Quote:
Originally Posted by photon
What do you mean? Science doesn't dismiss things such as do unto others as you would have them do unto you, because science mostly doesn't speak to that kind of thing. But it does dismiss things that are within the realm of science, such as historical events or claims about reality, when those events or claims clearly have no basis.
|
You basically explained what I meant. Serves me right for posting while eating a sammich. Science itself doesn't care for morality, but there is more to religion then morality. There are aspects of religion that science can explain or target and it is those things that I was speaking to. More specifically, the historical events in the bible. Interestingly enough, there are scientific theories presented in support of the Biblical flood. Something about a comet hitting the Indian Ocean 10,000 years ago. It was in a recent Discover magazine.
People who take the Bible in a literal sense cannot possibly approach life in a reasoned fashion. The same can be said about the people who dismiss the Bible outright because of it's religious significance. I guess that's the point to my rambling.
As I mentioned earlier in the thread, ID should not be taught in a scientific context since it cannot possibly be based on scientific pricipals. But, at the same time, it would be a disservice to the goals of education to exclude it from the curriculim. A vast segment of society actively believe in aspects of ID, which makes it very important to present it in an educational context. I'd like to see all schools in North America adopt a Religion class or expand the Social Science curriculum.