BACK TO HOME PAGE SITE NAVIGATION CONTACT POETRY FORUM STORY FORUM   Horoscope  Radio  Gallery  FAQ   Search   Memberlist   Usergroups   Register   Profile   PM's   
Log in 
 
General Forum Index -> Articles & Essays

Intelligent design. What do you think ?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Ladies Lifestyle and Living Store
  Author    Thread Post new topic Reply to topic
Khaleesi
Moderators


Joined: 06 May 2005
Posts: 551
Location: FL


Be more specific please.

Khaleesi
_________________
Hike up your skirt a little more and show your world to me.....

Never start a row in public when it can be settled politely in private. ~My Father~

Post Tue Dec 11, 2007 10:29 pm 
 View user's profile Send private message  Reply with quote  
Alice In Quantum Land



Joined: 04 Dec 2007
Posts: 77


I cannot be more specific than what I already said, I have explained what is considered a valid theory and what is not. I could probably add this :

We don't teach invalid theories because there are to many of them and it would be a waste of time. But of course, I think there's nothing wrong with letting people know about these invalid theories in a course like "history of science" or something like that.

Sorry for being rude by the way, I have a bad temper, sorry... no offense !

Exclamation

Post Tue Dec 11, 2007 10:39 pm 
 View user's profile Send private message  Reply with quote  
Eiregirl



Joined: 21 Jul 2005
Posts: 10230
Location: Chasing a pink bunny


Science <------->Religion

There have been people, scholars and philosophers say that science grew out of religion. From a persons desire to better understand the creation of their creator. A curiosity to understand the world around them. Why does fire burn and how can it be made? This was probably one of the first experiments of science…making fire. From that moment on science and technology have continued to advance. It was slow at first but always moved forward. Over the centuries some cultures have advanced faster than others for various reasons and yes one of those reasons is religion. In some cultures religion slowed or brought the advancement of science and technology almost to a halt while in others religion and science merged and pushed forward. Have there been times in history where science and religion butted heads? Of course there have but that never stopped the advance…never stopped the quest for knowledge and with time religion has always come back into step with science.

Evolution<------>Design

The theory of evolution has been around since the 1800’s and has evolved into what it is today while the concept of Design has been around for thousands of years in one form or another and it to has changed and evolved over time.

Knowledge<------->understanding

The quest for knowledge and understanding of the world on which we live will never be held in check. The desire to understand and know how things work…how they are made up and how nature keeps it all works together will never end. With every answer there will be a new question and with every question there will be more answers and the cycle will never end.

Teaching<------>Learning

The teacher and the student are one and the same. If a teacher has a good student then not only will the student learn but so will the teacher. A good teacher will not tell a student “this is the way it is whether you like it or not” instead they will say “If it can’t be done this way then how? Find a better way and then teach me”.

Should intelligent design be taught in schools?
Hmm…my thoughts bounce back and forth on this. It is one of the longest standing theories if not the longest standing one. I can understand the point of view of people who have no religious or spiritual belief being concerned with having their children exposed to something they do not believe in…initial creation by a higher being. I can also understand having a problem teaching something that has inherent flaws even though the entire theory is not flawed. I can also understand people who are deeply religious and have no belief in evolution not wanting it taught to their children in schools even though evolution does not state how existence began there are many people who teach it that way and actually believe it and every scientist will tell you it is not how existence began. Personally I have a great amount of faith in being able to teach my child what I believe and letting her make up her own mind and she will.

Are there problems with intelligent design? Yes and the unintelligent people who keep writing books and papers about it need to get some intelligence and simply have the theory state more facts and less conjecture. The main thing it needs to state is that our universe was initially formed by a higher intelligence or words to that affect. What needs to happen more collaboration between or a combining of intelligent design and evolution. I know there are those on both sides of the issue who will never agree with this but anyone with half a mind knows that evolution does play a part in our universe. That does not mean that all living things evolved from living creatures of the past. I do not think humans of today evolved from Neanderthals or any other ancient humanoid creature does that mean I am right…no but I cannot be proven wrong either. Does my belief in a higher deity mean that I cannot believe that evolution occurs…no because I do believe a higher being set all of creation into motion and that from that point it has evolved into what it is today. What would be wrong with teaching that in school? To me there would be nothing wrong with it because that is what I believe and I cannot be proven right or wrong at least in my opinion. Smile Anyone with strong convictions against what I believe would have a problem with it.

