In a message dated 11/21/2010 9:00:01 AM Eastern Standard Time,
rmcder@gmail.com writes:
I know I'm going to regret being drawn into this, but I'm willing to go one
more round...
Bob, I'm unclear exactly what it is that you "absolutely disagree with"? I
said that Fundamentalists may be plentiful in some parts of the country. I
didn't specify the South, but that's certainly one of the places. You say
it's a problem in Florida. Ok... I don't see grounds for disagreement so
far.
)))))))))))))
BZ
We agree on this.
))))))))))))))))))))))
I made some statements about the nature of science, with which I HOPE we
are
in agreement.
)))))))))))))))
BZ
No, I don't agree that Science and religion both are grounded in faith.
Science is grounded in prediction religion in faith. I think faith, at least
in a religious context, is not a good thing though perversely not having
faith somehow makes one immoral for religionists.
)))))))))))))))))))))))))))
I said that there are people who feel it is their duty to debunk religion.
Since you see religion as being "toxic", that suggests that you should be
numbered among them, but if I'm wrong about that, I'm sure you'll let me
know. Again, no disagreement that I can see.
)))))))))))))
BZ
I consider myself one of those "New Atheists." I am good friends with Dr
Victor Stenger I manage his discussion list. So guilty as charged. But I am
not trying to bring this point of view here, my concern is with the sorry
state of education in the United States, especially science education which I
think this is largely because of well funded right wing extremism and
religious fundamentalism. In the former Soviet Union it was left wing extremism
and in fact in America we have left wing extremists who are also hostile
to science. It's not a left or right thing. It's an accident of history that
the threat mostly comes from the far right today.
)))))))))))))))))))))))))))
You introduced a strawman argument in refutation of something I never
wrote,
implying that I said that science and religion are both based on "faith".
While there IS always some degree of uncertainty in scientific explanations
of how the world functions (why else would we continue to test?), Faith as
a
part of religion is quite a different thing. Faith in the religious sense
is belief in the absence of clear evidence. If there were clear evidence,
there would be no need for Faith. So despite you having introduced a new
element that was never a part of what I wrote, I find us still in
agreement.
))))))))))))))))))))))))0\
BZ
I didn't mean to create a strawman argument, I apologize for this. Also of
course there is no certainty in science, the very basis of science rejects
any notion of certainty.
))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
You say that "science teachers avoid teaching anything about evolution",
but
that certainly isn't the case way up here in New York. So here we disagree
to some extent, but this was, again, not something I wrote.
So let's get to the parts I WROTE that you probably disagreed with... I
said that there are a small number of people "who insist on a literal
interpretation of the Bible". I believe this to be the case. I think most
Christians can intellectually separate issues of Faith from the results of
the application of the scientific process. You bring up the size of the
opposition, and I wrote that we have swelled the ranks of science opponents
largely through the actions of people who believe that religion needs to be
debunked, and who used science as a club to DO it.
)))))))))))))))))))
BZ
I lived in New York (Newburg) for over 33 years raising two children,
evolution was downplayed in the public school. Here in Florida it's much worst.
Many teachers sneak in creationism or simply don't teach evolution. I am
on the board of the Florida Citizens for Science and are forever fighting
off attempts to bring creationism into the biology curriculum. I don't agree
that the best way to deal with religious interference is to soft peddle
factual education. I think that religion has declared war on science (aided by
far right wing extremism, racism so on). Scientists do well to notice this.
)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
From my point of view, the problem is the extent of GROWTH of opposition
to
science over the years. Exactly WHY has this occurred, and can it be
reversed? I contend that the bulk of "opposition" consists of people who
could be swayed from opposition if they didn't feel that their beliefs were
under attack. The rallying point, for both sides, is, of course, the issue
of evolution.
))))))))))))))0
BZ
I know this is a popular point of view and I understand its attraction. But
I don't see how you can actually teach evolution and the scientific method
and not undermine religion. The religious fundamentalists understand this,
we need to also.
))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
You, for example, state, "when you look at the percentage of Americans who
believe in creationism we see that science education in the United States
is
a dismal failure." Now I find that an interesting comment. So is (one of)
the purposes of science education to eliminate the belief in a Creation?
If
it is, then I can see why a growing number of Christians, in particular,
would take offense. I personally don't see that as a legitimate goal of
science education. I want students to understand the process involved in
science.
)))))))))))))))))))))
BZ
Science education is supposed to educate people in science. Creationism
isn't science. Of course I am not suggesting that we should ever teach atheism
or even mention the bible in biology class. Teach the science absent
bronze age myths is all I am saying. Science education shouldn't be held hostage
to anyone's religious beliefs.
))))))))))))))))
I want them to evaluate evidence and draw conclusions about what
is going on. In terms of evolution, I want them to know that organisms
change over time; something that is absolutely FACT, and absolutely
Irrefutable. I would also want them to understand that extending this FACT
leads to the reasonable conclusion that current-day organisms were quite
different in the distant past, and that it may be that everything
ultimately
evolved from a single-celled organism, which itself developed from
non-living material. I don't, frankly, feel that it is my responsibility
or
function to tell them that we KNOW we're right about this, that this is
what
they should believe, and that any other belief is absolutely, positively,
false. Why should I care if someone believes in Creation? How is that a
threat or impediment if that someone understands how to collect evidence,
evaluate it, and draw logical conclusions? Shouldn't the purpose of
education be to help people to evaluate evidence when deciding what THEY
choose to believe? If, after all that, they still believe that a Creation
occurred, how am I (pr they) diminished by that?
)))))))))))))))
BZ
The core fact in evolution is that the evolution of life lacks any apparent
teleology. They aren't stupid, they will understand this is what evolution
theory tells us about the nature of life and the history of life from its
early one cell beginning. Pretending otherwise won't appease the
fundamentalists, you're fooling yourself if you think it will. The very idea of
evolution makes mince meat out of the Biblical world view. They know this, they
won't be appeased by lip service to someplace somewhere god might have done
something. This isn't what they are taught in Sunday School.
))))))))))))))))))))))))
You can't stamp out belief in Creation. You cannot eliminate religion.
Better opponents than you attempted it in years past, AND IT DIDN'T WORK!
If this is your goal, then you are doomed to failure. I'd like to avoid
the
outcome that Christians, generally, become enemies of science. Asserting a
false certitude regarding scientific explanations/conclusions is not
acceptable to me. I think that it is not only intellectually dishonest,
but
also detracts from the process... AND... in the case of evolution,
unnecessarily antagonizes a HUGE group of people who WILL respond in
opposition. If you disagree with anything I've said, then so be it.
))))))))))))))))
In Europe the Churches are empty, I think would be a good outcome.
Nonetheless, all I am saying is that science should NEVER compromise with religion
on anything. Teach the science, leave religion out of it. That's all I am
saying.