Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-08-2010, 07:39 PM
 
598 posts, read 915,907 times
Reputation: 141

Advertisements

Religion should be in religion textbook; science should be in science textbook.

Is creationism science? Why is it biology text?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-08-2010, 07:51 PM
 
Location: New Jersey
4,085 posts, read 8,769,585 times
Reputation: 2691
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur View Post
Wow, all those years of studying epistemology in Philosophy classes, reading Kant, Plato, Popper, etc. - what a waste! I could have just read an internet article to learn what is "true".

The ignorance on both sides of this debate is equal. Two sides of the same coin.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-08-2010, 07:53 PM
 
Location: New Jersey
4,085 posts, read 8,769,585 times
Reputation: 2691
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bud235 View Post
Religion should be in religion textbook; science should be in science textbook.

Is creationism science? Why is it biology text?
And epistemology should be in philosophy books. Oh, but let's not talk about philosophy, everyone knows that with Science here to answer all questions about "truth" philosophy, along with religion, is no longer needed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-08-2010, 08:07 PM
 
Location: Victoria, BC.
33,513 posts, read 37,057,177 times
Reputation: 13985
Quote:
Originally Posted by BergenCountyJohnny View Post
Wow, all those years of studying epistemology in Philosophy classes, reading Kant, Plato, Popper, etc. - what a waste! I could have just read an internet article to learn what is "true".

The ignorance on both sides of this debate is equal. Two sides of the same coin.
Make the claim as many times as you want...That's what the religious do, but you are still wrong. They are not in any way equal. If they were there would be as much evidence for creation as there is for evolution...I think you did waste your time, if you think creation stands on the same level as science.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-08-2010, 08:17 PM
 
Location: Richland, Washington
4,903 posts, read 6,005,119 times
Reputation: 3533
Quote:
Originally Posted by BergenCountyJohnny View Post
And epistemology should be in philosophy books. Oh, but let's not talk about philosophy, everyone knows that with Science here to answer all questions about "truth" philosophy, along with religion, is no longer needed.
I don't see how this in any way relates to evolution. Science is based on the scientific method which uses rigorous testing then drawing conclusions based on the consequences of the test. Evolution is science because it is based on evidence gained through use of scientific testing. Creationism is not science because it is undetectable and there is no evidence to support it which makes it an invalid claim. Science should be taught in science class, therefore evolution should be taught and creationism should not, at least in science class. This doesn't mean philosophy is invalid, it just means that nonscientific claims should not be taught as scientific. This is where the problem with alot of parents whom home school their children is. It is a blatant lie to teach their children creationism as scientific because it is not scientific and all the evidence points toward evolution.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-08-2010, 10:18 PM
 
63,565 posts, read 39,855,129 times
Reputation: 7818
Quote:
Originally Posted by agnostic soldier View Post
Science should be taught in science class, therefore evolution should be taught and creationism should not, at least in science class.
As long as Creationism is the religious-based OEC or YEC and literal bible stories version . . . Agreed.
Quote:
This doesn't mean philosophy is invalid, it just means that nonscientific claims should not be taught as scientific.
I agree with this as well. So . . . why are nonscientific claims being taught as scientific by implication and default?
Quote:
This is where the problem with a lot of parents whom home school their children is. It is a blatant lie to teach their children creationism as scientific because it is not scientific and all the evidence points toward evolution.
This is where the disingenuous and deceptive "rubber meets the road." The specific religious beliefs and absurdities in Creationism can be called untrue . . . ("lie" incorrectly implies the speaker knows them not to be true . . . atheists seem to enjoy using implications for those things they cannot possibly know) . . . and they certainly cannot be taught as science. BUT . . . a Creator cannot be called untrue NOR IMPLIED to be untrue under the mantle of science.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-08-2010, 11:04 PM
 
Location: Richland, Washington
4,903 posts, read 6,005,119 times
Reputation: 3533
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD View Post
As long as Creationism is the religious-based OEC or YEC and literal bible stories version . . . Agreed. I agree with this as well. So . . . why are nonscientific claims being taught as scientific by implication and default?This is where the disingenuous and deceptive "rubber meets the road." The specific religious beliefs and absurdities in Creationism can be called untrue . . . ("lie" incorrectly implies the speaker knows them not to be true . . . atheists seem to enjoy using implications for those things they cannot possibly know) . . . and they certainly cannot be taught as science. BUT . . . a Creator cannot be called untrue NOR IMPLIED to be untrue under the mantle of science.
You're probably right that lie is maybe not the right word, it's just disturbing that some people are so incredibly willfully ignorant.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-08-2010, 11:13 PM
 
Location: Valencia, Spain
16,155 posts, read 12,821,127 times
Reputation: 2879
Quote:
Originally Posted by Visvaldis View Post
If this was Europe it would make sense to discuss what is taught in schools.
Home schooling is not common here and parents who teach their children have to open up their homes for inspection and provide an annual "statement of their intentions" for the child's education that year.

Quote:
American pupils lag behind their counterparts in European nations. The only change that can be expected is that the gap will widen. And for all I care, let it all happen. America will reap the 'benefits' of christian 'education' in future generations.
Alas, so true.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2010, 01:45 AM
 
4,082 posts, read 5,031,648 times
Reputation: 817
Quote:
Originally Posted by BergenCountyJohnny View Post
And epistemology should be in philosophy books. Oh, but let's not talk about philosophy, everyone knows that with Science here to answer all questions about "truth" philosophy, along with religion, is no longer needed.

Some of us accept the science of evolution and still have a place for religion. Does science answer all the questions? No, but neither does the bible.

Why is it that "creationists" need to get sarcastic when the conversation does not go the way they want it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2010, 09:17 AM
 
63,565 posts, read 39,855,129 times
Reputation: 7818
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jazzymom View Post
Some of us accept the science of evolution and still have a place for religion. Does science answer all the questions? No, but neither does the bible.

Why is it that "creationists" need to get sarcastic when the conversation does not go the way they want it?
Some of us accept all science and still have a place for God (not religion). Does science answer all the questions? No . . . but God does for theists ("Nature" does for atheists).

As a THEIST (NOT Creationist) "pot" speaking to all "kettles" . . . the perfectly "natural" tendency to denigrate one's opponent's intellectual skills with generic categorizations (stereotyping for those in Rio Linda . . . an example of same ) can have no other effect than to generate sarcasm (or worse) in response. Unless of course the respondent is truly Christ-like.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:51 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top