appropriate when someone has been offended: an apology.

Mariya, who does not attend church, says the lawsuit was her idea. But she is weary of the publicity, forming her finger and thumb into the shape of a pistol and holding it to her temple when asked if she is tired of giving interviews.

She did not attend the first two court hearings and seems far less interested in the outcome than her father, Kirill Shraiber, who spoke to the court on her behalf, and Anton Vuima, a family friend who heads a public relations firm called Spiritual Heritage.

Vuima, whose firm goes by the slogan, "We Create Sensations," believes that nothing short of society's collapse is at stake when it comes to the teaching of evolution. He, like the lawsuit, contends that Darwinism, while not a political ideology, stems from Marxist-Leninist ideology; after all, both Darwin and Karl Marx, who is said to have offered to dedicate Das Kapital to the scientist, wrote of grand struggles for survival.

Before launching the current "information war" against Darwin - which includes the Web site antidarvin.com and a special number that is accepting text-message "votes" for and against the scientist - Vuima set out to determine how society as a whole had become so morally bankrupt. He decided, in short, that it was because of a lack of faith in God. And, by his logic, since Darwin's theory as presented in schools essentially teaches that there is no God, Darwin himself is the enemy.

"If we want to have a high level of morality, not just in Russia but all over the world, we have to challenge Darwin's theory," Vuima said. "Darwin's theory kills morality. It denies the copyright of God."

Mariya's lawyer frames the argument in decidedly less sweeping, more legalistic, terms: "Secular education should not be based on offending the feelings of religious believers," Romanov said.

The Shraibers announced their plans for the lawsuit at a March news conference that featured free bananas. In July, when they mailed the paperwork to court, they were accompanied by an actor in a monkey suit - a stunt since dubbed "stupid" by Romanov, who asked that the monkey not come near him.

"That was his idea," said Mariya, pointing to her father, a graphic artist who runs an advertising firm. Mariya says the publicity makes her uncomfortable. She dyed her hair jet black and has taken to wearing a hood in public.

The Russian Orthodox Church is standing behind her. The Rev. Artemy Skripkin, head of the youth department of the St. Petersburg patriarchate, attended court hearings in a show of support. The next, perhaps final, one is scheduled for February.

"We consider it inadmissible when one theory - the theory of Darwin - is presented as the only true theory," Skripkin said. "Russia has always been presented as an atheist country. We are not all atheists. "What this school is advocating is atheism, which is wrong."

But Sergei Mamontov, one of the authors, says the book doesn't advocate anything - except the teaching of science. Taking offense to Darwinism, in his view, is like taking offense to the theories of Einstein or Copernicus.

"In middle and high school, students learn scientific theory - and not religious theory - for one simple reason: Nobody is able to prove religious theories," said Mamontov, a professor of biology at Russian State Medical University and a member of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences. "You just have to believe in them."

Mariya is scheduled to graduate from Cervantes Gymnasium next year, but it is unclear whether she will be able to do so. As she explained recently on a day that she skipped school to do two more interviews, she expects up to six failing grades at the end of the term. Her father is trying to get her into another school, but says he can't find one that will accept her.

She seems uncertain how to respond when asked whether her lawsuit - and the principles outlined in it - are worth the effort. "I think," she said, "I should do something good in life."
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Wed 3 Jan, 2007 12:53 pm
While I don't support anybody's refusal to study Darwin as a credible theory of science, you have to agree that the school attempting to shake this young lady's faith in her religion is also deserving of criticism. Russia's grand experiment with a Leninist atheistic society certainly produced less than stellar results. I think if I was them, I would not be discouraging religious faith.

As my own teachers put it, I don't care what you believe and what is meaningful for you is great. But you're gonna have to pass the science test just the same.
0 Replies
 
fisherman
 
  1  
Wed 3 Jan, 2007 01:04 pm
With all due respect since I am just hatched,
Foxfyre wrote:
Spendius writes
Quote:
The debate as I see it is to do with the social consequences of teaching evolution theory in American schools.


