Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,819 Year: 3,076/9,624 Month: 921/1,588 Week: 104/223 Day: 2/13 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Evangelical Indoctrination of Children
slevesque
Member (Idle past 4641 days)
Posts: 1456
Joined: 05-14-2009


Message 91 of 295 (524063)
09-14-2009 10:02 AM
Reply to: Message 67 by bluescat48
09-13-2009 11:38 PM


Re: Instruction vs indoctrination
Funny how things turn out on this thread, since it wasn't even 6 months ago that Texas voted that every aspect of a scientific theory should be examined, and that the evolutionists down in the US complained heavily about it.
Wanting evolution to be taught as the truth, with no questions allowed, is also indoctrination as per your standard, no ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by bluescat48, posted 09-13-2009 11:38 PM bluescat48 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by ochaye, posted 09-14-2009 10:18 AM slevesque has replied
 Message 102 by bluescat48, posted 09-14-2009 6:18 PM slevesque has replied

  
ochaye
Member (Idle past 5239 days)
Posts: 307
Joined: 03-08-2009


Message 92 of 295 (524069)
09-14-2009 10:18 AM
Reply to: Message 91 by slevesque
09-14-2009 10:02 AM


Re: Instruction vs indoctrination
quote:
Wanting evolution to be taught as the truth, with no questions allowed, is also indoctrination as per your standard, no ?
Science dos not recognise the concept of truth. It recognises what works. ET works. There is no competitor to it in science, and there has not been for over a century. End of story.
If people want to discuss other ideas outside science lessons, that's fine, surely.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by slevesque, posted 09-14-2009 10:02 AM slevesque has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 96 by slevesque, posted 09-14-2009 4:54 PM ochaye has replied

  
Rahvin
Member
Posts: 4032
Joined: 07-01-2005
Member Rating: 9.2


Message 93 of 295 (524093)
09-14-2009 12:38 PM
Reply to: Message 88 by ochaye
09-14-2009 9:48 AM


Re: Could we get back on topic?
But should we be discussing it at all? It looks slanderous, to me, and its worse because there is not a scrap of evidence offered, and no identification of who it is wants to scare people with hell. Percy has been asked to provide evidence, but he has ignored that request, and now, it appears, looks to suffocate legitimate questions. It's a disgrace to skepticism/atheism, if you did but realise it. Atheism will never be taken seriously like this.
Quite to the contrary - you've been presented with several examples, including video evidence of Christians using scare tactics to gain converts or reinforce the convictions of the faithful.
You've simply chosen to ignore those examples, and instead focused on one-line responses and repeating yourself ad nauseum. Your debate tactics remind me of Pee-Wee Herman: "I know you are but what am I" and "lalalalala, I can't hear you!" spring immediately to mind, with a healthy dose of broken record mixed in.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 88 by ochaye, posted 09-14-2009 9:48 AM ochaye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 94 by ochaye, posted 09-14-2009 1:10 PM Rahvin has not replied
 Message 95 by Granny Magda, posted 09-14-2009 4:03 PM Rahvin has not replied

  
ochaye
Member (Idle past 5239 days)
Posts: 307
Joined: 03-08-2009


Message 94 of 295 (524101)
09-14-2009 1:10 PM
Reply to: Message 93 by Rahvin
09-14-2009 12:38 PM


Re: Could we get back on topic?
quote:
you've been presented with several examples
I don't recall any examples. If post #7 is referred to, I did not, and will not get past the first two words. If dealing with evidence involves conceding that one is some lower form of life, it will have to go unobserved.
Of course there are people in the USA who say all sorts of things and do all sorts of things, that the rest of the world thinks is crazy. There is no denying that. But whether one can say that they are evangelical is another thing altogether. There is a current fashion for calling onself evangelical- in many parts of the world, one can hardly get oneself street cred without doing so. Allegedly Christian people who, within living memory, would view evangelicals with undisguised contempt are now going under the same banner. So one must reckon with the possibility that many, if not most, who today self-identify as evangelicals are actually the enemies of evangelicalism.
So whether these new species of evangelicalism are identifiable as genuine evangelicalism must be a a matter of sober examination. If this scrutiny is not made, one could make a completely false accusation, tarring evangelicalism with the same brush that properly applies to its enemies.
The first task, it seems to me, is to reach a consensus about a definition of evangelicalism.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 93 by Rahvin, posted 09-14-2009 12:38 PM Rahvin has not replied

