[nutronjon]

Originally Posted by ldsoftwaresteve

well, she's in a battle against a fallacy and that fallacy has created so many blindspots .... and it eventually gets back to the entire study of the Humanities: What it means to be human, what is the nature of morality and how motivation is tied to all of it. Because the achilles heel of her enemies is that they have no functioning model of what it means to be human. I think that if we could pull that string, all the bullshit would fall apart.

I don't know who "she" is but I sure like what you have said. Until 1917, vocational training was not part of public education. Until 1958 training for citizenship remained the priority purpose of public education, and then we changed the purpose of public education to preparing the young for a technological society with unknown values, and left moral training to the church. This has thrown our nation into a culture conflict pitting athiest against Christians, and the social ramifications of the change in public education are intense.

At the time of the US founding, except for apprintership training of some young people, religious education was the only public education. The colonist fought each other over religious matters and religious intolerance was not the rule, but all the different religions provided the same basic moral training, but many people were not religious and did not get this training, and immigrants with different values and customs were flooding our new democracy and causing social chaos. Around 1840 public schools for citizenship were established, and the humanities became the enemy to some religious groups, but by teaching a set of American values, we did restore social order. However, without the humanities, which has been the case since education for technology replaced liberal education, many people get no moral training. The dilemma is figuring out how to recreate a moral standard, and understanding our evolution from animals is the most sensible way to rebuild a moral standard and justice system.

PS, I address questions about brain science in a new thread.

[InfiniteNow]

Via Afarensis:

YouTube - What's so important about Human...

[Thunderbird]

GOVERNOR: Palin is only candidate to suggest it should be discussed in schools.
By TOM KIZZIA
Anchorage Daily News
Published: October 27, 2006
Last Modified: October 30, 2006 at 09:40 AM
The volatile issue of teaching creation science in public schools popped up in the Alaska governor's race this week when Republican Sarah Palin said she thinks creationism should be taught alongside evolution in the state's public classrooms


Palin was answering a question from the moderator near the conclusion of Wednesday night's televised debate on KAKM Channel 7 when she said, "Teach both. You know, don't be afraid of information. Healthy debate is so important, and it's so valuable in our schools. I am a proponent of teaching both."
Her main opponents, Democrat Tony Knowles and Independent Andrew Halcro, said such alternatives to evolution should be kept out of science classrooms. Halcro called such lessons "religious-based" and said the place for them might be a philosophy or sociology class.


adn.com | elections : 'Creation science' enters the race

[freeztar]

Good find TB.

Asked for her personal views on evolution, Palin said, "I believe we have a creator."

Ok Mrs. Palin, but, back to the question, What are your personal views on evolution?


You've gotta love this:

After a six-week trial, a Republican judge appointed by President George W. Bush concluded that intelligent design "advanced a particular version of Christianity" and did not belong in class.

Judge John E. Jones III said Darwin's theory of evolution was imperfect. "However, the fact that a scientific theory cannot yet render an explanation on every point should not be used as a pretext to thrust an untestable alternative hypothesis grounded in religion into the science classroom."

[Nitack]

I'm a small government kind of a guy. I hate earmarks and government programs, pork barrel politics drive me up the wall. I WAS going to vote for John McCain because his one defining shtick over his career was fighting against all that crap. Now his running mate is an ideologue and supports teaching religious crap in a science class. I am torn.

I hate politicians.

[Moontanman]

I asked a friend who is a rabid republican and knowledgeable about science if the idea of the republicans supporting teaching ID in school bothered him. His reply was a classic, he said he wasn't worried about it. Evolution should win out if the theory is presented with ID because the arguments for ID just don't hold up and if that small thing was all it took to get the Christian right to vote his man into office it was worth it.

[Nitack]

Originally Posted by Moontanman

I asked a friend who is a rabid republican and knowledgeable about science if the idea of the republicans supporting teaching ID in school bothered him. His reply was a classic, he said he wasn't worried about it. Evolution should win out if the theory is presented with ID because the arguments for ID just don't hold up and if that small thing was all it took to get the Christian right to vote his man into office it was worth it.

The problem with that is that ID does not hold up UNDER SCRUTINY. If you are a kid whose parents have been pushing religious zealotry on you your whole life, you are primed to believe the lies and overlook the flaws. People believe complete crap all the time, not because of the merits of the crap, but because they WANT to believe.

Breatharians really believe that they can survive on only air and sunlight; with out food or water. Many idiots die because they try this crap (although I consider it a blessing in disguise... think evolution ). The people want to believe that they can get everything they need from air and sunlight. That does not mean they actually can.

Perpetual motion... there are many many people who believe that they can create a perpetual motion machine. Should we teach that it is possible in science class just because there are a large number of people who believe it is possible? That is essentially the same argument that the creationists are pushing. "We believe it is scientific so you should teach it in a science class."

GAH!!

Ignorant people are really pissing me off.

[Moontanman]

Originally Posted by Nitack

The problem with that is that ID does not hold up UNDER SCRUTINY. If you are a kid whose parents have been pushing religious zealotry on you your whole life, you are primed to believe the lies and overlook the flaws. People believe complete crap all the time, not because of the merits of the crap, but because they WANT to believe.

Breatharians really believe that they can survive on only air and sunlight; with out food or water. Many idiots die because they try this crap (although I consider it a blessing in disguise... think evolution ). The people want to believe that they can get everything they need from air and sunlight. That does not mean they actually can.

Perpetual motion... there are many many people who believe that they can create a perpetual motion machine. Should we teach that it is possible in science class just because there are a large number of people who believe it is possible? That is essentially the same argument that the creationists are pushing. "We believe it is scientific so you should teach it in a science class."

GAH!!

Ignorant people are really pissing me off.

What is really amazing is that people who really know better are willing to let that crap be taught as truth in school just get their guy in office. Truth is meaningless under these conditions.

[REASON]

I think that if journalists are going to ask politicians and local school board members if they believe ID should be taught as a part of public school science curriculums and they say yes, that the immediate follow up question should be whether they also believe Astrology, Palm Reading, Tarot Cards, ESP, Witchcraft, and Ghost Busting should be included in the science curriculum as well, and see what they say about that.

It would at least be fun watching them squirm as they attempt to explain the difference.

[Nitack]

Originally Posted by REASON

I think that if journalists are going to ask politicians and local school board members if they believe ID should be taught as a part of public school science curriculums and they say yes, that the immediate follow up question should be whether they also believe Astrology, Palm Reading, Tarot Cards, ESP, Witchcraft, and Ghost Busting should be included in the science curriculum as well, and see what they say about that.

It would at least be fun watching them squirm as they attempt to explain the difference.

But they would say that ID is also a scientific theory and the sheep would follow with out actually making them prove that assertion.