|
|
|
Sanity
New Member
19 Posts |
 Posted - 07/12/2003 : 11:27:13 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by gezzam
I think filthy's quote was to be taken as "tongue in cheek"
Thanks. I've yet to learn who the satire masters are here  . |
 |
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9687 Posts |
Posted - 09/01/2003 : 13:45:30 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sanity
quote:
Originally posted by gezzam
I think filthy's quote was to be taken as "tongue in cheek"
Thanks. I've yet to learn who the satire masters are here .
Besides, evolution is not confined to biology... |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
Bill Burke
New Member
13 Posts |
Posted - 09/02/2003 : 08:12:56 [Permalink]
|
Here is a skeptical-based defense, in part, of Creationism.
Some or most of the Creationists appear to be involved in the textbook fight not so much to promote the teaching of anti-science Creationism, but to counter the teaching of anti-Bible evolution.
Appealing to Biblical "truths" is an obvious use of the Appeal to Authority fallacy, and a good reason to discount Creationism.
But some of the Creationists have pointed out that virtually all high-school students and at least some of their teachers don't have a sufficient understanding of science to independently understand whether evolution is true or not, and that this makes the teaching of evolution (whose theory and facts are typically presented and/or understood by students not as highly probable but as certain truths!) also a fallacious appeal to authority.
Most sceptics on Creationism seem to have missed or ignored this point, and I can't help wondering why.
|
|
|
|
walt fristoe
SFN Regular
USA
505 Posts |
Posted - 09/02/2003 : 10:08:41 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bill Burke
Most sceptics on Creationism seem to have missed or ignored this point, and I can't help wondering why.
Hmmm, let me see.....could it be maybe.....SATAN??? |
"If God chose George Bus of all the people in the world, how good could God be?"
Bill Maher |
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 09/02/2003 : 14:40:30 [Permalink]
|
 |
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
|
|
|
Avenel
Skeptic Friend
USA
60 Posts |
Posted - 09/02/2003 : 15:22:53 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bill Burke
But some of the Creationists have pointed out that virtually all high-school students and at least some of their teachers don't have a sufficient understanding of science to independently understand whether evolution is true or not, and that this makes the teaching of evolution (whose theory and facts are typically presented and/or understood by students not as highly probable but as certain truths!) also a fallacious appeal to authority.
Most sceptics on Creationism seem to have missed or ignored this point, and I can't help wondering why.
It's ignored because it's nonsensical. Are you really arguing that, if the elementary and middle schools fail to teach children the tools necessary to evaluate scientific arguments, we shouldn't bother teaching science in high school? If a student is unprepared to evaluate biology (and essentially all modern biology depends on evolution for it's underpinnings), then they are equally unprepared for chemistry, physics, astronomy, paleontology, and any other science, and, for that matter, history. Yes, high school is late to teach people how to use reason, inductive and deductive reasoning, when and how to apply Occam's Razor, how to recognize the difference between a scientific and a metaphysical hypothesis, among the other tools necessary, but abandoning the children is entirely the wrong response. |
"How many angels can swim on the head of a beer?" - Roger Ramjet |
|
|
|
Bill Burke
New Member
13 Posts |
Posted - 09/02/2003 : 18:26:52 [Permalink]
|
Avenel - You seem to have missed my point entirely. Of course we should not abandon the kids, but let's be honest that we are not teaching them evolution but indoctrinating them with it, as if it were "received wisdom" just like the Bible is claimed to be. And on this point the Creationists I mentioned deserve, I think, a better response than merely pointing out to them that they believe in "nonsense."
|
|
|
|
jmcginn
Skeptic Friend
343 Posts |
Posted - 09/03/2003 : 06:38:18 [Permalink]
|
Bill Burke,quote:
But some of the Creationists have pointed out that virtually all high-school students and at least some of their teachers don't have a sufficient understanding of science to independently understand whether evolution is true or not, and that this makes the teaching of evolution (whose theory and facts are typically presented and/or understood by students not as highly probable but as certain truths!) also a fallacious appeal to authority.
I would add that all fields of science taught at most high schools, community colleges, and even at the lower level at most universities fits this description. The same is true with history and the social sciences. Our educational system is pitiful from the bottom up on teaching critical thinking, reasoning, and evaluating competing hypothesis based on the evidence at hand. The fact that our high school graduates cannot evaluate the theory of evolution nor any other scientific theory for that matter based on the evidence is the true tragedy of our educational system. Our educational system is based on beating as much material as possible into their minds; not on teaching them how to think for themselves, evaluate competing hypothesis, etc.
The only points that one can use to counter such an argument are:
1. The material being drummed into their heads is based on valid scientific research unlike creationism.
2. Yes, the educational system is flawed terribly in this regards, but that does not give open license to teaching any nonsense in the science/history/sociology/etc classes. |
|
|
|
furshur
SFN Regular
USA
1536 Posts |
Posted - 09/03/2003 : 08:00:58 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Of course we should not abandon the kids, but let's be honest that we are not teaching them evolution but indoctrinating them with it, as if it were "received wisdom" just like the Bible is claimed to be. And on this point the Creationists I mentioned deserve, I think, a better response than merely pointing out to them that they believe in "nonsense."
I have two points to make.
1. What you believe is not nonsense. It is just not supportable by any facts. If you believe that the universe is simply the dream of some god, that is not nonsense, but it cannot be supported by facts.
2. You say we are indoctinating instead of teaching Evolution. What does that mean?
The sun energy is derived from nuclear fusion. If we teach that fact, is it 'indoctrination' because we do not teach the mechanics of fusion in highschool? Electricity and magnetism are taught in high school but the Maxwell equations and Quantum therory are not. Is this also 'indoctrination'?
