I'm still using my Netwon and waving it at Steve during the keynotes, why don't they just start making the Newton again? They could re-market it as the granny-smith.
Anytime you teach someone, you're indoctrinating them into something. For example, you're indoctrinating anyone who reads your comments into thinking that intelligent design is an empty claim. Although you just threw that out there without any justification. I don't think indoctrination (or teaching) is bad, but who gets to determine what the "right" teachings are? Should students be taught that everything can be explained with science? Or that anything that can be explained can be done with science? Another question, is it freedom of religion or freedom from religion?
It is unfair to say Fundamentalists are incapable of learning and I see nothing in the definition of fundamentalist that would merit such a claim. Labeling doesn't facilitate constructive dialog or understanding.
Evolution is just a theory. Just like everything else in Science, you never prove anything, you just come up with better theories.
And whats wrong with questioning evolution? If it is "right" then it will stand up to questioning/criticism.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm still using my Netwon and waving it at Steve during the keynotes, why don't they just start making the Newton again? They could re-market it as the granny-smith.
Anytime you teach someone, you're indoctrinating them into something. For example, you're indoctrinating anyone who reads your comments into thinking that intelligent design is an empty claim. Although you just threw that out there without any justification. I don't think indoctrination (or teaching) is bad, but who gets to determine what the "right" teachings are? Should students be taught that everything can be explained with science? Or that anything that can be explained can be done with science? Another question, is it freedom of religion or freedom from religion?
It is unfair to say Fundamentalists are incapable of learning and I see nothing in the definition of fundamentalist that would merit such a claim. Labeling doesn't facilitate constructive dialog or understanding.
Evolution is just a theory. Just like everything else in Science, you never prove anything, you just come up with better theories. And whats wrong with questioning evolution? If it is "right" then it will stand up to questioning/criticism.
That is such a generalization, how do you speak for humanity?
Does this fall under news for nerds or stuff that matters? I'm guessing it isn't the latter.