Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: [Phys-L] John Lienhard on Absolutism, Evolution and Education, Engines of our Ingenuity No.2132



Yes, both scientists and theologists trust some authorities much more that others. But this is a different topic. My point was that no one can personally verify everything; many scientific claims are accepted on the basis faith, not on the basis of personal investigations. Most of us often trust those who publish, and those who collectively review publications (see Dawid's reply to Marty).

Ludwik
====================================================

On Jun 11, 2013, at 12:40 PM, Marty Weiss wrote:

Depends on who the authority is.... Do you equate an authority on the Bible who counted the generations from Adam and comes up with an age of 6000 years, or 5773 to be precise, as being on equal footing as an authority in, say neuroscience, who has done experiments on mice brains and has developed a hypothesis on learning? Even though a physicist may not be expert in neuroscience or the Bible, should he trust the neurobiologist and the theologian equally?

Yes, I know the following argument... scientists cheat. That happens, but if we distrust every hypothesis in every field because of a few rotten apples what happens to science as a whole? And does that mean we have to teach the Biblical depiction of events as being equal to the work of scientists?

On Jun 11, 2013, at 12:18 PM, Ludwik Kowalski wrote:

ONCE AGAIN:

Yes indeed! Scientists are not very different from theologians, in that respect. They also often accept findings on the basis of authority; it is practically impossible to confirm everything through personal investigations. Do you agree?

Ludwik
===================================================================================
On Jun 10, 2013, at 8:32 PM, marx@phy.ilstu.edu wrote:


If the majority of the American public does not accept the modern theory
of evolution, then it means two things:

1. the educational system fails to teach how science really works, that it
is a creative human endeavor to increase human knowledge of the universe
and that it necessarily excludes the supernatural from its explanations;
and

2. the educational system has failed to adequately provide evidence and a
proper explanation of the theoretical framework.

Why should we expect people to accept what science says, just because we
say it is so?

Nowadays, even scientists take the easy way out and just accept the
findings of scientists from other disciplines (sometimes their own
discipline), without taking the time to look at the evidence or
understanding the theoretical underpinnings.




On 6/10/2013 3:16 PM, John Clement wrote:
See the link below:

http://www.uh.edu/engines/epi2132.htm No. 2132 ABSOLUTISM

This is one of the most stinging inditements of our educational system
and
our society. We rank with Turkey, below all other European contries and
Japan.

John M. Clement
Houston, TX
_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@phys-l.org
http://www.phys-l.org/mailman/listinfo/phys-l


Uh? It's an opinion piece - no supporting data that I noticed....

Brian Whatcott Altus OK
_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@phys-l.org
http://www.phys-l.org/mailman/listinfo/phys-l


_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@phys-l.org
http://www.phys-l.org/mailman/listinfo/phys-l

_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@phys-l.org
http://www.phys-l.org/mailman/listinfo/phys-l

_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@phys-l.org
http://www.phys-l.org/mailman/listinfo/phys-l