Furious evolution debate hits Kenyan museum

[arsenal]

Originally Posted by Phaneuf3

True, but with no way to tell if circumstances are being influenced by god/a supreme being we can't tell if this is all completely 'natural'.

So then why even consider the possibility of a God / Supreme Being then?
If there is no proof either way, and everything seems to occur "naturally" why even bring in a Supreme Being into the fold?

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by arsenal

So then why even consider the possibility of a God / Supreme Being then?
If there is no proof either way, and everything seems to occur "naturally" why even bring in a Supreme Being into the fold?

I guess it's better safe then sorry.

[photon]

Lol yeah that's a great reason. I don't really believe in purple unicorns that come and feast on firstborns, but I'll buy this anti-unicorn spray for $4.99. Better safe than sorry.

[Phaneuf3]

Originally Posted by arsenal

So then why even consider the possibility of a God / Supreme Being then?
If there is no proof either way, and everything seems to occur "naturally" why even bring in a Supreme Being into the fold?

just showing that there is a middle ground between creationism and evolution in this debate that nobody seems to acknowledge. accepting the possibility that god may have had a hand in all of this mess does not make you one of the people on the video that penn (or is it teller - never actually found out which one's which) seems to need to tear apart.

also, on a side note to the video, they seem to be strongly against having the bible taught in public school. WHY?! in my opinion its important to teach about one of the most important and influencial books ever written. as long as its taught from a literary perspective and not a religious one, its a very good idea

edit: and of course it being optional.

[Cheese]

Originally Posted by Phaneuf3

also, on a side note to the video, they seem to be strongly against having the bible taught in public school. WHY?! in my opinion its important to teach about one of the most important and influencial books ever written. as long as its taught from a literary perspective and not a religious one, its a very good idea

edit: and of course it being optional.

So in order to teach the Bible from a literary perspective who would do it? Atheists? Moronmons? Muslims?
The problem with teaching ANY religious content is you always end up with Holier than Though people trying to convert people into their theoretical version of a God.
IF an Atheist tried teaching religion for what it was, fantasy, can you imagine the uproar from any number of religious groups?
An optional course? Who would take it besides those already indoctrinated into a theism? If thats the case why bother...let the churches continue to transform its people.
I find the naming of a publicly funded school system in the name of a religion to be distasteful....and it even discriminates against other religions being a part of its dogma....how silly is that?

Holier than Though...another Penn and Teller Vid

[Phaneuf3]

Originally Posted by Cheese

So in order to teach the Bible from a literary perspective who would do it? Atheists? Moronmons? Muslims?
The problem with teaching ANY religious content is you always end up with Holier than Though people trying to convert people into their theoretical version of a God.
IF an Atheist tried teaching religion for what it was, fantasy, can you imagine the uproar from any number of religious groups?
An optional course? Who would take it besides those already indoctrinated into a theism? If thats the case why bother...let the churches continue to transform its people.
I find the naming of a publicly funded school system in the name of a religion to be distasteful....and it even discriminates against other religions being a part of its dogma....how silly is that?

Holier than Though...another Penn and Teller Vid

but it wouldn't be teaching religion. it would be teaching about religion. its possible to teach about shakespeare's plays without getting into any academic controversy over who REALLY wrote them. in social studies i'm sure they've been talking about what's been going on in the middle east, the war on terror, etc. there are some pretty heated opinions on that floating around. how can this be taught objectively but learning about the bible or even religion as a whole can't? its been such a huge factor in society forever... shouldn't they at least try to give the leaders of tomorrow at least some basic understanding of what its all about?

and you're right - maybe it shouldn't be optional. religious texts might be worth including in english class. understanding the major world religions could come in handy for social studies.

edit: wait wait wait... in an epidosde called "Holier than Thou" in which they try to point out hypocracy, this:

takes a jab at someone else by making a fat joke?

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Cheese

So in order to teach the Bible from a literary perspective who would do it? Atheists? Moronmons? Muslims?

IMO, it is very possible to teach religion to go along with evolution.

The whole 'we come from apes' thing needs to go. Too many people refer to evolution in such a manner, and from that point they jump to the conclusion that evolution is crazy and wrong.

[arsenal]

Anyone that can teach in an objective manner would be able to teach religion. It's the same with any subject though. As soon as personal feelings get included in what the teacher teaches, it goes down hill.

