RE: Text Books ... about damn time ...

RE: Text Books ... about damn time ... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Arpig -> RE: Text Books ... about damn time ... (9/6/2009 9:23:42 AM)
Sure, why not. One is science and one is mythology. I think they should be teaching Norse, Celtic, Hindu, Buddhist Greco-Roman, Egyptian mythologies as well (they covered the Norse and Greco-Roman mythologies way back when I was in school), after all those creation myths have just as much validity as the Judeo-Christian one. They should all be covered in the approriate context..a comparative religions or mythology class. If there were a scientifically valid alternative to the theory of evolution then I would be all for that being taught in a science class, and I oppose teaching evolution without making it clear that it is a theory...one that fits all the evidence but still not unassailable fact. Like any theory, it undergoes modification as new details and discoveries come to light, but on the whole the theory still stands and explains the observable phenomena. However, in the absence of such a rival theory,I am content that evolution be taught alone.

thishereboi -> RE: Text Books ... about damn time ... (9/6/2009 9:27:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: gift4mistress All you liberals sit there and complain about this as if you guys have been keeping your filthy hands out of our school system. HA! All of them? Are you sure that all liberals do this? And are all the people who are complaining liberal? I wouldn't put any money on that one. Now your post was in response to chia and I am not sure if pets have hands, but if they do, I am willing to bet chia's are clean. Well most of the time anyway.

GotSteel -> RE: Text Books ... about damn time ... (9/6/2009 9:33:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: chiaThePet I just googled, front page offered these, I'm sure numbers change, care to ease up. As an atheist, the number of atheists in this country is kind of important to me. I also care where people are getting their numbers. So seeing a number that I suspect is both several years out of date and the misrepresentation of a Gallup poll question that involved the words "universal spirit or higher power" makes me a little twitchy. I'm still not entirely sure what point you're trying to make. If it's the same one made in Arpig's last post then I completely agree.

Musicmystery -> RE: Text Books ... about damn time ... (9/6/2009 9:48:50 AM)
quote: I oppose teaching evolution without making it clear that it is a theory...one that fits all the evidence but still not unassailable fact. Like any theory, it undergoes modification as new details and discoveries come to light, but on the whole the theory still stands and explains the observable phenomena. However, in the absence of such a rival theory,I am content that evolution be taught alone. That it is not unassailable fact applies to all of science, not just evolution. Lost in the either/or debate is that evolution is more than one theory. THAT it happens is pretty well demonstrated through the fossil records. HOW it happens is a different matter. While once a gradual shift through passing on superior traits was favored. This, though, is difficult to isolate and test. However, the more recent "punctuated equilibrium" theory, that these changes come quickly in the same organism when necessary, can be and has been observed--in pepper moths in the U.K. changing color, in Galapagos finches changing beak length in wet and dry seasons, for example--and is held in greater favor because of this. Even our own cells change in extreme conditions--from adjusting to addictions (including emotional ones), to adding capillaries in mountain climates--as well as day to day changes depending on lifestyle choices and environment.

chiaThePet -> RE: Text Books ... about damn time ... (9/6/2009 9:51:47 AM)
I suppose my own train of thought here is traveling down the track of, if so many individuals believe in a higher power, and accept that the higher power is in some way responsible for their creation, why do they accept the fact that their children are spoon fed quite the opposite as their thoughts are shaped and honed? My own parents would cart me off to bible study on Saturday, dress me up on Sunday for the gathering of fellowship, yet sent me off five days a week to learn quite the opposite with nary a concern. Didn't see a balance within the classroom walls then, and do not now. This I find interesting given the percentages. Unfortunately, I'm off to a wedding reception, so any further exchanges will have to wait. Till we meet again. chia* (the pet)

Musicmystery -> RE: Text Books ... about damn time ... (9/6/2009 9:54:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: Arrogance Creationism is fiction. "Fiction" seems like a very strong word to decribe the principal creation myth of the planet, Arro. Certainly when the offered replacement is deeply unsatisfying, and incomplete. Perhaps a look into integrating into, and expanding the metaphor, rather than insisting that because we can put a man on the moon and do a little math, we have it all figured out? This begs the question, though. Creationists present their case as unassailable truth, not an extended metaphor. Nor is dismissing a tale with no demonstrable basis--in fact, with strong evidence contradicting it--"insisting...we have it all figured out." As has often been the case, the masses' beliefs don't acquire truth in numbers. When we demoted the earth in favor of the sun as the center of the solar system (well, actually, we wanted the center of the universe), we didn't explore the mythology. It was a mistaken belief.

