Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

Bernie wrote-

Quote:

So it makes it rather tough for a christian (or other) to argue that there's something inherently evil or inappropriate in doing something which effects or alters a child's faith.

That's a finger-twisting sophistry Bernie which you should save for the doorman at the Pearly Gates.

I don't think anyone has argued for such a proposition. I certainly haven't.

Quote:

There's no place for religious indoctrination in schools. But it is certainly the case that, say, if my daughter were to take a course in World Religions and if it were to then happen that she gained affinity for Buddhist ideas or Christian ideas then that's quite appropriate and nothing I'd want to alter...it is her mental universe and not mine.

I think were it to come to pass that your daughter took to the Buddhist faith and with a keen fundamentalist attitude you would have something to say with a view to re-aligning her mental universe. At least I should hope you would. It's one thing to be a Buddhist because it's "cool" and quite another to be a Third Dan Buddhist nun in Thailand.

0 Replies

Berni wrote-

Quote:

Over the last 150 years, across Canada, native Indian children were forcefully taken from their homes and communities and held in Catholic schools where they were punished if they spoke their native languages and where they were indoctrinated in the one true faith.

Languages and cultures ended right there.

I could defend that but your heart bleeds with such sympathy and understanding that I fear to try.

When these children had gone through that process that may well have become more assimable in Western society and thus more successful. Are you arguing to keep them out? And if you're not how do you get them in if they retain their old tribal customs and beliefs.

They might even have been better fed and housed.

I don't think you should use words like "forcefully", "punished" and "indoctrinated " in the grossly unscientific manner you have done. You sound like an impressionist.

0 Replies

spendius wrote:

I would willingly offer to adjudicate in the dispute between Foxy and ros but alas I have become so bamboozled about who has misrepresented who and who has distorted who's statements that I feel unqualified to undertake the task.

If a jury at the Old Bailey was brought in I would have a bet on Foxy being exonerated.

Why don't you just explain to me how I misrepresented what Ros said about telling a student that his religious faith was magic? This is what I am accused of yet neither Ros nor Wandel seem willing to back up their accusations with anything substantive. Actually it was just Wandel making an accusation I think. Ros objected to me not accepting his story change at face value.

0 Replies

wandeljw wrote:

You recapped part of the discussion, Foxfyre.

The discussion with Rosborne was spread out over more than one day (with Rosborne forced to deal with your previous misrepresentations of what he was saying).

Thanks Wand. I'm glad at least someone is paying attention to the details.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

rosborne979 wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:
And frankly it wouldn't make any difference whether a teacher did that in class or out in the hall. The effect is the same..

Forget it Fox. We're not getting anywhere anyway.

We rarely do when I'm arguing apples and you want to argue oranges. And you aren't going to answer the question are you?

I've answered it several times already. The exchange you posted several pages back answers it pretty clearly.

But here, I'll do it again..

Foxfyre wrote:

How is it not indoctrinating a child in Atheistic doctrine for the science teacher to tell that child that his religious faith is magic or superstition?

First of all, I said "supernatural" is synonymous with "magic". I didn't say "Religious Faith". You made that extrapolation yourself. And I'm not entirely sure that all religious faiths are based on the supernatural, so I'm not sure I agree with your extrapolation.

None the less, the definition you provded below shows that I am correct, the Supernatural and Magic are the same. (if you think they are different, then explain the difference, because I can't see it from the definitions)

Foxfyre wrote:

Quote:
Main Entry: 1mag·ic
Function: noun
Pronunciation: 'ma-jik
Etymology: Middle English magique, from Middle French, from Latin magice, from Greek magike, feminine of magikos Magian, magical, from magos magus, sorcerer, of Iranian origin; akin to Old Persian magu sorcerer
1 a : the use of means (as charms or spells) believed to have supernatural power over natural forces b : magic rites or incantations
2 a : an extraordinary power or influence seemingly from a supernatural source b : something that seems to cast a spell : ENCHANTMENT
3 : the art of producing illusions by sleight of hand

The reason that telling a child the definition of a word is not indoctrination is because nobody is telling the child that they should or shouldn't believe in the supernatural. All we're doing is observing the simple fact of a definition.

I won't even go into why your further extrapolation into Atheism isn't reasonable because the definitions of Atheism and Indoctrination are going to take us down a whole new track, and I suspect that we haven't even found common ground on this one yet.

