Monday, October 13, 2008
Argument Center
Here's the new argument center. The last one went well, so I feel the need to change it up a little. You can still post whatever you want, but this time try to keep it within the category of government. Again, feel free to completely disregard the topic, but it's been a while since I've gotten into a good government argument, so post on topic if you want to make me happier than a copious amount of clams.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
"why should I have to learn about something I don't believe in?"
Why should I have to learn about faith in my science class?
Ya, I didn't like that comment either. In fact, I found it fairly absurd. Who cares what you believe in when it comes to classes other than philosophy? Should we require schools to teach black history from a Nazi perspective? It follows the same path of logic. Teaching science from a faith-based perspective just seems...wrong...to the point of offensively ridiculous.
Especially in a science class. If you only believe in something because of your faith, it probably doesn't have a very strong scientific standing
"Why should I have to learn about something I don't believe in?"
"Why should I have to learn about faith in my science class?"
How's this: since I don't believe in the Big Bang, and it cannot be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, why should I have to learn about it? I likely feel the same amount of ridiculousness in having to learn about the Big Bang as you would learning about a faith-based alternative. So what's the harm in both being objectively presented?
Can you say with 100% certainty that the Big Bang happened? No, but you believe it did.
Can I say with 100% certainty that Creation happened? No, but I believe it did.
Why can't we just find a happy medium here and present both? Certainly the students (we hope) will be intelligent enough to pick the one they wish to believe in, so what's the problem?
Or ... perhaps if you just want me to go to Stephanie's blog and you and Jackylnn stay here with your blog, fine. We'll just stick to our own, biased corners and pout.
I would prefer agreeing to disagree and moving on.
Agreeing to disagree is sacrilegious in An Argument Paradise. Seriously, that statement alone has destroyed so many arguments that could have become wonderful in time, so PLEASE continue if you still feel you have some momentum behind your argument.
Now I think that I agree with you when you denounced the Big Bang Theory. That is a case where science is relying just as much on faith as any religion (perhaps even more). However, science is all about teaching "facts" and then researching them until they are reasonably proven, or completely obliterated where the "facts" then change. It's a flawed system, I know, but it's a fairly constructive way to do things. That way, ideas are put on the spotlight and constant scrutiny.
Now to answer your question, teaching both Creationism and Evolution in the same class gives credibility to the science (or lack thereof) behind Creationism; perhaps even putting it on even ground. So teaching that "theory" (it's SO not a theory) with no scientific backing in a science class as if it is equally relevent as evolution is immensely deceiving.
"Can't we agree to disagree?"
"Never!!!"
This is SO not a blog where I only want people of my own opinion posting. In fact, I would be happy as a clam if my blog only attracted a hundred active bloggers completely disagreeing with me. Post if you feel like you need to and know for sure that I want you to. Did I not stress that I love arguing enough...cuz I REALLY love to argue? (Or would that be a period on the end of that last sentence? Hmmm...)
I am a person who strives for productivity - even subconsciously (it's a little unnerving at times). As such, it is relatively unproductive for two people who have views in huge opposition and no desire to change to continue to rant on their sides. But, as you said, this is Argument Center, so I apologize for my blasphemy. I suppose within the context of this blog's purpose, this is VERY productive (now go and comment on my blog - moviesbycorey.blogspot.com! lol).
"Now I think that I agree with you when you denounced the Big Bang Theory. That is a case where science is relying just as much on faith as any religion (perhaps even more)."
Amen, brotha (pun intended). I'll keep this short, because I have to get up obscenely early tomorrow (which is actually today, as you have it). You say scientific ideas are put on the spotlight and scrutiny. So that's what? Fact until proven incorrect?
I'd like to share my experiences with the teaching of the Big Bang in school. I never took General Science in 8th grade (where evolution was taught) because I skipped it, as part of the advanced science path my school did. Therefore, my only encounter with the subject was in I believe the third grade. There, I was shown a video on the Big Bang. Being a third grader, I cannot say if it presented it as a theory - something that has a chance of being incorrect.