OrionTheWolf -> RE: Text Books ... about damn time ... (9/6/2009 11:26:14 AM)
The Obama televised message I did not have much of a problem with, as long as it is a one or two time message, about things like staying in school, helping be a good citizen (without partisan slant), etc. This though is indoctrination, and needs to be challenged. What the hell ever happened to just neutral civics classes. You know the one's that taught you about the founding fathers, branches of government, checks and balances, and all those things that are needed more than ever? Hell, we should have an ethics class concerning personal responsibility and social contract as well. quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY What Happens in Texas Doesn't Stay in Texas When the Texas Board of Education finishes drafting its new statewide standards for textbooks, students will be expected to "identify significant conservative advocacy organizations" and be able to "describe Ronald Reagan's role in restoring national confidence, such as Reaganomics and Peace with Strength." The curriculum's conservative bias has led critics to claim that the board is excluding a liberal perspective from statewide education (there are no analogous questions about left-leaning organizations) and has been described as having a "persistent, tendentious conservative voice." If these standards are adopted, there could be serious ramifications for states outside of Texas, Talking Points Memo says. Along with California, Texas has one of the country's largest student enrollments, meaning that textbook publishers often cater to the market. Firm

OrionTheWolf -> RE: Text Books ... about damn time ... (9/6/2009 11:33:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Arrogance Evolution shouldn't be polarizing or politicized. It's fact. You seem to come off as knowing everything, could you explain the difference between fact and theory? You know as in the theory of evolution. Could you possibly list some of the current areas of study that relate to evolution, such as maybe HBE, which is in it's infacy as a possible science. Sorry but there are many unanswered questions even about evolution, so facts are being discovered and disputed every day, because they are theories. quote: Creationism is fiction. Actually it is metaphorical theory, based upon old stories being handed down by word of mouth. Kind of like a mixture of mythology (within even mythology there may be some truths/facts hidden) and philosophy. quote: It doesn't seem too difficult to differentiate between the two for some. There is a big difference, but there are also some common ground, such as theories being proven or disproven, as new information is gained. I will agree that they are apples and oranges, though both are fruits.

DomKen -> RE: Text Books ... about damn time ... (9/6/2009 11:36:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: chiaThePet I suppose my own train of thought here is traveling down the track of, if so many individuals believe in a higher power, and accept that the higher power is in some way responsible for their creation, why do they accept the fact that their children are spoon fed quite the opposite as their thoughts are shaped and honed? My own parents would cart me off to bible study on Saturday, dress me up on Sunday for the gathering of fellowship, yet sent me off five days a week to learn quite the opposite with nary a concern. Didn't see a balance within the classroom walls then, and do not now. This I find interesting given the percentages. Unfortunately, I'm off to a wedding reception, so any further exchanges will have to wait. Till we meet again. chia* (the pet) If the majority believes something that isn't true that doesn't mean it should be taught as fact. it means the teaching of the actual truth needs to be more vigorous. The reality is the universe is 14+ billion years old not 6000 odd. The Earth is 4.5 billion years old not 6000 odd. There was no global flood. Humanity was never reduced to 8 people. Humanity did not emerge in upper mesopotamia. Languages did not spring from Babylon sometime after 2000 BCE.

DomKen -> RE: Text Books ... about damn time ... (9/6/2009 11:40:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf quote: ORIGINAL: Arrogance Evolution shouldn't be polarizing or politicized. It's fact. You seem to come off as knowing everything, could you explain the difference between fact and theory? You know as in the theory of evolution. Could you possibly list some of the current areas of study that relate to evolution, such as maybe HBE, which is in it's infacy as a possible science. Sorry but there are many unanswered questions even about evolution, so facts are being discovered and disputed every day, because they are theories. Theories explain facts. For instance the fact is that populations of organisms change over time (the fact of evolution). The Theory opf Evolution is the best explanation of that fact. There will always be unanswered questions about everything. That doesn't mean you should doubt exceptionally well documented and reliable scientific theories.

Musicmystery -> RE: Text Books ... about damn time ... (9/6/2009 11:52:51 AM)
quote: There will always be unanswered questions about everything. That doesn't mean you should doubt exceptionally well documented and reliable scientific theories. Exactly. We don't know how gravity works. Yet apples still reliably fall from the trees.