I would have stated it otherwise; The debate as I see it is to do with the social consequences of teaching ID theory in American schools along side evolution theory. If I understood you correctly Spendius, I would agree that evolution theory should be confined to graduate and post-graduate settings which are voluntary and self-selecting.

As for the assertion that ID is a "feeling". Has that been proven too?
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Wed 3 Jan, 2007 01:11 pm
Thomas wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:
Albert Einstein Quotes

You forgot this quote, which is crucial and puts the ones you did quote in proper perspective:

Albert Einstein, in a 1954 letter, wrote:
"It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it."

Thus, in the quotes you presented, Foxfyre, Einstein's usage of the word "god" is different than that of most other people. He uses it as shorthand for `the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.' He doesn't use it to mean something that answers prayers, punishes sins, rewards some with eternal bliss in paradise, and condemns others to an eternity in hell.



Thomas...as you can see from her next post...Foxfyre has about as closed a mind as anyone posting in this forum.

The moment she formulates a "belief"...which is to say, the moment she makes a guess...stuff like facts will never make an impact.
0 Replies
 
xingu
 
  1  
Wed 3 Jan, 2007 02:51 pm
Well hello Frank; good to see you back.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Wed 3 Jan, 2007 03:19 pm
xingu wrote:
Well hello Frank; good to see you back.


Yo, Xingu. Nice new avatar. I gotta do mine over also. This one is two years old...and I have aged a lot since then.

Crying or Very sad
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Wed 3 Jan, 2007 03:22 pm
He must be feeling frisky zingy.

He used to enjoy a good set to in the old days. It might be the golf but I think he was getting flummoxed and he retired to his corner.

I wonder what has caused him to call in here.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Wed 3 Jan, 2007 03:27 pm
wande quoted-

Quote:
The principal has suggested that the girl and her family are not being driven by devout beliefs, but by a push for publicity.


I suggested that possibilty at Dover but everybody scoffed. I suppose it must be PC to say it about Russians.
0 Replies
 
smorgs
 
  1  
Wed 3 Jan, 2007 03:34 pm
Hey, frank Smile

Not 'seen' you for ages, have you been away, or have we just not crossed threads?

I hope you are well and all the very best for 2007.

Sarah
x
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Wed 3 Jan, 2007 04:21 pm
smorgs wrote:
Hey, frank Smile

Not 'seen' you for ages, have you been away, or have we just not crossed threads?

I hope you are well and all the very best for 2007.

Sarah
x


Hey Sarah...

...good to see ya.

I've been away for a few months. Banned because of excessive zeal in a couple of posts.

Broke my shoulder in an ice skating encounter with rink boards last week...so I decided to spend some of my recovery time talking with old friends.



Hope all is well...

...and that 2007 is wonderful and fulfilling.

Same to everyone else...

...including that other Brit who has trouble addressing remarks to an individual like a man would.

Twisted Evil
0 Replies
 
smorgs
 
  1  
Wed 3 Jan, 2007 04:30 pm
Frank wrote:

Quote:
I've been away for a few months. Banned because of excessive zeal in a couple of posts.


Notch, notch...

Quote:
Broke my shoulder in an ice skating encounter with rink boards last week...so I decided to spend some of my recovery time talking with old friends.


Bugger! Was it your 'useful' arm as well? Good about the friends though.

Ice skating - TUT! You are only supposed to sit on park benches and feed the ducks at your age. Laughing

regards

x
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Wed 3 Jan, 2007 06:04 pm
Frank's been in the sin bin has he?

I've not had the privilege. It must be because I'm a nice considerate guy in the opinion of the referee.
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Thu 4 Jan, 2007 08:20 am
Spendy Franks been in the sin bin for whacking someone with his hockey stick. It wasnt you was it?

Hope you're feeling better Frank.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.13 seconds on 10/01/2024 at 05:29:26