Teaching is about giving the students the tools think on their own, not forcing your beleifs down their throat.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by arsenal

Anyone that can teach in an objective manner would be able to teach religion. It's the same with any subject though. As soon as personal feelings get included in what the teacher teaches, it goes down hill.

Teaching is about giving the students the tools think on their own, not forcing your beleifs down their throat.

###.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by arsenal

Anyone that can teach in an objective manner would be able to teach religion. It's the same with any subject though. As soon as personal feelings get included in what the teacher teaches, it goes down hill.

Teaching is about giving the students the tools think on their own, not forcing your beleifs down their throat.

I agree. But everything should fit in its place. Religion has a place in life--whether it has a place in schools is a matter of some debate, but I have to admit to not feeling strongly one way or another on the topic. There's one place that religion doesn't belong, though: the science classroom. It should probably stay out of the Kenyan natural history museums too.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

I agree. But everything should fit in its place. Religion has a place in life--whether it has a place in schools is a matter of some debate, but I have to admit to not feeling strongly one way or another on the topic. There's one place that religion doesn't belong, though: the science classroom. It should probably stay out of the Kenyan natural history museums too.

Psychology course, perhaps?

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by Azure

Physcology course, perhaps?

Sure, I guess.

I'm of two minds on this. I agree with cheese that when you include religion in an educational curriculum, the question becomes "whose religion"--and in a country as diverse as Canada or the US, this is an important question, and not one where you can let the largest minority rule. The other thing is that a scholastic approach to religion might tend to take an abstract and analytical approach to it--by looking at how religions are formed, what powers their institutions tend to take on, etc. etc. People who want theology to be part of the curriculum will no doubt be disappointed by that.

As it happens, I talk a lot about religion in one of the classes I teach--in part because I teach early American lit, and there's so much nonsense out there about the religious views of Jefferson, Franklin, Adams, etc. that I feel I need to correct so that these kids know where they came from--and also because like it or not, religion IS an important topic in the foundational literatures of the USA. But we don't do it in a theological, ethical or moral sense--we look at how the foundational principles of the new America shaped the religious views of the framers.

[photon]

Social Studies; it's a huge part of human history and should be studied. To understand who we are we have to learn our past.

[Azure]

nm..

[someguy51]

Originally Posted by RedMan12

I heard Satan made dinosaur bones and other fossils to confuse the pagans and turn people away from god.

Sadly...I heard that one too

[Cheese]

Originally Posted by Azure

IMO, it is very possible to teach religion to go along with evolution.

The whole 'we come from apes' thing needs to go. Too many people refer to evolution in such a manner, and from that point they jump to the conclusion that evolution is crazy and wrong.

I would be very interested to know how you would do that?
Could you scratch a quick course outline together in point form and post it here so we could see how you would mold the two together?

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Cheese

I would be very interested to know how you would do that?
Could you scratch a quick course outline together in point form and post it here so we could see how you would mold the two together?

Basically acknowledge that some people believe there was/is a higher being that created everything and looks after it, and that evolution, the big bang and multiple other theories were used in that creation.

Just because some people believe there is a God, certainly doesn't mean you can't believe that 'God' didn't use science to create the world. Considering how complex planet Earth and the Universe around us is, I really don't understand how religious people can stay hinged on the 'God created us and I don't believe in science' BS.

IMO, they, without knowing it downgrade the knowledge of their chosen "god" by saying that.

It probably doesn't belong in a science classroom, but that still doesn't mean the two subjects cannot be put together.

[troutman]

I think religion (myth) should be taught in schools. Myths from all cultures.

Read myths. They teach you that you can turn inward, and you begin to get the message of the symbols. Read other people's myths, not those of your own religion, because you tend to interpret your own religion in terms of facts -- but if you read the other ones, you begin to get the message. Myth helps you to put your mind in touch with this experience of being alive. Myth tells you what the experience is.
-- Joseph Campbell, The Power of Myth

[RedMan12]

Originally Posted by troutman

I think religion (myth) should be taught in schools. Myths from all cultures.

Read myths. They teach you that you can turn inward, and you begin to get the message of the symbols. Read other people's myths, not those of your own religion, because you tend to interpret your own religion in terms of facts -- but if you read the other ones, you begin to get the message. Myth helps you to put your mind in touch with this experience of being alive. Myth tells you what the experience is.
-- Joseph Campbell, The Power of Myth

speaking throughs quotes today, eh?

[troutman]

Originally Posted by RedMan12

speaking throughs quotes today, eh?

Sure, there a few people out there who are smarter than me.