Teaching About Evolution.

[DadDude]

The only thing that gets me is how do we teach good moral values, and who determines them? where is the textbook, the guidebook, the standard on what is good behaviour?

Aristotle's Ethics, the lists of virtues from various religions, etc.  There are many good books about ethics, theoretical and applied.  If you actually compare lists of virtues from all different traditions you'll see remarkable overlap.

[DadDude]

I'm agnostic myself (some people would describe my belief system as atheistic), but I see a rising and very annoying intolerance on the part of anti-religious people, in the wake of non-philosopher, non-religious scholar scientists like Richard Dawkins.  Many actual philosophers who study philosophy of religion, unlike Dawkins, believe it is possible to be an intellectually honest and reasonably open-minded Christian.  I believe that myself, although I am not a Christian.

Of course, too many religious people use intimidation and indoctrination to propagate their belief system.  But that is true of all ideologies--including, I should say, the scientific-materialistic one, which I happen to share.

On religious issues, I think the whole world needs to unclench a little.

[Skylark]

"I was glad to hear a point of view from someone from a different country with a different background that was not brainwashed a Christian. Your epiphany seemed to happen in the reverse to mine. I was brainwashed a Christian then taught evolution and it changed my whole view on Christianity."

Dont have much time to respond, but this is a good point, Pat, you put it better then I ever could,    I never experienced christianity the way it is applied in US ( I grew up in the family of scientists and gov officials in non-western country, where I also came to become a Christian), and when I had my first experience with meeting "Christians" from abroad and then in US, my first though was "wow, no wonder people turn to hating christianity", the closest handle I can put on it is "churchianity", ha! And in my opinion it has nothing to do with sincere Christianity, after all Jesus hated that as well.

I was brought up as a scientist, doctor, and I am sincere believer, but I would never limit myself by the do's and don'ts, just because some church says that. I have personal relationship with God, and that is just between me and Him. I do not mind exposing my children to any kind of experience or information in my discretion for their age  , just because some religious denomination tells me it is good or bad. After all if children are brough in an environment with knowledge and experiences available to them, along with good research and encouraging them to make their choices and decisions, they will learn to grow emotionally, spiritually and intellectually, forming their decisions and beliefs, rather then carbon copying them. When their decisions, viewpoints and believes are formed, rather then just imposed with no process of forming ones. Then they are able to be objective, tolerant, persuadive, self-confident individuals with desire for learning and discovering more. If their viewpoints and beliefs are simply "imposed" ( and those can be any beliefs!), then they can not be securely standing up for them, they do not know why they believe or do not believe certain way, they are not able to be selfconfident, tolerant and they are not taught to be open for more knowledge and learning....

Just my personal opinion. Hope it was clear, as English is not my first language   

[TheyCan]

getting brave and jumping in here.....I want to comment specifically on the above post's last sentence in regards to education.

I don't know how people expect students to study history without studying religion.  It's a HUGE part of history.  You would have to majorly water down history books (more like flat-out lie) if you take religion out.  This has already happened and it's just crazy. One of the biggest parts of studying history is understanding WHY people made the decisions they made.  It's stepping into their shoes and analyzing their thought process.  How can students possibly have an intelligent conversation about history with having a thorough understanding of religion???? 

I just read on someone's blog that their daughter's history book said that the Pilgrims were giving thanks to the Indians on Thanksgiving!!!!!!!!!!!!  WOW!!!!  Talk about lying to control the minds of our children.  Sounds pretty opposite from some of the above posts....  (For anyone who has views about America's goverment similar to the above post - I recommend getting an accurate history book about how America was started and also learning what was intended by the statement "separation of church and state" back in 1802.  Contrary to what's taught today - it was meant to keep the state out of the church's business, not to keep the church out of the state's business.)

Is anyone else concerned about the accuracy of our school's history books??!

[Kemmy]

I don't believe in God as is usually espoused in various organised religions which, obviously, I don't believe in either (organised religion, that is). And I'm not going to teach my child creationism at any point, which I believe is complete fantasy. She'll no doubt get it from school and her peers, so she'll be introduced to creationism that way.

I'll teach her evolution and other scientifically supported theories which can be tested. If she chooses to believe in creationism at any piont I really won't mind. But it won't come from me. And I was brought up though Christian schooling right up until the end of high school and I made a choice not to believe, so I don't think that's really important. What I'd like my daughter to be is a critical thinker, and if I can help her to get there, I'll feel I've done something right as a parent.