As near as I can tell, your main objection to my statements comes because you are not convinced that Supernatural and Magic are synonymous. Although for the life of me, I can't see why, when you've posted the definition yourself. Perhaps Supernatural, or Magic means something different to you than it does to me.

0 Replies

I should imagine they mean something different to everybody. What the dictionary seeks to do is find something snappy which approximates to the average group of compiler's view of those sorts of words which has grown up from their reading.

I don't think Foxy did misrepresent what Ros said about telling a student that his religious faith was magic.

I think to tell a student that his religious faith is magic or a superstition is to attack his religion. I have made similar points my self along the way.

That is not not say that the teacher shouldn't do it. A communist teacher who was faced with a very bright kid who had religious faith might attack that faith because he could see that the kid's promising future might be ruined if he persisted with it in a bureaucratic communist world. The same problem arises with Bernie's Indian kids.

One of the main articles of faith among the Zulus was that a man could not have a woman until he had "dipped his spear in the blood of the enemy". Rider Haggard mentions a discussion among high-ups which resulted in a policy to attack that belief. The aggression the belief caused had to be eradicated or the Zulus had to be.

Talking about such things in the abstract is a mind game.

Actually Bernie's use of the words "force", "punishment", and "indoctrination" in his piece is a simple example of how an impression can be given which might not be an accurate portrayal of the events.

Whatever the teacher's word formulations if he is interested in attacking the religious view he will find a way of doing so.

As I have said, the prevention of that involves having no atheists teaching kids because they are invariably a bit militant about it for one reason or another, none of them to do with science, and will find ways to attack the kids belief which nobody could argue about afterwards and that shouldn't come as too great a shock when ten candidates declare for the race to the WH and the atheists have been weeded out from the beginning and from probably before that.

0 Replies

Quote:

I don't think you should use words like "forcefully", "punished" and "indoctrinated " in the grossly unscientific manner you have done. You sound like an impressionist.

No? Children removed under law from families and villages by government agents (police or other) where the wishes of the children and families were irrelevant and ignored. When those children snuck away, they were recaptured and returned. Where they were overheard speaking their first nation language rather than english, they were denied meals or might be physically punished. They were disallowed any demonstration of their own religious heritage or rituals and were mandated into observance of christian beliefs and rituals.

0 Replies

And where do you want them to be 30 years later?

In a theme park whittling on a stick to show how traditional eating utensils were made so you can visit it when you're bored to show how much you wish to protect the cultural heritage of the peoples whose hunting grounds have been turned into real estate.

As long as there are only a few of such theme parks and they don't get sprouting up all over the place and become mundane, presumably?

Or joining the mainstream, and nobody ever said that would be easy.

It will be impossible with drivel like you are spouting Bernie.

What you know about evolution science could be written on the back of a postage stamp with a slurry gun.

It only works over unimaginable time periods as Mr Darwin often reminded his readers. His attentive ones I mean. Not the ones looking for something solipsistic.

0 Replies

Bernie wrote-

Quote:

No? Children removed under law from families and villages by government agents (police or other) where the wishes of the children and families were irrelevant and ignored.

That's the nature of compulsory education Bernie.

Are you in favour of compulsory education?

I'm inclined to think that without compulsory education the schools would be empty. I can't see any reason why it would be compulsory otherwise.

0 Replies

Bernie wrote-

Quote:

They were disallowed any demonstration of their own religious heritage or rituals and were mandated into observance of christian beliefs and rituals.

Well at least somebody took their responsibilities seriously in that case.

0 Replies

Quote:

That's the nature of compulsory education Bernie.

Isuggest that you read a few of the De Loria works or those of the Ethnograhic Surveys of US and CAn. It appears that much of the "compulsory education" was done after the ethnic cleansing by the same agencies. Good ole Christians dont like competition (unless its little boys for the Catholic Fathas)

0 Replies

farmerman wrote:

Im sitting here in the Charleston W Va general aviation , waiting to hitch a ride. They have an information booth that presents the Creation Museum.
I really want to go.

It's a ways from Charleston, but it is nit too far from the Greater Cincinnati Airport. When you visit the museum, be sure to go by Big Bone and see the place that so infatuated Thomas Jefferson that he had Lewis and Clark stop by on the way to St. Louis and parts west. It's a little factoid that isn't too well covered at the museum. I guess that's because there are no unicorn bones.

