However, there was a film that I really wanted to see. Earlier tonight, I stepped into a cinema for the first time in seven months.
The film that I saw was Ben Stein's documentary, "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed."
I liked it, although I did snicker at its major evocation of Godwin's Law.
I guess I could share my opinion on the issue of Evolution vs Intellegent Design, but I really don't feel like it. You guys can share with me your opinions on the matter if you want, but chances are good that I won't care about what you have to say.
....I'm just being honest. :C
- Mood:
sleepy
Profile
![[info]](http://p-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif)
kartoon_kween- kartoon_kween
Comments
Though maybe human vision (Why wire the back of the brain to do vision when the eyes are in the front of the head?), and knees (engineering disaster) could show that even god makes mistakes?
I mean, if you take what's written in monotheistic scripture about Creation as being super simplified for idjits who didn't even understand bacteria, all that bidness about let there be light and then I made some fishies and then some birdies is just kind of "BIG BANG AND EVOLUTION FOR DUMMIES."
I mean, Science now can't even explain what all the parts of our own brains do; how can they completely naysay the idea of a force beyond human comprehension conceiving of existence and then willing it so? It's the "beyond human comprehension" part they have issues with; to accept ID means to acknowledge that there are things Science cannot observe and that a data table can't explain.
I guess I might as well state my stance after all. It's not a particularly special or complex stance... I guess I was just really tired when I was composing this journal.
In classrooms, there should be the freedom of inquiry. In order for students to develope well-informed beliefs, every possible theory needs to be hashed. On that note, scientific theory should not be taught as scientific fact.
I am of the personal belief that the only things that don't belong in the classroom are bias and harrasment. I think that a teacher should be able to mention Creationism (or Darwinism, in the case of more conservative schools) without having to worry about losing his/her job. Furthermore, students should be able to ask any question without the fear of being shot down.
Freedom of inquiry. I think that's the most precious form of the Freedom of Speech. If people are going to learn as much as possible, they need to ask all the questions. Political correctness is the greatest enemy of this freedom, because it hinders our thoughts and makes perfectly reasonable questions seem taboo.
what i wouldn't mind is if ID was presented as "the scientific perspective on the religious belief of creation." it is not scientifically valid to point at creationism - "and lo, god touched his finger to the earth and all kinds of shit popped up fully formed out of nowhere" - as a scientific theory for the origin of life. it's a RELIGIOUS BELIEF. there is no science in it whatsoever, so it has no business in a science classroom. ID, on the other hand, by acknowledging the existence of scientific laws and theories and incorporating the role of the divine into them, can bridge the gap between "hardcore, incomplete scientific theory" and "religious belief."
Anyway, if I were the teacher in that situation, I would just smile and tell the class that everyone is free to believe what they want to believe. Even a Bible-thumper cannot argue that man has free will... in fact, "free will" is an important part of Christian lore. I wouldn't even have the right to say if that kid was right or wrong.
As of now, science can not explain to us how everything began. There is circumstantial evidence that supports certain theories, but there is no definitive proof. Because the teacher does not have the answer, the teacher has no right to say that the Bible is wrong. All the same, the teacher has no right to say that the Bible is correct, either.
If the student continues to be a disruption, he or she can be removed from the classroom.