[DadDude]

Getting back to the education of kids--has anybody actually posted presentations here about either evolution (and paleontology, say, with names and pictures of Lucy, Neanderthal, Homo Erectus, etc.) or the Genesis story?  I would like to use both.

[patreiche]

I would like that also but I don't think it exist. Nice of you to volunteer. Just kidding.

[baz]

For those who are interested, here's 100 Renowned Academics Speaking about God.

Part 1
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/s47ArcQL-XQ&rel=1" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/v/s47ArcQL-XQ&rel=1</a>

Speakers in order of appearance:

1. Lawrence Krauss, World-Renowned Physicist
2. Robert Coleman Richardson, Nobel Laureate in Physics
3. Richard Feynman, World-Renowned Physicist, Nobel Laureate in Physics
4. Simon Blackburn, Cambridge Professor of Philosophy
5. Colin Blakemore, World-Renowned Oxford Professor of Neuroscience
6. Steven Pinker, World-Renowned Harvard Professor of Psychology
7. Alan Guth, World-Renowned MIT Professor of Physics
8. Noam Chomsky, World-Renowned MIT Professor of Linguistics
9. Nicolaas Bloembergen, Nobel Laureate in Physics
10. Peter Atkins, World-Renowned Oxford Professor of Chemistry
11. Oliver Sacks, World-Renowned Neurologist, Columbia University
12. Lord Martin Rees, Astronomer Royal
13. Sir John Gurdon, Pioneering Developmental Biologist, Cambridge
14. Sir Bertrand Russell, World-Renowned Philosopher, Nobel Laureate
15. Stephen Hawking, World-Renowned Cambridge Theoretical Physicist
16. Riccardo Giacconi, Nobel Laureate in Physics
17. Ned Block, NYU Professor of Philosophy
18. Gerard 't Hooft, Nobel Laureate in Physics
19. Marcus du Sautoy, Oxford Professor of Mathematics
20. James Watson, Co-discoverer of DNA, Nobel Laureate
21. Colin McGinn, Professor of Philosophy, Miami University
22. Sir Patrick Bateson, Cambridge Professor of Ethology
23. Sir David Attenborough, World-Renowned Broadcaster and Naturalist
24. Martinus Veltman, Nobel Laureate in Physics
25. Pascal Boyer, Professor of Anthropology
26. Partha Dasgupta, Cambridge Professor of Economics
27. AC Grayling, Birkbeck Professor of Philosophy
28. Ivar Giaever, Nobel Laureate in Physics
29. John Searle, Berkeley Professor of Philosophy
30. Brian Cox, Particle Physicist (Large Hadron Collider, CERN)
31. Herbert Kroemer, Nobel Laureate in Physics
32. Rebecca Goldstein, Professor of Philosophy
33. Michael Tooley, Professor of Philosophy, Colorado
34. Sir Harold Kroto, Nobel Laureate in Chemistry
35. Leonard Susskind, Stanford Professor of Theoretical Physics
36. Quentin Skinner, Professor of History (Cambridge)
37. Theodor W. Hänsch, Nobel Laureate in Physics
38. Mark Balaguer, CSU Professor of Philosophy
39. Richard Ernst, Nobel Laureate in Chemistry
40. Alan Macfarlane, Cambridge Professor of Anthropology
41. Professor Neil deGrasse Tyson, Princeton Research Scientist
42. Douglas Osheroff, Nobel Laureate in Physics
43. Hubert Dreyfus, Berkeley Professor of Philosophy
44. Lord Colin Renfrew, World-Renowned Archaeologist, Cambridge
45. Carl Sagan, World-Renowned Astronomer
46. Peter Singer, World-Renowned Bioethicist, Princeton
47. Rudolph Marcus, Nobel Laureate in Chemistry
48. Robert Foley, Cambridge Professor of Human Evolution
49. Daniel Dennett, Tufts Professor of Philosophy
50. Steven Weinberg, Nobel Laureate in Physics

Part 2

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/6Gt4WSK_NlQ&rel=1" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/v/6Gt4WSK_NlQ&rel=1</a>

Speakers in order of appearance:

51. Frank Wilczek, Nobel Laureate in Physics, MIT
52. VS Ramachandran, World-Renowned Neuroscientist, UC San Diego
53. Bruce C. Murray, Caltech Professor Emeritus of Planetary Science
54. Sir Raymond Firth, World-Renowned Anthropologist, LSE
55. Alva Noë, Berkeley Professor of Philosophy
56. Alan Dundes, World Expert in Folklore, Berkeley
57. Massimo Pigliucci, Professor of Philosophy, CUNY
58. Bede Rundle, Oxford Professor of Philosophy
59. Sir Richard Friend, Cambridge Professor of Physics
60. George Lakoff, Berkeley Professor of Linguistics
61. Sir John Sulston, Nobel Laureate in Physiology/Medicine
62. Shelley Kagan, Yale Professor of Philosophy
63. Roy J. Glauber, Nobel Laureate in Physics
64. Lewis Wolpert, Emeritus Professor of Biology, UCL
65. Mahzarin Banaji, Harvard Professor of Social Ethics
66. Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, Professor of Practical Ethics, Duke University
67. Richard Dawkins, Oxford Evolutionary Biologist
68. Bruce Hood, Professor of Experimental Psychology, Bristol
69. Marvin Minsky, Artificial Intelligence Research Pioneer, MIT
70. Herman Philipse, Professor of Philosophy, Utrecht University
71. Michio Kaku, CUNY Professor of Theoretical Physics
72. Dame Caroline Humphrey, Cambridge Professor of Anthropology
73. Max Tegmark, World-Renowned Cosmologist, MIT
74. David Parkin, Oxford Professor of Anthropology
75. Robert Price, Professor of Theology and Biblical Criticism
76. Jonathan Haidt, Professor of Psychology, Virginia
77. Max Perutz, Nobel Laureate in Chemistry
78. Rodolfo Llinas, Professor of Neuroscience, New York
79. Dan McKenzie, World-Renowned Geophysicist, Cambridge
80. Patricia Churchland, Professor of Philosophy, UC San Diego
81. Sean Carroll, Caltech Theoretical Cosmologist
82. Alexander Vilenkin, World-Renowned Theoretical Physicist
83. PZ Myers, Professor of Biology, Minnesota
84. Haroon Ahmed, Prominent Cambridge Scientist (Microelectronics)
85. David Sloan Wilson, Professor of Biology and Anthropology, SUNY
86. Bart Ehrman, Professor of Religious Studies, UNC
87. Seth Lloyd, Pioneer of Quantum Computing, MIT
88. Dan Brown, Fellow in Organic Chemistry, Cambridge
89. Victor Stenger, Emeritus Professor of Physics and Astronomy, Hawaii
90. Simon Schaffer, Cambridge Professor of the History of Science
91. Saul Perlmutter World-Renowned Astrophysicist, Berkeley
92. Lee Silver, Princeton Professor of Molecular Biology
93. Barry Supple, Emeritus Professor of Economic History, Cambridge
94. Alan Dershowitz, Harvard Professor of Law
95. John Raymond Smythies, Professor Emeritus of Psychiatric Research
96. Chris Hann, Max Planck Institute For Social Anthropology
97. David Gross, Nobel Laureate in Physics
98. Ronald de Sousa, Emeritus Professor of Philosophy, Toronto
99. Robert Hinde, Emeritus Professor of Zoology, Cambridge
100. Carolyn Porco, NASA Planetary Scientist

[Tamsyn]

Wow, this is an old thread!  I enjoyed reading it.  I am a Christian, so naturally I am teaching my children about creation.

Here's some food for thought.  Whether we speak of creationism or evolution, regardless of our beliefs, there is another debate among scientists, atheists and religious alike, and that is gradualism vs catastrophism.  I am a catastrophist.  I find the idea that the world has been here for millions of years not only contrary to my faith, but also to science.

So, I have some very different beliefs, but I wholeheartedly subscribe to the Electric Universe theory, which has many religious and atheistic scientists working together, doing real experiments, and I find their work to be fascinating.  They teach catastrophism.  Take what you want and leave the rest.  Here are a few resources that may be of interest:

http://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/Vu_AL1qDOcU&rel=1" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/v/Vu_AL1qDOcU&rel=1</a>

http://www.youtube.com/user/ThunderboltsProject?feature=watch

Here is a Mormon's take on EU.  I'm a Mormon (LDS), my husband and I took his classes, and we found them to be very interesting and edifying, although we don't agree with him 100%.  EU is a recent study for us, but we believe it, and it has dramatically changed our approach to teaching our children science, particularly cosmology.  I also add, and emphasize, that the following website does NOT represent mainstream LDS faith, no, not at all.  But it also does not counter it, and for me personally, this discovery felt like the missing link between faith and science. 

http://www.mormonprophecy.com/

Okay, now you all know how weird I really am.   

Edited to fix youtube links.