I pity anyone who is 'locked' into a belief that the earth is 5000 years old, evolution doesn't occur or that the earth was flooded, based on one book written "sometime in the past" and by anonymous authors. With these 'blinders on' they can neither become a person of science nor can they truly see the increadible beauty of the world as it is. There is always the fear that if you believe something based on empirical evidence, even your own empirical evidence, that god may end up hating you.
A strange belief set and a strange god. |
If I knew then what I know now then I would know more now than I know. |
|
|
|
Bill Burke
New Member
13 Posts |
Posted - 09/03/2003 : 09:09:30 [Permalink]
|
furshur - I call it indoctrination, because it can only be accepted by the students as true through an implict and fallacious Appeal to Authority - the same basis on which kids accept the bible as taught to them by parents and others.
The kids of course may implicity and mistakenly believe they are being shown some kind of conclusive proof. Since educators must know this, they are much like corrupt cops who "frame the guilty."
I think this problem could be avoided in textbooks by a simple and brief and HONEST caveat to the students. |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 09/03/2003 : 10:48:31 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bill Burke
Here is a skeptical-based defense, in part, of Creationism.
Some or most of the Creationists appear to be involved in the textbook fight not so much to promote the teaching of anti-science Creationism, but to counter the teaching of anti-Bible evolution.
Appealing to Biblical "truths" is an obvious use of the Appeal to Authority fallacy, and a good reason to discount Creationism.
But some of the Creationists have pointed out that virtually all high-school students and at least some of their teachers don't have a sufficient understanding of science to independently understand whether evolution is true or not, and that this makes the teaching of evolution (whose theory and facts are typically presented and/or understood by students not as highly probable but as certain truths!) also a fallacious appeal to authority.
Most sceptics on Creationism seem to have missed or ignored this point, and I can't help wondering why.
There are some basic problems I can see with your arguements.
1) Evolution makes no mention of a supreme being nor a theology. It is a mechanism of change. The Bible is vague on how life occurred and describes no mechanism of change. Since the two are describing completely different subjects (science of mechanisms of change and theology of the why things occurred), using one to invalidate the other is absurd. It commits the fallacy of Complex Question.
2) The teachers may not have sufficient understanding of evolution to independantly determine it's truth. But they don't need to. They are using an appeal to authority to someone is actually an expert in that field. The individual teachers do not need to be independant authorities on evolution to teach it, they need only appeal to the original authors of the theories. While in science class umpteen years ago, evolution was presented as a theory, not as fact. It is even labeled today as a theory. (fallacy: Subverted support)
3) Knowing the minds of teenagers is sort of like nailing jello to a wall. They are little individuals. You can only determine what they know by asking questions directly. You can only fault the teachers for what they are teaching, not the gleaned understanding of the student. They are given feedback on their understanding level through tests and quizes, but the questions are usually on the understanding of the subject matter, not the understanding of the status of the subject matter. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
| Edited by - Valiant Dancer on 09/03/2003 10:53:40 |
|
|
|
furshur
SFN Regular
USA
1536 Posts |
Posted - 09/04/2003 : 06:25:57 [Permalink]
|
quote:
furshur - I call it indoctrination, because it can only be accepted by the students as true through an implict and fallacious Appeal to Authority - the same basis on which kids accept the bible as taught to them by parents and others.
What are you talking about??? I looked at my kids science book from the 8th grade there is no "appeal to autority". It is full of evidence and facts stating how life and the earth evolved over time. There is page after page describing dating techniques, the fossil record, plate tektonics, and hundreds of other of other factual observations. I suppose that you think all of these are lies put in the text books by some demon to throw us of the track. But that is nonsense.
The bible (or the koran, or the buddhist sutras) are the mystical writings that must appeal to authority. There is no evidence (corroboration in other writtings) for 95% of the bible. Not to mention that there are miracles/magic in all of these writtings that directly contradict physical possibilites. If you have faith that these physically impossible miracles and stories are true that is fine. However, do not try to teach them to my child with woo woo science.
By the way you said, "accept the bible as taught to them by their parents". I do discuss the bible with my kids - I feel that the bible is mythology that teaches alot of truth. If they ask me if there is a God, I tell them that is a question only they can answer. I tell them that some parts of the bible are no longer applicable in modern society. Such as; slaves should respect there masters, women are not allowed to go to church with their heads uncovered, women are immoral if they wear jewlery, and it is OK to kill someone for working on Saturday.
Enjoy
|
If I knew then what I know now then I would know more now than I know. |
|
|
|
Randy
SFN Regular
USA
1990 Posts |
|
|
Arcanix_X
New Member
USA
39 Posts |
Posted - 10/12/2003 : 19:36:11 [Permalink]
|
| I have a good sugestion, why don't we all become good little christians, adopt a fundamentalist society model, reinstate the hanging of witches and start hunting down scientist for they are "the DEVIL!!!" :) That'd be fun! NO! |
|
|
|
Randy
SFN Regular
USA
1990 Posts |
Posted - 11/06/2003 : 14:46:50 [Permalink]
|
Just posted this update....
http://www.skepticfriends.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=2324
|
"We are all connected; to each other biologically, to the earth chemically, to the rest of the universe atomically."
"So you're made of detritus [from exploded stars]. Get over it. Or better yet, celebrate it. After all, what nobler thought can one cherish than that the universe lives within us all?"
-Neil DeGrasse Tyson |
|
|
 |
|
Topic Locked