I accepted it as fact - I'm in third grade, my teacher wouldn't tell me something that isn't 100% proven! It wasn't until I was an astute fifth grader with newly-found knowledge on Creationism that I dismissed this theory for a different opinion.
Is this right? Sure, you can, in the spirit of science, teach the Big Bang with the embedded disclaimer to take it with a grain of salt, but isn't third grade a little too early for that to be understood? You yourself said that this "science" is relying on faith (perhaps even more than creationism?!!!). How, then, can you justify teaching it to small, impressionable children?
I suppose you'll raise the argument of if it is correct to bring children up with the religious beliefs of their parents. And to that, I would say it is much of the same. But not entirely. Perhaps it shouldn't be allowed to introduce religion until you're old enough to decide for yourself. But there's a big difference in parents passing on their beliefs and schools preying on the easily-manipulated views of small children.
Thoughts?
I think there is a difference between the big bang theory and evolution, for one thing. Evolution is more about the evolving of creatures once on earth, and the big bang theory is more of the actual creation of the earth, isn't it? I wonder why there isn't more debate about the BB rather than evolution...
But anyway, the really reason that I don't think Creationism should be taught in schools is that it undeniably promotes religion. I have doubts that you would believe in Creationism if you weren't religious.
Then there is the argument that we should receive all sides of the origin of the world. So according to other religions, maybe heaven and earth are spirits who have no beginning or end. Or maybe we should learn what neoplatonists believe that we derived from and almighty One and that our current state/world is just an illusion and that our ultimate goal is to be reunited with the One.
...Where does it end? Our science classes become a philosophy/religious class. I don't think because a certain faith is particularly popular means that it becomes more scientific and should be taught in schools. It does promote a religious belief and that is not fair. Religious education can be just as affective outside schools, right?
This is my main qualm.
"I don't believe in the Big Bang, and it cannot be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, why should I have to learn about it? "
My art teacher in highschool didn't believe in dinosaurs because the bible didn't talk about it. Does that mean we shouldn't learn about it? Does that mean it doesn't exist? Knowing theories doesn't automatically mean adopting them. In fact, knowing theories and being critical of them is very scientific. A young scientist may learn about a theory which is accepted in the community but be personally disgusted by it and seek to prove it wrong, and may change science. But if he has no starting point, and if he never learns where science "is" at the point, it is a disadvantage to our little "The world is round!" scientist.
And teaching anything to children will make an impression, won't it? It can't be helped.
"And teaching anything to children will make an impression, won't it? It can't be helped."
Yes it can be helped - you can wait until they are old enough to understand the difference between theory and facts.
A theory - an educated guess, a conjecture, a hypothesis, a fact-driven opinion , is not fact. Fact is non-debatable. Third graders don't know the difference.
"fact-driven opinion"
Works for me.
I'm not sure if I understand what we are arguing. Do you not what to teach children anything? How old is old enough to think?
I think you underestimate the ability of a growing mind. I don't think you are lacking in any capacity of argument, intelligence, or decision-making and you were introduced to both religious and science at a young age.
Oh man, I'm doing some intense blogging right now. I think it's because I don't want to write our paper for tomorrow.... :)
I'm going to have to keep mine pretty short because I have yet to start the rough draft that's due tomorrow, but I think I can make my points clear.
Again, I don't believe that the Big Bang should be taught in schools at the moment. It's an example of the scienctific community getting cocky, and definitely not an example of sound science. In fact, I would argue that the Big Bang being taught in schools was actually a victory for creationism, because it kind of goes hand in hand with it.
However, if I were to give an incredibly shallow argument to defend teaching it in schools, I would say that The Big Bang is the current belief of science, so it is taught in a science class, while Creationism is the belief of the Church and should be taught in a church. Again, this is incredibly shallow, kind of off the topic of evolution (not that I care about getting off topic), and doesn't address all of the details of your arguments, but it will have to suffice for now.
P.S. Sorry about not visiting your blog. I always worry that I'll stumble onto a spoiler about a movie that I want to see. Perhaps this is irrational like most of the thoughts in my mind...
Post a Comment