http://education.guardian.co.uk/schools/...87,00.html

The Brits mandate teaching the evolutionary biology standpoint of Richard Dawkins (even require reading some of his works) and Intelligent Design in religion courses.

What's the big fuss? They included Intelligent Design.

Here, there'd be 500 times the outrage that Dawkins was included.

georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:http://education.guardian.co.uk/schools/...87,00.html

The Brits mandate teaching the evolutionary biology standpoint of Richard Dawkins (even require reading some of his works) and Intelligent Design in religion courses.

What's the big fuss? They included Intelligent Design.

Here, there'd be 500 times the outrage that Dawkins was included.

I have no problem with that. I also think Religion should be taught in our schools. There is no way you can grasp world history without understanding the role that religion played in that history. Our students should learn about the origins of religion, pagan, near east mystery religions, Judaism, Christianity, Islam etc..

ShoreBuc Wrote:

georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:http://education.guardian.co.uk/schools/...87,00.html

The Brits mandate teaching the evolutionary biology standpoint of Richard Dawkins (even require reading some of his works) and Intelligent Design in religion courses.

What's the big fuss? They included Intelligent Design.

Here, there'd be 500 times the outrage that Dawkins was included.

I have no problem with that. I also think Religion should be taught in our schools. There is no way you can grasp world history without understanding the role that religion played in that history. Our students should learn about the origins of religion, pagan, near east mystery religions, Judaism, Christianity, Islam etc..

My sixth grader spent most of the fall semester learning about religions in his geography class. Of course the only ones they discussed/learned about were Islam, Hinduism, & Budhaism. Oh, and by the way, they were taught that Islam is the religion of peace. The IB courses (by the UN) are such a joke.

One reason we're behind in education is that people make assertions that are not backed up by evidence.

Know anyone like this GTS?

WTF? What evidence do you provide that this approach would improve the US' education position?

Both Europe and E. Asia have very different approaches to education, and both are superior to the flailing that is accomplished by US "educators" who seem more concerned w/ making up for their tormented childhoods, rather than learning and effectively teaching their subjects.

Moreover, Dawkins is a 3rd rate hack at this point, and is going downhill fast. I don't care if he is a professor at Cambridge, so was C.S. Lewis, and since some of their views are mutually exclusive, that appeal to authority is pointless.

Next question...why would you force schools to teach evolution during a religion course? Is evolution part of a religious manuscript or movement?

GrayBeard Wrote:Next question...why would you force schools to teach evolution during a religion course? Is evolution part of a religious manuscript or movement?

Actually...
http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/postmonth/nov96.html

Quote:When this is studied it is realized that Darwin, who gets the credit for the idea of natural selection and evidence for evolution, was one thousand years late in the discovery. The Muslim scientists ibn Kathir, ibn Khauldun, ibn Arabi, ibn Sina, among other scientists, such as the Ikhwan school of though, arrived at the same conclusions as Darwin with a convincing amount of evidence. Every Muslim school and mosque used to teach evolution up until a few hundred years ago. Some westerners, including Darwin's contemporary, Sir William Draper, called it the Mohammedan Theory of Evolution. Draper admitted that the Muslim version was more advanced than Darwin's, because in the Muslim version, the evolution starts out with minerals. The Muslim scientists used the Qur'an as their guide in doing this.

Been wanting to put that out to Bourgeois Rage, but I've been lazy.

So, when are the courts going to ban Darwinism b/c it promotes religion!

DrTorch Wrote:One reason we're behind in education is that people make assertions that are not backed up by evidence.

Know anyone like this GTS?

WTF? What evidence do you provide that this approach would improve the US' education position?

Both Europe and E. Asia have very different approaches to education, and both are superior to the flailing that is accomplished by US "educators" who seem more concerned w/ making up for their tormented childhoods, rather than learning and effectively teaching their subjects.

Moreover, Dawkins is a 3rd rate hack at this point, and is going downhill fast. I don't care if he is a professor at Cambridge, so was C.S. Lewis, and since some of their views are mutually exclusive, that appeal to authority is pointless.

The point is that the curriculum here is pathetic. Another example:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tr1qee-bTZI

Third rate hack? I'd like to see you refute some of the very very good points he makes.

GrayBeard Wrote:Next question...why would you force schools to teach evolution during a religion course? Is evolution part of a religious manuscript or movement?

They all share the same ultimate purpose:
They explain the world as it is today.

One uses science. The other uses... well... imaginary friends and very old text.

georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:The point is that the curriculum here is pathetic.

I agree with that. Now, teachers are forced to teach to an end of the year test, instead of actually teaching something to the kids. Our education is a nightmare, and I am glad to say that my 2 children that are in the Public screwel system are being removed from it next year.

**edit**GTS, why don't you tell us how your really feel about people that believe in and follow the so called "imaginary friends"?