Rap

0 Replies

fm wrote-

Quote:

Isuggest that you read a few of the De Loria works or those of the Ethnograhic Surveys of US and CAn. It appears that much of the "compulsory education" was done after the ethnic cleansing by the same agencies. Good ole Christians dont like competition (unless its little boys for the Catholic Fathas)

I don't understand your point fm. Anything significant that Ella Cara Deloria wrote will have gone into the mainstream won't it? Once again you elude a point by this tried and tested method of name dropping.

You seem to know a lot about the little boys. You mention that sort of thing everytime you get the chance. One swallow does not make a Summa.

It's a good example of how to attack a students faith with a sneer though like "magic" and "imaginary friend" and "superstition" and "flying spaghetti monsters". If a teacher wants to attack a kid's faith there are a large number of ways to do it.

The point is, as you don't seem to be able to understand it, that if you have compulsory education force will be used by the authorities to make anybody who refuses subject to it. So Bernie's Indian kids are being singled out to bolster some view of Bernie's and his chosen language is intended to leave the reader with an impression which the scanty information provided does not justify.

And that is propaganda, like your little boy jibe, and should not be part of a science discussion.

You promised us you would write something about the Establishment Clause. What happened to that?

At the time it was chipped into the tablets of stone a very large number of European habits of thought, customs and traditions were carried to the New World and not least the languages which were created out of religious institutions, one of which the clause was written in.

Why was that an exception when the nations that did have religious influences were proving their evolutionary prowess by building empires on the back of their scientific and technological knowledge which was also an outgrowth of their religious world-view.

I was asking an expert but all I get is flannel and pretty low grade flannel it is.

0 Replies

spendius wrote:

Bernie wrote-

Quote:
They were disallowed any demonstration of their own religious heritage or rituals and were mandated into observance of christian beliefs and rituals.

Well at least somebody took their responsibilities seriously in that case.

Don't you see, B? It's fine and good when you are forcefeeding Jesus into young minds, but don't you dare come near them with science. That's fact related.

Joe(I am still praying for rain. It's magical how it works. {See Alabama})Nation

0 Replies

Quote:

Big Bone Lick State Park is located in Boone County, Kentucky. It is located on Beaver Road and between the communities of Beaverlick and Rabbit Hash. The name of the park comes from the Pleistocene megafauna fossils found there. The mammoths and other creatures are believed to have been drawn to this location by a salt lick.

That sounds like a fairly witty extended metaphor to me.

Any other explanation rests upon an admitted "belief". Do we not actually know that the creatures were drawn to the location by a salt lick. Do we only "believe" it?

I thought you guys didn't do "belief".

0 Replies

We do belief, what we don't do is suspend belief.

Joe(Unless we at the movies)Nation

0 Replies

spendi

Quote:

Anything significant that Ella Cara Deloria wrote will have gone into the mainstream won't it? Once again you elude a point by this tried and tested method of name dropping.

,and you have tried to master the art of casual name dropping . Unfortunately--wrong Deloria. (Keep looking sport).
Hint "Custer Died for our Sins"

RAp, Ive been to Bone Lick once. At the time the W Va survey was doing some geophysics in order to button up the site to locate a gift shop. Tht was maybe 25 years ago before the last dig (accoding to your link).

They had this free information kiosk at Charleston, probably a seasonal thing for the science starved homies.

0 Replies

Joe (It's done with a flick of the wrist) Nation wrote-

Quote:

Don't you see, B? It's fine and good when you are forcefeeding Jesus into young minds, but don't you dare come near them with science. That's fact related.

What would you have done Joe?

You have obviously missed my repeated point that Jesus invented the Western science of dynamic space and the point an American Ph.D. made that the Catholic Church developed it.

Show me the atheists or Pagans or any others who did that.

We have all been forcefed my dear. Do you really think that your ideas are the result of personal genius on your part? That would be just about the most unscientific idea I can imagine. That you filled your own brain up single handed from scratch. Do you wear a loin cloth?

Sheesh!!!!!

0 Replies

fm wrote-

Quote:

,and you have tried to master the art of casual name dropping . Unfortunately--wrong Deloria. (Keep looking sport).
Hint "Custer Died for our Sins"

You dropped the name De Loria, implying knowledge not being offered, so I Googled it. When the search produced an anthropologist and was related to Indian matters what was I supposed to think?

Can't you tell us what your point was with the name? Why play hard to get? You're not a tweeting virgin I'm inclined to think.

0 Replies

fm wrote-

Quote:

RAp, Ive been to Bone Lick once.

The audience sniggered and tittered behind their hands.

0 Replies

Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know