Quote:
|
Originally Posted by jorgelito
Supposed to, but "facts" are relative. I still remember my old social studies book that talked about the "races" and how negroes were sex crazed. My astronomy text book is now hopelessly out of date because the old "fact" of Pluto being a planet is no longer valid. Oh man, don't even get started on the history books, the "facts" contained therein are fodder for war....
So yeah, "facts" really have no bearing here.
|
Facts are never relative, never, those aren't facts, and they are opinion. A fact is, something that is verifiable, falsifiable and quantifiable. Things like, I was born on a Monday. It can be verified, it can be falsified, and it is quantifiable. The blue jays are the best team ever, is not, unless you give qualifications for 'best' that are measurable, 'they had the most home runs than any other team'
As for Pluto, it is a fact that Pluto is a stellar body that orbits our sun, we can quantify it’s weight, it’s distance, etc, but the definition of ‘planet’ is subjective. Like when does a shrub become a bush? For me, it’s around 2 feet tall. But that is subjective.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by jorgelito
I think the better argument would be to keep religion in its own classroom and science in another. Seems reasonable to me. If people want to bring it up or mention it then good, they can have a nice debate in class.
|
That’s fine by me, a religions class would be a great place for ID. It is possible that ID is true, however, all the evidence out there say’s it isn’t, but the premise that a supernatural being being able to do this is possible.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by jorgelito
But it is still imformative to mention that Holocaust deniers exist. So you could still feasably mention that an alternative theory called ID exists etc...
Holcaust denial debates are terrific in class and a great learning tool. I can't even count how many times I've experienced Holocaust denial discussions in class from the 8th grade on.
Likewise, ID would bring an interesting element to the debate.
|
Id is a wonderful teaching tool of how science isn’t. it is full of bad science, logical falicies and other wonderful teaching opertunitied, just like the holocaust deniers, when I said equal time, I meant a lecture written by holocaust deniers to be given to the students, not just a they exist.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by jorgelito
I strongly disagree that religious people should be banned from teaching positions. I find that position to be highly idiotic as there is no basis to make that assertion.
My father is a devout evangelist and a highly respected professor (of science) at elite universities. According to the prevailing logic, he should then be barred from teaching? I disagree.
Here's the best part: My father, the devout religious man, believes in aliens.
|
They should be allowed to teach, as long as they teach science and not let there personal views on the matter disrupt the learning of the students. The poor students that are taught ID are ill prepared to think critically about the world around them, and will be eaten alive when they get to college.
and will, where does the moon landing land in that scale?