• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Freedom of Religion vs the Mandate to Evolve [W 65]

Which is more crucial


  • Total voters
    40
  • Poll closed .
Often, it made up of things we didn't understand. Story is a good way to navigate complicated issues. That said, the wrong story just as easily causes as much harm as good. I still put faith in telling the truth as much as possible.

I'm not saying that we should teach religious doctrines as fact. But I'm also denying that studying the social implications of religion is negative.
 
I'm not saying that we should teach religious doctrines as fact. But I'm also denying that studying the social implications of religion is negative.

I don't disagree with that, but it's under the category of religion or religious study.
 
What they neglect to mention is that everything in science is just a theory and is never proven. Unlike the Prime Number Theorem, which will absolutely and forever be true, it is still possible, albeit very, very, very, very, very unlikely, that the theory of evolution by natural and sexual selection may one day turn out to be false. But then again, it is also possible, albeit very, very, very, very, very unlikely, that monkeys will fly out of my ass tomorrow. In my judgment, both events are about equally likely.




Like gravity. ;)

That's what it says in the link. I don't think you read my link.
 
Were we specifically talking about science class? I'm just talking school in general. Of course you don't teach mythology in math class.

I learned the theory of evolution in history class in 6th grade.

Usually this is discussed in the context of creationist theories in the science classroom. But if you were referring to a general case, then I apologize. In general, I don't see an issue with theology being taught as an academic study in school.
 
It happens. No worries.

I just looked at your link, and to be honest, it's hard to know who to trust. I am holding my opinions on what created or creates GW until there is some more evidence. So far, as far as I'm aware, they can go back through some periods of time but not all, so they really cannot be SURE there is not some kind of pattern here. They are comparing to the known data that they have and are capable of collecting at this current time with the technology available is all.
 
I don't disagree with that, but it's under the category of religion or religious study.

Is that a bad thing? One of the reasons I can only comment on religion in a broad sense is my lack of textual understanding. Real religious scholars ought to be deeply versed in the core texts of their study, even if they disagree with the claims of these texts, no?
 
Is that a bad thing? One of the reasons I can only comment on religion in a broad sense is my lack of textual understanding. Real religious scholars ought to be deeply versed in the core texts of their study, even if they disagree with the claims of these texts, no?

No, but I wasn't really talking about religion studied as religion in my original comment.
 
I copied it from your link. You highlighted the wrong part.

No, you need to read it again apparently. Use your comprehension!!! The bold part is copied from my link.

The creationists and other critics of evolution are absolutely correct when they point out that evolution is “just a theory” and it is not “proven.” What they neglect to mention is that everything in science is just a theory and is never proven. Unlike the Prime Number Theorem, which will absolutely and forever be true, it is still possible, albeit very, very, very, very, very unlikely, that the theory of evolution by natural and sexual selection may one day turn out to be false. But then again, it is also possible, albeit very, very, very, very, very unlikely, that monkeys will fly out of my ass tomorrow. In my judgment, both events are about equally likely.
 
Do we have any scientists disputing the theory of relativity? No we don't.


Lol! What? I don't know of anyone except for very few who don't want their children to learn about the theory of evolution. Some of them would like the religious theory included too, that doesn't mean they're against learning about other theories as well. Why does it have to be one way or the other with some of you people?

but why would they want a religious theory taught in a science class?

if religious theory MUST be taught in science - shouldn't there also be competing theories on the nature of the universe? why isn't geocentrism presented as an alternative theory, for example?
 
but why would they want a religious theory taught in a science class?

if religious theory MUST be taught in science - shouldn't there also be competing theories on the nature of the universe? why isn't geocentrism presented as an alternative theory, for example?

Well it doesn't have to be brought up in science class. Like I stated, I learned about the theory of evolution from my 6th grade history teacher, and she was quite thorough too.
 
Well it doesn't have to be brought up in science class. Like I stated, I learned about the theory of evolution from my 6th grade history teacher, and she was quite thorough too.

Was it the Mrs. Garrison evolution explanation?
 
No, you need to read it again apparently. Use your comprehension!!! The bold part is copied from my link.

The creationists and other critics of evolution are absolutely correct when they point out that evolution is “just a theory” and it is not “proven.” What they neglect to mention is that everything in science is just a theory and is never proven. Unlike the Prime Number Theorem, which will absolutely and forever be true, it is still possible, albeit very, very, very, very, very unlikely, that the theory of evolution by natural and sexual selection may one day turn out to be false. But then again, it is also possible, albeit very, very, very, very, very unlikely, that monkeys will fly out of my ass tomorrow. In my judgment, both events are about equally likely.

This is absolute rubbish. The theory of evolution is well established, and there is a considerable amount of evidence which supports it.... so to give creationists credit by stating that creationists are absolutely correct when they point out that evolution is “just a theory” and it is not “proven.” suggests that you don't understand the use of the word "theory" when used in a scientific context.
 
I learned about Greek mythology in school. I didn't think it was real though. I don't know what you're so frightened of.

did you learn that greek myths offered a valid alternative explanation of the world?

if so it makes sense that you think children should learn alternative "scientific" theories such as creationism.
 
Well it doesn't have to be brought up in science class. Like I stated, I learned about the theory of evolution from my 6th grade history teacher, and she was quite thorough too.

clearly not thorough enough!
 
