Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Should Math Be Taught in Schools?

((Sad to say, this parody is hardly exaggerated at all. A few of the answers are almost verbatim to the actual answers of the Miss USA contestants to "Should Evolution Be Taught in Schools." Go watch that video on YouTube and see for yourself)).

(((There are days I think I am living in the world of Kornbluth's "Marching Morons." Just look at reality TV, and remember the hit show in his story)))

(((I am vastly pleased that the eventual Miss USA winner, and GAME OF THRONES fan, does "believe in evolution." And presuambly in math as well))).



Jul. 5th, 2011 03:09 am (UTC)
Well, actually, it does contradict your faith. The Bible lays out a pretty specific history of how life started, and evolution proves that account to be false. It's hard for these two things to coexist because in order for one to thrive, the other has to adjust and concede.

Of course, you can't (yet) disprove the existence of a god with science, but it has debunked the stories of the holy books, and pushed the need for a good so far back that its hypothetical existence is irrelevant.
Jul. 5th, 2011 05:13 am (UTC)
I don't think so, nor do the Jews or the Catholics. Really, it's only the evangelical Christians who believe there is an inherent contradiction. Most other religions accept that God's guidance of evolution meets the description of what is in the Bible. The Catholics say that the human soul was created by God from nothing, but the evolution of the body/biology is not objected to.
Jul. 5th, 2011 06:12 am (UTC)
According to the original translation of the Bible evolution really doesn't contradict it. It depends on how literal you want to be with the idea of "seven days." Recently we've decided to be REALLY literal.

I say this as an atheist.
(Deleted comment)
(no subject) - spitphyre - Jul. 6th, 2011 12:19 am (UTC) - Expand
(Deleted comment)
(no subject) - joeromel - Jul. 5th, 2011 04:02 pm (UTC) - Expand
Jul. 5th, 2011 06:23 am (UTC)
It contradicts a literal interpretation of the Bible. By far not all branches of Christianity have such an interpretation-
Jul. 5th, 2011 06:41 am (UTC)
Science contradicts a literal interpretation of the Bible—that the world is 6000 years old, that we all descended from Adam and Eve, and so on. Treating these as metaphors instead of a literal description of the origin of Man and Earth resolves these issues.
Jul. 5th, 2011 12:36 pm (UTC)
Evolution hasn't proven Creation false. If anything, it makes a stronger account. The fossil chain has far too many holes to make Evolution into a LAw, hence the continuing "theory of evolution". While speculation points in that direction, scientists have not been able to form a solid path from man to ape. Evolution does occur, but on small scale (this bird beak is longer because it has to dig further into the tree to find the insects it chooses to eat).

As for science debunking "the stories of the holy books", the way I see things it seems to offer more proof than point out inaccuracies.
wrong - James T Delles - Jul. 6th, 2011 01:17 am (UTC) - Expand
Jul. 5th, 2011 02:22 pm (UTC)
That only applies to Biblical literalists/fundamentalists. The broader position of many faiths (including much of the Catholic Church) is that allegorical creationist accounts in the Bible are not meant to be taken literally in human terms. (This leaves them in the Intelligent Design camp, and ID is itself a non-falsifiable hypothesis and thus a matter of faith, not science. Which is why a large number of theologians also object to the teaching of ID in science classes -- ID is not science.)
Jul. 5th, 2011 02:34 pm (UTC)
For example, one notes that Catholic schools in the US teach evolution in their science curriculum. Also, the current and approved catechism of the Catholic Church reflects the attitude expressed in my entry above.
Jul. 5th, 2011 03:15 pm (UTC)
Your concern only holds...
If you insist on a Fundamentalist reading of the creation story (which the two largest groups of Christians oppose) then perhaps you are right. But then again anyone can be right if they get to tell other people what constitutes (and contradicts) "their" Faith.
Scott Rollen
Jul. 5th, 2011 03:26 pm (UTC)
Profoundly disagree. What you say is only true if you are one who thinks every word of the Bible must be strictly literal. There are many Christians of very strong faith that believe that portions of the Bible are allegorical and meant to enlighten the relationship between God and man (and woman) without having to be taken as an historical account of actual events. Jesus often taught with allegory and parable himself, remember. I, for one, am perfectly comfortable accepting the Bible as a spiritual guide that teaches us truths about ourselves and God, while at the same time being a strong believer in science to explain the Universe we live in. I have both faith in God, and trust in empirical fact and I do not believe they contradict one another.
Jul. 5th, 2011 06:33 pm (UTC)
Jul. 6th, 2011 01:41 am (UTC)
No...it doesn't. You can't take something that was written for one purpose, like the book of Genesis, and take it to mean something else. It was written during the Babylonian exile as a "counter-story" to Babylonian creation myths. It was not written to describe the age of the earth, the origins of life, or anything else that is considered "scientific."

What you just said is equivalent to "The account of science presented in the Odyssey is false." You shouldn't hold works of fiction accountable for wrong answers to questions they aren't even trying to answer.
Ignacio Llerena
Jul. 7th, 2011 11:59 am (UTC)
"The Bible lays out a pretty specific history of how life started"

Actually, the bible lays out TWO. Read the Genesis book a little.

It's because it's not history what's in the bible. They are "stories". It's different.

At least, that's what I believe as a Catholic. The bible contains little historical truth. I don't believe god created the universe in seven days. But I do believe god created the universe. And I believe in the big bang too.

Evolution doesn't contradict my faith. It contradicts the people who believe the Bible should be read like a science book, when it's not.

And I do think evolution should be teached in schools.
Jul. 7th, 2011 01:56 pm (UTC)
This is flat out wrong, on many levels. First, there is no contradiction between science and religion, or more specifically, science and Christianity. They both speak to two different areas.

Secondly, your ignorance is showing when you claim that the Bible "lays out a pretty specific history of how life started." You make the assumption that 1) the original authors/storytellers would have assumed that this was in fact a history and meant for it to be understood in such a way and 2)you assume that a literal interpretation of Genesis has been the norm and is the norm, when it isn't. Some thought it was more literal, others thought that the creation story in Genesis represented a long span of time, notably Augustine and Origen, two highly influential theologians. The point that evolution contradicts Christianity, though, is highly false.


George R.R. Martin
George R. R. Martin

Latest Month

April 2018


Page Summary

Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Lilia Ahner