  
Granny Magda
Member
Posts: 2462
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007
Member Rating: 4.0


Message 95 of 295 (524151)
09-14-2009 4:03 PM
Reply to: Message 93 by Rahvin
09-14-2009 12:38 PM


Re: Could we get back on topic?
Hi Rahvin,
Rahvin writes:
Your debate tactics remind me of Pee-Wee Herman: "I know you are but what am I" and "lalalalala, I can't hear you!" spring immediately to mind
ochaye, in the very next post, writes:
If post #7 is referred to, I did not, and will not get past the first two words.
Once again Rahvin, your psychic powers are confirmed!
Mutate and Survive

"A curious aspect of the theory of evolution is that everybody thinks he understands it." - Jacques Monod

This message is a reply to:
 Message 93 by Rahvin, posted 09-14-2009 12:38 PM Rahvin has not replied

  
slevesque
Member (Idle past 4641 days)
Posts: 1456
Joined: 05-14-2009


Message 96 of 295 (524161)
09-14-2009 4:54 PM
Reply to: Message 92 by ochaye
09-14-2009 10:18 AM


Re: Instruction vs indoctrination
Ok, so indoctrination cannot happen in science because science does not recognize the concept of truth ?
How do you reconcile this concept of science with the concept of logic, which involves determining true and false claims using logical reasoning ?
I don't know if you see the problem here, but throw out the concept of truth in science, and you pretty much have to throw out logic also ...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by ochaye, posted 09-14-2009 10:18 AM ochaye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 97 by ochaye, posted 09-14-2009 5:25 PM slevesque has replied

  
ochaye
Member (Idle past 5239 days)
Posts: 307
Joined: 03-08-2009


Message 97 of 295 (524171)
09-14-2009 5:25 PM
Reply to: Message 96 by slevesque
09-14-2009 4:54 PM


Re: Instruction vs indoctrination
quote:
the concept of logic, which involves determining true and false claims using logical reasoning ?
Logical truth is another case, that may have no relation to any other sort of truth. One may reach a 'true' logical conclusion that is based on premises that may be actually false. Science of course depends on logic, but does not recognise the category 'true' except in the logical sense, and ET is true in that sense. It fits the data.
Edited by ochaye, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by slevesque, posted 09-14-2009 4:54 PM slevesque has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 98 by slevesque, posted 09-14-2009 5:36 PM ochaye has replied

  
slevesque
Member (Idle past 4641 days)
Posts: 1456
Joined: 05-14-2009


Message 98 of 295 (524173)
09-14-2009 5:36 PM
Reply to: Message 97 by ochaye
09-14-2009 5:25 PM


Re: Instruction vs indoctrination
This is of course redefining the terms, because you originally stated that science did not recognize the concept of truth.
ANd it would be interesting what these others sorts of truth are ...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 97 by ochaye, posted 09-14-2009 5:25 PM ochaye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 99 by ochaye, posted 09-14-2009 5:43 PM slevesque has replied

  
ochaye
Member (Idle past 5239 days)
Posts: 307
Joined: 03-08-2009


Message 99 of 295 (524174)
09-14-2009 5:43 PM
Reply to: Message 98 by slevesque
09-14-2009 5:36 PM


Re: Instruction vs indoctrination
quote:
you originally stated that science did not recognize the concept of truth.
Truth in the sense you used.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by slevesque, posted 09-14-2009 5:36 PM slevesque has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 100 by slevesque, posted 09-14-2009 5:49 PM ochaye has replied

  
slevesque
Member (Idle past 4641 days)
Posts: 1456
Joined: 05-14-2009


Message 100 of 295 (524176)
09-14-2009 5:49 PM
Reply to: Message 99 by ochaye
09-14-2009 5:43 PM


Re: Instruction vs indoctrination
I do not recognize that there are different sorts of truth, therefore logical truth was included in the sense of truth I used. This is why it would be pleasant to know the different sorts of truth you think exist.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by ochaye, posted 09-14-2009 5:43 PM ochaye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 101 by ochaye, posted 09-14-2009 5:54 PM slevesque has replied

  
ochaye
Member (Idle past 5239 days)
Posts: 307
Joined: 03-08-2009


Message 101 of 295 (524179)
09-14-2009 5:54 PM
Reply to: Message 100 by slevesque
09-14-2009 5:49 PM


