|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 5846 days) Posts: 7405 From: satellite of love Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: International Aspects of Creationism/ID | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Brad McFall Member (Idle past 5059 days) Posts: 3428 From: Ithaca,NY, USA Joined: |
Tell me then, please my man, what ARE the "real" reasons?
I can do all of this without any links. This is a thread. I posted twice here. I do not use the word "rant". Are you ONLY? interested in what ICR said?? I am from East Orange. My Grandfather got his Phd using flies from Columbia. My mother wanted to leave US for Australia and start a Christian Mission with my Newark native father of the melting pot population abandoning my Grandmother's agnositicism of a lineage back to the Ward of revolutionary war days that was not incompatible with the teaching of Evolution TO TEACHERS that occurred in WESTERN NY in this family by leaving a Seventh Day Adventist farming family unable to deal with a death at child birth. I had said that things would have to CHANGE in US if the %skeptical was to no longer DOUBT evolution. I still hold to the position that if one can change ICR type minds then the rest of US will follow. You dont agree? Please if you refuse to mention me at all (which you did) why cant you say what you think the reasons really were. So you dont have a subjective confidence of what counts for a bacterial "species"? You think that placing a series of morphologies in a series explains the "transition"(Gould is well aware this is not suffient).ICR is concerned not as much with this kind of response but with a demonstration from a rock facie of the same, not one pieced together from different places. Abiogenesis is used to stifle questions by both evolutionists and creationsists because the philosophy of reductionism vs holism is a heterogenity but the failure occurrs in a homogeneity of objections that either you or I could write. from the GENERAL METHOD opcit p 186
quote: If you only want to "debate" within creation and evolution, I can oblige you elsewhere. I merely provided the link for balance. Please try to address what I, BSM, wrote. Even if only to ask a question. I regret that it appears that to be a "good evcer" one has to sound like one is "answering" another poster's questions. I wish that wasnt a general take home message but it appears that way. I did say at one place, "I dont know". You can take advantage of that dont forget. This message has been edited by Brad McFall, 05-14-2005 09:21 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Andya Primanda Inactive Member |
quote: Just to correct the orangutan, YEC is not the preferred flavour in Islamic creationism in Turkey & the rest of the Muslim world. OEC/ID is. But yes, I have come across some Christian YECs in Indonesia.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 438 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
jar writes:
It is true that there are YEC organizations in Canada, but my impression is that they are pretty innocuous. Their main focus seems to be on "creation weekends" and the occaisional conference with people from AiG, etc. Classic YEC Creationism is alive and well in Canada, the US, Indonesia, Australia, Japan, Turkey and to some extent in Europe. As far as I know, there is no threat to education. People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
coffee_addict Member (Idle past 503 days) Posts: 3645 From: Indianapolis, IN Joined: |
Ringo writes:
That's what the French said about the danger, or the lack, of German occupation before they surrendered. As far as I know, there is no threat to education. The danger is always there. As long as there is religion, there is always the danger of ignorance dominating over education.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Silent H Member (Idle past 5846 days) Posts: 7405 From: satellite of love Joined: |
As long as there is religion, there is always the danger of ignorance dominating over education. As much as I personally dislike religion, I think this is unfair. As long as there is hubris and a willingness to believe in the absolute truth (knowledge) of the "betterness" one's position, there will always be the danger of ignorance dominating over education. The atheist is just as open to such error, and the pious are not inherently more vulnerable. holmes "...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 438 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Just to clarify, when I said "there is no threat to education", I meant that there have been no school boards trying to exclude evolution or include YEC/ID in the curriculum (to the best of my knowledge). A "threat" would be German troops massing on the border or a school board meeting with "evo vs creo" on the adgenda.
We do need to keep an eye out for those warning signs (and I intend to look into the tax-exempt status of those YEC organisations, too). People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Limbo Inactive Member |
What would histories greatest thinkers say about all this controvery, if they were suddenly alive today?
Would they want to quickly read and catch up on all the facts of both sides, and attempt to wiegh the evidence? Or would they dig below the surface...to the philosophical undercurrents driving both sides? This message has been edited by Limbo, 05-14-2005 05:00 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
mick Member (Idle past 5013 days) Posts: 913 Joined: |
What would histories greatest thinkers say about all this controvery, if they were suddenly alive today? I think I know which side Darwin would be on...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Limbo Inactive Member |
Is that the extent of your thoughts on the matter? C'mon, open up your mind.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Limbo Inactive Member |
Suppose you are accused of a crime that you know you didn't commit, and the evidence stands against you. Are you obliged to believe that you're guilty because the evidence stands against you?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Alasdair Member (Idle past 5776 days) Posts: 143 Joined: |
Hello again, Brad! To tell the truth, quite a bit of what you're saying is going right over my head...but I'll try and deal with it.
quote: I'd guess ignorance, from talking to my peers.
quote: Sorry about that, I just saw a lot of capital letters and exclamation marks and jumped to conclusions
[quote]I had said that things would have to CHANGE in US if the %skeptical was to no longer DOUBT evolution. I still hold to the position that if one can change ICR type minds then the rest of US will follow. You dont agree?[quote]
Oh, gotcha. Sorry. I agree completely that it'll do it for most of the US, but you'll always have fringe loonies.
quote: Why? And apart from evolution, what other explanation is there that if you arrange the fossils in order of age, they just happen to show an evolutionary sequence?
quote: I'll remember that, thanks
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
mick Member (Idle past 5013 days) Posts: 913 Joined: |
OK, which great thinkers do you have in mind? Many of them probably made statements on evolution, science and religion.
