If the supernatural was to be the cause of something inside nature (ex: DNA, or miracle.) than it would be science who would determine it, not theology.
A miracle? What are you talking about? - We're talking about science not mythology.
If science
only deals with the natural (i.e. only things that can be observed in nature), then how can one, using science, come to the conclusion that it could only be supernatural?
For all of human history it has been the other way around. Science has removed the supernatural from ever single equation. In this day and age, it has become apparent that there is no need to invoke a supernatural cause when deal with
natural phenomena. This
is science.
Miracles, supernatural entities, etc., are dealt with in theology, and I feel they should be taught in mythology because that's all Christianity is. Modern day mythology.
So although science deals with nature, it does not have to be naturalistic.
Is this an opinion of yours? How do you study the supernatural?
Or is it just a conclusion you arrive at because (A) you already believe in God, (B) you can't understand how things would work without him, or (C) both?
But Let me hypethetically agree that science cannot alude to any supernatural causes.
No, please, don't agree. Just explain how science would do that.
Would you find it appropriate to talk about irreducible complexity, Intelligent Design, etc. in a religious class ?
No, not at all. It is not a religion. I wouldn't want my kids learning that garbage that a handful of idiots are proposing.
ID has no place in modern education. It is NOT science, and clearly, by definition, it is not a religion.
I do not know at what age you teach evolution down in the states, but here in quebec we only had a bried overview of it during biology class in secondary 3 and 5.
What you are failing to understand is that modern biology is what it is today
because of our understanding that things evolve.
It is not a seperate entity of biology, it
is biology.
Nonetheless, my opinion is that you do not teach things to children when they do not have the mental capabilities to question it. Teaching things to kids when they are not mentally able to express critical thinking on the subject equals indoctrination in my book.
This is nonsense. If this were the case then kids wouldn't go to school until the age of 15.
However, let me ask, at what age should a child be taught about the mythological character known as god?
And so you teach the ToE when it is assumed that the children probably teenagers) are mentally capable of questioning it.
Questioning what? What do you think a 15 year old child should question? 1 specific theory that a few fundamentalist, who are not educated in the subject, question themselves?
Would you also encourage a 15 year old kid to question the theory of gravity? Or the atomic theory? Or thermodynamics?
No wait, just evolution, right? Because you have an apriori belief in the supernatural -(that you lack objective evidence for)- and want those indoctrinated in this belief to question a theory that has mountains of objective evidence to support it. That sadly, you've never learned.
If this is what you are suggesting, then you are commiting an educational disservice to anyone that you encourage to do the same. Seriously, you should be ashamed to promote this level of ignorance to children, and to adults that are gullible enough to believe you.
I'm glad that the educational system, throughout the world, disagrees with your ridiculous opinion.
- Oni
™ Version 4.2