OrionTheWolf -> RE: Text Books ... about damn time ... (9/6/2009 5:23:37 PM)
~FR~ Yes DomKen you are correct, but so is my statement. Yes Tim you are correct. The theories on gravity are actually being tested again, with the Pioneer anomaly. Now there are also philosophical theories: " Theories whose subject matter consists not in empirical data, but rather in ideas are in the realm of philosophical theories as contrasted with scientific theories. At least some of the elementary theorems of a philosophical theory are statements whose truth cannot necessarily be scientifically tested through empirical observation." Those are theories as well, though not scientific theories. Some philosophical theories cannot be readily tested because the perception to do so, may require an idea that links together several series or events to come to the conclusion. Just because these may not be able to be tested with empirical observation, does not always make them untrue. Now that we are off on a tangent, maybe we can also talk about social and political theories, which would be more valid to the subject. Both social and political theories may not be able to be tested with empirical observations, so they should not be part of any science or math courses. They do not seem to have anything to do with English or Grammar, so where is it left to teach? I say it can be an elective, as long as there are at least two other political/social theories available as electives as well. These things should not be forced into the education system, and I hope that these text books are challenged and the publishers have to redo them at no charge.

Musicmystery -> RE: Text Books ... about damn time ... (9/6/2009 6:38:40 PM)
quote: Now that we are off on a tangent, maybe we can also talk about social and political theories, which would be more valid to the subject. Both social and political theories may not be able to be tested with empirical observations, so they should not be part of any science or math courses. They do not seem to have anything to do with English or Grammar, so where is it left to teach? I say it can be an elective, as long as there are at least two other political/social theories available as electives as well. These things should not be forced into the education system, and I hope that these text books are challenged and the publishers have to redo them at no charge. I have no quarrel with it presented in philosophy class. None. Zilch. Two things: that essentially makes it a college level topic, and it means it's gonna take a bashing, just as other theories.

Arpig -> RE: Text Books ... about damn time ... (9/6/2009 7:58:06 PM)
quote: Hell, we should have an ethics class concerning personal responsibility and social contract as well. I went to a catholic high school, and in grade 10 when the catholics had their religion class, the rest of us had an ethics class. It was probably the best thing I learned in high school, and I think such a class should be required in high school.

chiaThePet -> RE: Text Books ... about damn time ... (9/6/2009 8:51:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: chiaThePet I suppose my own train of thought here is traveling down the track of, if so many individuals believe in a higher power, and accept that the higher power is in some way responsible for their creation, why do they accept the fact that their children are spoon fed quite the opposite as their thoughts are shaped and honed? My own parents would cart me off to bible study on Saturday, dress me up on Sunday for the gathering of fellowship, yet sent me off five days a week to learn quite the opposite with nary a concern. Didn't see a balance within the classroom walls then, and do not now. This I find interesting given the percentages. Unfortunately, I'm off to a wedding reception, so any further exchanges will have to wait. Till we meet again. chia* (the pet) If the majority believes something that isn't true that doesn't mean it should be taught as fact. it means the teaching of the actual truth needs to be more vigorous. The reality is the universe is 14+ billion years old not 6000 odd. The Earth is 4.5 billion years old not 6000 odd. There was no global flood. Humanity was never reduced to 8 people. Humanity did not emerge in upper mesopotamia. Languages did not spring from Babylon sometime after 2000 BCE. And we're back. Lovely couple, both clients, great reception. Just gets uncomfortable if they divorce. Whose reality though? Yours, mine, theirs? Here, your examples and denials are based on historical or origins science, interpreting evidence from past events based on a presupposed philosophical point of view. The theory then is historical, based on the interpretation of evidence that is available in the present. This relies on the assumption of naturalistic or materialistic explanations and causes, the doctrine that scientific laws are adequate to account for all phenomena, a belief claiming that physical matter is the only or fundamental reality, and that all organisms, processes, and phenomena can be explained as manifestations or interactions of matter. Interpretations or theories of the past are based on assumptions and cannot be equated with facts that are observable in the present. This holds true for both creationist or evolutionist theories. It is a most interesting observation here, that neither evolution or creation is directly observable, testable, repeatable or falsifiable. Each is based on certain philosophical assumptions about how the earth began. Two opposite presuppositions looking at the same evidence, yet interpreting that evidence in a different way. Two opposite presuppositions, yet only one is taught as truth in standard curriculum. I suppose the example of evolution vs creationism certainly won't be settled here, and more than likely not in our schools any time soon. God forbid (sorry, it's learned, get over it) all the little homies would be carving beautiful interpretations of Our Lady of Perpetual Wealth into the binders of their bibles. Right before throwing down with the East Side Locos behind the church by the discarded confessional. Was that a raindrop? chia* (pet)

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875