|
|
Post by Vodmeister on Oct 7, 2013 11:12:30 GMT 5
What should be forced in the education, and what should not?
In my opinion, evolution is a must-have in science. Without evolution, biology is virtually pointless. It's a well-observed and documented fact, and almost irrefutable. Creation on the other hand, should be banned from school altogether, as it will only create conflict between students of different religions.
Thoughts?
|
|
|
|
Post by creature386 on Oct 7, 2013 13:31:33 GMT 5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 7, 2013 15:50:13 GMT 5
I say just kill off the stain called Young Earth Creationism. Even Christians hate it.
|
|
|
|
Post by theropod on Oct 7, 2013 16:01:34 GMT 5
This isn't even a question. It is of course the scientific, virtually factual explanation that should be taught in schools, not the pseudo-religious belief of some idiots.
Being religious isn’t the same as being a creationist, it is of course possible to be the former without being a total moron and denier of scientific evidence. They should not be afraid to teach evolution in schools and omit (or mention as a superstitious idiocy) creationism. People being offended in their religious beliefs isn’t an argument, if you are offended by people disagreeing with you on the basis of scientific evidence, you deserve to be offended.
That's like refusing to do life-saving medical procedures such as blood transfusions or heart transplants, just because some people are against that for some religious reason. We cannot let creationists have that much influence on education (or any other part of our lives for that matter, except for entertainment).
Creationism imo should be part of the curriculum at school, but certainly not as some sort of "valid alternative" to evolution, but in order to educate people about its flaws and give them the knowledge to see it for what it is.
|
|
Derdadort
Junior Member
Excavating rocks and watching birds
Posts: 267 
|
Post by Derdadort on Oct 7, 2013 18:21:12 GMT 5
Science classes should teach scientific working and its results. Furthermore the students should learn to think sceptical. This expulses a believe, which is based on a 4000 years old story and denies every contradictionary fact.
Creationism belongs to philosophy or religion classes, not as fact (like any other religion or attitude towards life) but as a possibilty of believing.
|
|
Fragillimus335
Member
Sauropod fanatic, and dinosaur specialist
Posts: 573
|
Post by Fragillimus335 on Oct 8, 2013 4:18:39 GMT 5
Only things that can be explained using scientific method should be taught in science, that excludes all religions.
|
|
Derdadort
Junior Member
Excavating rocks and watching birds
Posts: 267
|
Post by Derdadort on Oct 8, 2013 12:04:03 GMT 5
Refering to scientific subjects like biology or physics I agree with you, But there should be also philosophy/ethic classes in school. In opposite to the classical religious education students aren't taught a specific religion but the diversity of attitudes towards life without saying e.g. Christianity is the right one.
EDIT: @fragillimus
Oops, I thought this was an answer to my post above...
|
|
|
|
Post by Vodmeister on Oct 9, 2013 5:58:17 GMT 5
I remember how someone (Richard Dawkins I think?) made an analogy. A religious person has a holy book which claims that the holocaust never happened, a large group of people devote themselves to this religion. The religion gains political power, and as a result, changes the whole history curriculum and scraps any study on WW2. No matter how much evidence there is on the holocaust, the religious extremists refuse to allow any education upon the subject.
This is what is happening on evolution and creation studies today.
|
|
|
|
Post by creature386 on Oct 9, 2013 16:01:07 GMT 5
There are indeed some religious fundamentalists who deny the holocaust (like Harun Yahya, although he stopped doing so after 2000).
|
|
|
|
Post by coherentsheaf on Oct 9, 2013 21:32:49 GMT 5
Only things that can be explained using scientific method should be taught in science, that excludes all religions. Most religions make false empirical predictions. These are good examples for flase hypotheses. Although religious leaders tend to reinterpret their dogma after they have been falsified. I think they could be taught as examples of bad historical science. |
|
|
|
Post by Godzillasaurus on Oct 14, 2013 21:48:39 GMT 5
Science classes are there to teach kids, well, science. Even if some kids believe in Young Earth Creationism, religious matters should be saved for social studies courses. After all, they don't have to agree with everything that is taught; they just need to know it. It is not like schools are forcing everybody to get a degree in science.
|
|
|
|
Post by theropod on Oct 15, 2013 16:58:13 GMT 5
Kids that believe in such hogwash are already dumb enough. This dumbness doesn't have to be reinforced by schools...
|
|
|
|
Post by creature386 on Oct 15, 2013 22:10:51 GMT 5
I won't call all of them dumb. Some of them simply grew up with them and never questioned it, because their parents didn't want them to do so and when they start learning it at a young age, it is hard to change their opinion.
|
|
Derdadort
Junior Member
Excavating rocks and watching birds
Posts: 267
|
Post by Derdadort on Oct 15, 2013 23:23:54 GMT 5
Pupils just should learn to question things and to think discrete. We can't do more.
|
|
|
|
Post by theropod on Oct 16, 2013 1:13:20 GMT 5
You're probably right creature. However in that case it's even more important not to make it look as if that was some sort of valid alternative for science.
|
|
