NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.
All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report
Stories, comments, journals, and other submissions on use Perl; are Copyright 1998-2006, their respective owners.
Could you miss the point more? (Score:1)
This method of instruction is not based in fact, and is a form of religion itself. In my experience, public schools often teach that things just happened, that there was no design to how things came about. Fine, teach science, but that is not science! Teaching about
Re:Could you miss the point more? (Score:1)
In this respect "random chance" is the accepted scientific .. process, if you will. That is not, in itself, a religious belief of any kind. It's a "fact" that science considers that theory the most likely, and that there are no other scientifically-sound theories that
Re:Could you miss the point more? (Score:1)
Fine, don't call it religion, although I'll disagree, but to call that science? What do you weigh or measure or compare or graph to say it happened by chance? There's nothing empirical about it in any sense. Sure, science can say that because this species didn't have incisors it wasn't able to survive, but science can't say why it didn't have incisors.
I won't pretend to know why it didn't have incisors. Maybe it was purely by chance. But there's no possible way for science to give us this answer. It falls outside what the scientific method is able to do.
Reply to This
Parent
Re:Could you miss the point more? (Score:1)
Re:Could you miss the point more? (Score:1)
Then we don't disagree! I thought I was clear in my initial reply to gnat, but perhaps I wasn't: I don't want the schools to answer that question. I want them to stick to the facts. The problem is that many schools don't do that; they say that these things happened by chance, effectively telling many children that their religion is wrong.
Well, really, I want local school boa
Re:Could you miss the point more? (Score:1)
Re:Could you miss the point more? (Score:1)
Re:Could you miss the point more? (Score:1)
Re:Could you miss the point more? (Score:1)
Not in the very clear context I was using the word, no: chance in the sense of randomness, of lack of design or direction.
In that sense, as I said, science cannot say these things happened by chance. If you prefer, I'll amend that to science cannot say these things happened randomly, without direction or design. But from the context, such a clarification shouldn't have been necessary: I was using "chance" in the context of causation; to use that w
Re:Could you miss the point more? (Score:1)
Well, actually, we do. Except these things are taught more by omission.
For example, I was looking at my thirteen year old cousin's history book on East Asia (primarily, China, Japan, and Taiwan). I flipped to the section on Taiwan and found no mention of the following facts:
Re:Could you miss the point more? (Score:1)
For example: I had my hair cut few days ago and the guy who did is of Armenian origin. Search for "armenian massacre": in 1915-1916 Turkish troops killed 1-2 million Armenians. Of course, the Turki