[TeachingMyToddlers]

Okay, now you all know how weird I really am.   

Nah, we think you're pretty wonderful.    At least I do anyway.   You clearly have this wholesome, peacefulness that radiates through a keyboard. I may not be LDS, but I can definitely appreciate the beautiful tapestry of diversity that makes up this board and the world as we know it. Thank you for contributing to that my LDS friend!

[Kerileanne99]

Absolutely agree with that sentiment

Besides...has anybody in this forum ever really been 'normal?!'

I was under the distinct impression that we are here, in this fantastically, wonderfully diverse community because none of us are what the big world calls normal

Hhhmmm. Have any of you ever met anyone you decided was completely, 100% 'normal'? I shudder to think!

[Tamsyn]

Shucks, thanks everyone.     Yes, there is no real normal.  We're all whackos who think our babies can learn how to read. 

[Lappy]

*** Just a special love note from our Admins ***

To all of our lovely forumers here at BrillKids:

I would personally like to apologize if you were looking for this topic in the past 24 hours and couldn't find it - it's because we had to take this thread in to "forum rehab" to sort of clean up the thread a bit. (Big thanks go to TeachingMyToddlers for being quick to let us know about this!)

As much as I would looove to be on top of all the conversations in this forum, unfortunately I am sometimes not the fastest to police our little community, which is why I hold the help of our other volunteer admins in high regard.

Just to explain what I did:

I understand that some posts on this thread veered wildly off-topic; some have been reported as offensive (even mildly) or judgemental (even mildly). For the purposes of keeping the discussion ON-TOPIC, INFORMATIVE, and UNBIASED, we have removed some posts which may give cause for others to flame.

I would be the first to say that I love a good debate. And it is towards this belief that I am bringing this thread back. However, keep in mind that I am entreating everyone who wishes to participate in this discussion to stay the course, and to please refrain from hasty generalization.

Think this whenever posting anything in our forum: Might anyone get offended by this?

If you have to think twice, just pause and move away from the keyboard.    This thought may be a good thing to keep around even when you're not in the BrillKids forum.

Just in case you found that one or more of your posts have been removed, please note that it is not our intention to hurt you or to accuse you of wrongdoing. Understand that our goal is to keep the thread on topic, palatable, and encouraging of good discussion.

Thank you very much once again for being understanding!

All the best,

Lappy

*** Just a special love note from our Admins ***

And with that, the discussion may now go on! 

[Chris1]

  I am a catastrophist.  I find the idea that the world has been here for millions of years not only contrary to my faith, but also to science.

Hi Tamsyn,

Could you please provide an example of Young Earth evidence.
 
Something to think about-

See Google images-The moon has over 250 craters with diameters of 100 km or more. The Earth; due to its greater size and stronger gravitational pull, will have been struck by a SIGNIFICANTLY larger number of asteroids during the same time scale. These massive impacts have never been observed and no well-preserved craters close to 100 km exist. What does this suggest about the age of the earth?

Please note that there are more precise and direct dating methods available.

Chris.

[Tamsyn]

Hello, Chris, thank you for your comment.

As far as your first question, as far as referencing young earth science, I'm not exactly sure what you are asking for, or what side of the fence you are on.  I like to know who I'm talking to before jumping into a debate. 

I am happy to address the crater issue though, because I find that topic fascinating.  Can you use the number or size of craters to tell the age of a celestial body?  No, you are ABSOLUTELY right!  If so, the northern and southern hemispheres of Mars would be a billion years apart, as shown in the video I'm referencing.  But I will go on to say that I don't think that many of the "craters" in our solar system are craters at all, but the footprint of electric discharge from an age of planetary instability.  The Electric Universe has a lot to say on this subject, and I'm inclined to agree with them.  However, I'm not pretending to be a scientist myself, and my study of it is relatively new to me.  I'm not here to try to convince anyone, rather, I am introducing the concept in hopes that it may be of interest to those who want to dig further into the EU themselves.

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/IbsGxrEXvlI&rel=1" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/v/IbsGxrEXvlI&rel=1</a>

document.getElementById('recent_loading').style.display = 'none';document.getElementById('recent_page_box').style.display = '';

Page: 1/4  

Loading...

Members

• Total Members: 214769
• Latest: Meobi

Stats

• Total Posts: 110526
• Total Topics: 19136
• Online Today: 493
• Online Ever: 826
• (January 22, 2020, 12:09:49 AM)

Users Online

• Users: 0
• Guests: 381
• Total: 381