This is absolute rubbish. The theory of evolution is well established, and there is a considerable amount of evidence which supports it.... so to give creationists credit by stating that creationists are absolutely correct when they point out that evolution is “just a theory” and it is not “proven.” suggests that you don't understand the use of the word "theory" when used in a scientific context.

Wrong. The above is absolutely correct. A scientific theory is just that a theory, not a fact silly! :lol:
 
did you learn that greek myths offered a valid alternative explanation of the world?

if so it makes sense that you think children should learn alternative "scientific" theories such as creationism.

Not at all. Why so cranky?
 
clearly not thorough enough!

Apparently I learned more than you, as I understand what a scientific theory is, and obviously you do not. :)

Here! For your education! ;)

Scientific Hypothesis, Theory, Law Definitions

Theory

A scientific theory summarizes a hypothesis or group of hypotheses that have been supported with repeated testing. A theory is valid as long as there is no evidence to dispute it. Therefore, theories can be disproven. Basically, if evidence accumulates to support a hypothesis, then the hypothesis can become accepted as a good explanation of a phenomenon. One definition of a theory is to say it's an accepted hypothesis.

Example: It is known that on June 30, 1908 in Tunguska, Siberia, there was an explosion equivalent to the detonation of about 15 million tons of TNT. Many hypotheses have been proposed for what caused the explosion. It is theorized that the explosion was caused by a natural extraterrestrial phenomenon, and was not caused by man. Is this theory a fact? No. The event is a recorded fact. Is this this theory generally accepted to be true, based on evidence to-date? Yes. Can this theory be shown to be false and be discarded? Yes.
 
Was it the Mrs. Garrison evolution explanation?

Actually, it was Mrs. Carey's evolution explanation. :mrgreen:
 
Interesting thing to me is that the term "evolution" contains an inherent value judgment.... "evolved" is somewhat synonymous with "developed" and tends to suggest that whatever is evolved is somehow superior to that which came before it.

There is something, in my opinion, inherently unscientific about that. Nature, being insentient, doesn't pick winners based on their beauty, their smarts, or their skill, but rather randomly. Some genes survive because they are better suited to specific environments, but because environments constantly change, the net result is randomness.

As such, instead of "evolve," don't we really just mean "change?"
 
No, you need to read it again apparently. Use your comprehension!!! The bold part is copied from my link.

The creationists and other critics of evolution are absolutely correct when they point out that evolution is “just a theory” and it is not “proven.” What they neglect to mention is that everything in science is just a theory and is never proven. Unlike the Prime Number Theorem, which will absolutely and forever be true, it is still possible, albeit very, very, very, very, very unlikely, that the theory of evolution by natural and sexual selection may one day turn out to be false. But then again, it is also possible, albeit very, very, very, very, very unlikely, that monkeys will fly out of my ass tomorrow. In my judgment, both events are about equally likely.

The part you out in bold says it very well. Gravity is just a theory. We may learn something else one day. But it is unlikely. So when scientist say its a theory, no it's not math, but it's not just a wild guess either. It's pretty damn likely true.
 
Whatever the religious theory is, it's not a scientific theory. And evolution isn't just a theory. There is The Theory of Evolution, but many scientific concepts of evolution are accepted as fact.
 
Religion also evolves with humans as well they aren't separate but inter twined through out history People and their views change through a different perspective think of this someone during the romans times or whenever they were also mandated to evolve and they did and what did they become after Constantinople they were Christians and they were accepted and not beaten or put into gladiator matches against lions . We are Mandated to evolve as well as religious beliefs if they did not all Christians ( for example ) would be like the Amish and the early puritans .
 
Religion also evolves with humans as well they aren't separate but inter twined through out history People and their views change through a different perspective think of this someone during the romans times or whenever they were also mandated to evolve and they did and what did they become after Constantinople they were Christians and they were accepted and not beaten or put into gladiator matches against lions . We are Mandated to evolve as well as religious beliefs if they did not all Christians ( for example ) would be like the Amish and the early puritans .


True. I'm always struck by those who don't see the Bible changing views over time. This ability for it to change convinced me that it was the beginning of the discussion and not the end. It is rarely the act itself that changes, but the effect of the act, which I think leads us back to defining sin again.
 
American schools don't teach evolution or religion. I think both studies are important to understanding the world, literally understanding the people, attitudes, and cultures all around the world.

That doesn't mean I agree with the other poster that religious beliefs and scientific theory are equal.

The thing is, a lot of religions believe in creation stories. A scientific classroom is not the place to debate Christian creationism from the POV of literalists, versus non literalist, versus new age, versus scientologist, versus buddhist, versus Hindu, native American tradition, etc.

Those discussions and how all those creation stories intertwine and relate is meant for a religious class.

As for science and studying religious texts, you can look at the stories literally or figuratively. You could consider Galileo's perspective, that the Bible isn't meant to teach science. That he didn't feel the Bible said anywhere he was committing sins by trying to understand the universe through science. He never lost his faith, and contended that if science causes your faith to weaken then perhaps the problem is the way you interpret the Bible. Various interpretations is why we have so many churches to begin with, so keep a big picture view of your religious movement.

Learn where you Bible comes from and the history if the cannon. My understanding is that the book of Genesis was written much later than all the other books.



That's all food for thought IMO.
 
Back
Top Bottom