Re: Instruction vs indoctrination
quote:
logical truth was included in the sense of truth I used.
Then please demonstrate your truth by the use of logic.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by slevesque, posted 09-14-2009 5:49 PM slevesque has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 104 by slevesque, posted 09-14-2009 7:40 PM ochaye has replied

  
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4190 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 102 of 295 (524184)
09-14-2009 6:18 PM
Reply to: Message 91 by slevesque
09-14-2009 10:02 AM


Re: Instruction vs indoctrination
Wanting evolution to be taught as the truth, with no questions allowed, is also indoctrination as per your standard, no ?
Not as truth, but as the establshed robust theory it is as opposed to ID , which is nothing more that creation (the wolf ) in sheep's clothing (ID). Creation isn't science therefore doesn't belong in a science class. It has nothing to do with truth which is a relative term depending on who is using whatever as "The Truth."
Edited by bluescat48, : typoooooo

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002
Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969
Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008

This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by slevesque, posted 09-14-2009 10:02 AM slevesque has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 103 by slevesque, posted 09-14-2009 7:34 PM bluescat48 has replied

  
slevesque
Member (Idle past 4641 days)
Posts: 1456
Joined: 05-14-2009


Message 103 of 295 (524195)
09-14-2009 7:34 PM
Reply to: Message 102 by bluescat48
09-14-2009 6:18 PM


Re: Instruction vs indoctrination
this is what the texas board voted this april I think, which I was referring to earlier:
quote:
In all fields of science, analyze, evaluate, and critique scientific explanations by using empirical evidence, logical reasoning, and experimental observation and testing, including examining all sides of scientific evidence of those explanations so as to encourage critical thinking by the students
I find absolutely nothing wrong with this statement, and I find it very healthy for the scientific intellectual development of children. But the NCSE and other such organisations were against it, driven by their fear of the 'creationist wolf'.
The fact that this fear is legitimate or not is beside the question. the result, if we were to listen to the NCSE, would be a one way evolutionnary explanation of the facts, without being allowed for students to question it, either through logical reasoning or otherwise. I find that such a situation would be very much analog to the current one you are criticising here (the christian indoctrination).
Because, I think we can agree that teaching children with the 'this is true' method is not the problem. The problem is when the children cannot question what you teach as being true.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 102 by bluescat48, posted 09-14-2009 6:18 PM bluescat48 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 106 by bluescat48, posted 09-14-2009 8:44 PM slevesque has replied
 Message 114 by Percy, posted 09-15-2009 8:21 AM slevesque has not replied

  
slevesque
Member (Idle past 4641 days)
Posts: 1456
Joined: 05-14-2009


Message 104 of 295 (524196)
09-14-2009 7:40 PM
Reply to: Message 101 by ochaye
09-14-2009 5:54 PM


Re: Instruction vs indoctrination
My 'truth' is only the common definition that some things are either true or false, and that this can be determined from logical reasoning. Yo uare the one claiming that there are multiple sorts of truth, and for the third time already I have to ask you to provide other examples of truths ....
The existence of truth is an axiom of my position and of logical thinking. The reason for this is simple: I have to assume that it is true that I can deduce the existence of truth through logic in order to determine if it exists through logic. Trying to prove it becomes only begging the question.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 101 by ochaye, posted 09-14-2009 5:54 PM ochaye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 105 by ochaye, posted 09-14-2009 7:53 PM slevesque has replied

  
ochaye
Member (Idle past 5239 days)
Posts: 307
Joined: 03-08-2009


Message 105 of 295 (524199)
09-14-2009 7:53 PM
Reply to: Message 104 by slevesque
09-14-2009 7:40 PM


Re: Instruction vs indoctrination
quote:
My 'truth' is only the common definition that some things are either true or false, and that this can be determined from logical reasoning.
quote:
Funny how things turn out on this thread, since it wasn't even 6 months ago that Texas voted that every aspect of a scientific theory should be examined, and that the evolutionists down in the US complained heavily about it.
Please demonstrate by logic how things have turned out to be funny on this thread.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by slevesque, posted 09-14-2009 7:40 PM slevesque has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 107 by slevesque, posted 09-14-2009 8:44 PM ochaye has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024