Evolutionary Biology should not be taught in religion classes. It really has nothing to do with religion. Some people's religious views may change after learning about evolution, but evolution does not directly imply atheism. There are plenty of people who are theists and atheists that understand evolution.

As for the Muslim theory of evolution, it is well established that during the middle ages Islam doctors were more advanced than western doctors. It wouldn't surprise me that evolution was studied by Muslims long before the west did.

If anything that statement just goes to show that evolution is compatible with a variety of religions and does not imply any particular religion by itself.

Bourgeois_Rage Wrote:As for the Muslim theory of evolution, it is well established that during the middle ages Islam doctors were more advanced than western doctors. It wouldn't surprise me that evolution was studied by Muslims long before the west did.

Yeah, they were more "advanced" in alchemy too. lmfao

DrTorch Wrote:Yeah, they were more "advanced" in alchemy too. lmfao

Are you really that overly proud?
Medieval Muslims were also more advanced in mathematics, engineering, schooling and administration. This was helped greatly by the fact that they didn't burn all the Greek books they found and call them blasphemous.

Fanatical Wrote:

DrTorch Wrote:Yeah, they were more "advanced" in alchemy too. lmfao

Are you really that overly proud?
Medieval Muslims were also more advanced in mathematics, engineering, schooling and administration. This was helped greatly by the fact that they didn't burn all the Greek books they found and call them blasphemous.

I suppose this is an attack on Christianity. I thought it was the Roman Empire that burned the library at Alexandria.

The Muslims from the 8thC-11th C were more advanced than Europe. There were many reasons for this, but I doubt you can pin most of it on Christianity.

Furthermore, my point was that coming up w/ an evolutionary theory 1000 years prior to Darwin, is not necessarily a reflection of advanced science. Frankly, that was pretty obvious.

The parallels of modern evolutionary theory advocates, to those who hindered the birth of chemistry from alchemy, are many and striking. Biology is poised to advance, and will do so. Evolutionary theory is uneccesary for this advancement, and in fact is a hinderance to it. It adds nothing to the science, despite the claims of its devout practitioners and proseletyzers.

Just once I'd like to see a positive argument for intelligent design and not an anti-evolution argument.

Fanatical Wrote:

DrTorch Wrote:Yeah, they were more "advanced" in alchemy too. lmfao

Are you really that overly proud?
Medieval Muslims were also more advanced in mathematics, engineering, schooling and administration. This was helped greatly by the fact that they didn't burn all the Greek books they found and call them blasphemous.

Exactly it wasn't the fact they were Muslim that made them more advanced it was the fact they had not driven underground all the math, science and medicine they learned prior to Islam.
The dark ages in Christianity quelled any free thought or imagination spurred by science, math and medicine.
No argument there but now you can look throughout the Middle East and see how far behind they have fallen in math, science, research etc.. because of an intolerant, literal interpretation of Islam.

GrayBeard Wrote:Next question...why would you force schools to teach evolution during a religion course? Is evolution part of a religious manuscript or movement?

My thought is you teach evolution during science and religion during social studies, history etc..
It is okay to tell a kid Islam is the religion of peace but they should also be taught that it was expanded by the sword and the violence and intollerance that it also represents. They should also do the same with Christianity, Judaism etc..

I'm not attacking Christianity; I'm attacking fundamentalism and the censorship it can bring.

I wonder if the Brits talk about Rael. He's probably got the best religious ID idea of them all. He even uses the book of Genesis to describe how aliens created the races.

www.rael.org
enter at your own risk

ShoreBuc Wrote:The dark ages in Christianity quelled any free thought or imagination spurred by science, math and medicine.

Uh, right.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Ages

Quote:Many modern historians dismiss the notion that the era was a "Dark Age" by pointing out that this idea was based on ignorance of the period combined with popular stereotypes: many previous authors would simply assume that the era was a dismal time of violence and stagnation and use this assumption to prove itself.

DrTorch Wrote:

ShoreBuc Wrote:The dark ages in Christianity quelled any free thought or imagination spurred by science, math and medicine.

Uh, right.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Ages

Quote:Many modern historians dismiss the notion that the era was a "Dark Age" by pointing out that this idea was based on ignorance of the period combined with popular stereotypes: many previous authors would simply assume that the era was a dismal time of violence and stagnation and use this assumption to prove itself.

Oh I'm sorry Wikipedia has set the record straight. Math, Science, and medicine actually blossomed during the Dark Ages lmfao lmfao

I guess when the Roman Catholic Church was setting the blue print for the Taliban by burning down library's and destroying pagan temples and anything they decided to be Heretical like Science, Math and Medicine was actually a great period in our Christian history.

Bourgeois_Rage Wrote:Just once I'd like to see a positive argument for intelligent design and not an anti-evolution argument.

You have, but you've dismissed them with circular reasoning.