Marx on religion:
Marx writes: Man makes religion, religion doesn't make man. Religion is the self-consciousness and self-esteem of man who has either not yet found himself or has already lost himself again Marx writes: Religious poverty is, in one, the expression of real poverty, and in another, a protest against real poverty. Religion is the sigh of a heavy laden creature, the heart of a heartless world, just as it is the spirit of spiritless conditions. It is the opium of the people I imagine marx would see creationists as a bunch of misguided people who have despaired at improving their economic condition so turn to the afterlife instead. Perhaps he would not be concerned with the fact that the leaders of movements like ID tend to be right wingers. He thinks the power of those leaders comes from the disillusionment of the masses with capitalism. The cure is to make life better for workers, then they will abandon their dreams of a better afterlife because they have a good life right now.
Marx writes: Its [religion's] disappearance must be done by social development, in which education must play a part Studying biology might help creationists, only insofar as they are able to improve their material conditions by doing so. However some later marxists had a slightly different view of Darwinism.
Pannekoek (1909) writes: That Marxism owes its importance and position only to the role it takes in the proletarian class struggle, is known to all. With Darwinism, however, things seem different to the superficial observer, for Darwinism deals with a new scientific truth which has to contend with religious prejudices and ignorance. Yet it is not hard to see that in reality Darwinism had to undergo the same experiences as Marxism. Darwinism is not a mere abstract theory which was adopted by the scientific world after discussing and testing it in a mere objective manner. No, immediately after Darwinism made its appearance, it had its enthusiastic advocates and passionate opponents; Darwin’s name, too, was either highly honored by people who understood something of his theory, or despised by people who knew nothing more of his theory than that man descended from the monkey, and who were surely unqualified to judge from a scientific standpoint the correctness or falsity of Darwin’s theory. Darwinism, too, played a role in the class-struggle, and it is owing to this role that it spread so rapidly and had enthusiastic advocates and venomous opponents. Darwinism served as a tool to the bourgeoisie in their struggle against the feudal class, against the nobility, clergy-rights and feudal lords. This was an entirely different struggle from the struggle now waged by the proletarians. The bourgeoisie was not an exploited class striving to abolish exploitation. Oh no. What the bourgeoisie wanted was to get rid of the old ruling powers standing in their way. The bourgeoisie themselves wanted to rule, basing their demands upon the fact that they were the most important class, the leaders of industry. What argument could the old class, the class that became nothing but useless parasites, bring forth against them? They leaned on tradition, on their ancient divine rights. These were their pillars. With the aid of religion the priests held the great mass in subjection and ready to oppose the demands of the bourgeoisie. It was therefore for their own interests that the bourgeoisie were in duty bound to undermine the divinity right of rulers. Natural science became a weapon in the opposition to belief and tradition; science and the newly discovered natural laws were put forward; it was with these weapons that the bourgeoisie fought. If the new discoveries could prove that what the priests were teaching was false, the divine authority of these priests would crumble and the divine rights enjoyed by the feudal class would be destroyed. Of course the feudal class was not conquered by this only, as material power can only be overthrown by material power, but mental weapons become material tools. It is for this reason that the bourgeoisie relied so much upon material science.
I doubt that Pannekoek would have sided with right-wing creationists over Darwinism in the present day. but it's an interesting quote! What thinkers other than Marx would you like to consider? Do you think setting up a thread "Great thinkers on religion, science and biology" would be fun? Contributors could offer a short essay on the thinker of their choice, and others could comment or criticise. Best wishes, mick
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
mick Member (Idle past 5013 days) Posts: 913 Joined: |
Your personal experience is generally better evidence than anything a prosecutor could provide you with. My fingerprints might have been on the knife, etc., but I KNOW that I didn't stab her.
Anyway, I don't want to bring that stabbing up again. It's been analysed enough in the media. Of course if you have had a history of mental illness which involved false memories, etc, then perhaps you would be convinced of your guilt despite the fact you can't recall doing the crime. What does this have to do with ID? Mick
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Limbo Inactive Member |
quote: Remember that next time a Christian says their own spiritual experiences about God are better evidence than anything a scientist could provide them with.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1431 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
they would most likely continue to think as they had before. those that predate christianity might be amused by it's presumptions, those that lived under it's more harsh hands (do I need to say galileo?) would not.
and those from the enlightenment might wonder why it is still an issue. what do you think? we are limited in our ability to understand by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024