Eiregirl Arrow

More later
_________________
All poems and stories posted by Eiregirl are Copyright 2005 - 2008 Aoibhegréine These literary works are my property under copyright. If you wish to use my work for any purpose please ASK FIRST.

Post Wed Dec 12, 2007 12:12 am 
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  Reply with quote  
Alice In Quantum Land



Joined: 04 Dec 2007
Posts: 77


I've been thinking about what I would want to see being taught in science classes. Here's what I think.

I haven't been to college or anything, I don't know how they teach science there... But I have been in highschool and I know what I don't like about the way they teach science there. I don't know if its the same on your side of the world, where ever you are, but here in Montréal, this is what I think about it.

I remember we use to have a bit of biology, a bit of physics, a lot of maths and that's pretty much it. I wouldn't really change anything about the maths courses, but as to biology and physics, I would rather see a kind of "Philosophy of science" mixed with a "history of science" kinda class that would act like a introduction to science.

So instead of saying to the students : "So here it is, an hydrogen atom is made out of... blablabla" I think we should teach the students things like : What is science ? How does it work. Where does it come from, what is a theory. What are mathematics. How did theories such as quantum mechanics and general relativity dramatically changed our world and our perception of the world.

So now that they know what science is, and what it's implications means, then you make the students learn about pure sciences such as physics, bio and so forth.

Post Wed Dec 12, 2007 12:29 am 
 View user's profile Send private message  Reply with quote  
Alice In Quantum Land



Joined: 04 Dec 2007
Posts: 77


Eiregirl. I'm reading what you just wrote. There is a huge misunderstanding here when you say :

Should intelligent design be taught in schools? (...) It is one of the longest standing theories if not the longest standing one .

It is not correct. I understand what you think... But there is an error in your definition of Intelligent design. And I think that a lot of people makes this mistake. And this is why I despise this theory so much, because the supporters of this theory profits from the public misunderstanding of their claims to harm science, it is not so much the theory that I despise but its proponents.

Let me explain myself:

I know what you mean, you're saying that throughout history, in all epochs, a lot of philosophers, all theologians and a huge load of scientists claimed the existence of a "supreme being" that had, in a way or another, intervened into the creation of the world. Newton, for example, was a strong believer. It is absolutely correct, I'm not arguing this.

But this creationist view of the world is not what Intelligent design is. This is what I'm trying to say since the beginning of this discussion. Intelligent design is a new theory, it's been elaborated in the 20th century. It as not been around for ancestral times. This theory tries to insert itself into Darwin's theory of evolution saying that : "Darwin theory is almost correct but there is a God at the end of this theory and we can prove it." (they were not able to prove it).

Since the theory of evolution cannot tell us how life came into existence they say "God did it". So by doing this, Intelligent design is nothing but a "God of the gaps". A God that we place at the edge of our knowledge saying that "Where our ignorance resides... there is God." So by invoking this particular kind of god, we end up explaining nothing. It's like saying "stop searching, God did it". So they are trying to block our learning process of the world by imposing this kind of practice.

A lot of philosophers, theologians and scientists have talked about this problem.

Georges Lemaître for example, the Belgian Roman Catholic priest and cosmologist that was the first to come up with a rough model of what would be later called the Big Bang model, "the Primeval Atom", warned the Pope that we should not use this theory to say that this is the moment or whatever that God created the universe, since we just don't know that.

And this is exactly what Intelligent design supporters does.

Again.... this doesn't mean that there is no God, it only means that we cannot use God as a scientific tool to learn about the world, whether he really exists or not.

I don't know if you understand what I'm saying... If not please tell me.

Post Wed Dec 12, 2007 2:03 am 
 View user's profile Send private message  Reply with quote  
Khaleesi
Moderators


Joined: 06 May 2005
Posts: 551
Location: FL


Alice I think maybe what you don't understand is WE DO UNDERSTAND what you are saying. We just don't necessarily agree with you. We are intelligent women. Just because we have a different opinion than you does not mean we do not understand what you are saying. We may agree or disagree with part or all of what you are saying but we ARE NOT STUPID. Information can be interpretated differently. You told me that I did not understand the dfference between a theory and a law. Well guess what? I really do! I read the sources that you supplied very carefully, and I interprete what they say differently than you. So stop saying we don't understand.

Khaleesi
_________________
Hike up your skirt a little more and show your world to me.....

Never start a row in public when it can be settled politely in private. ~My Father~

Post Wed Dec 12, 2007 3:54 am 
 View user's profile Send private message  Reply with quote  
Eiregirl



Joined: 21 Jul 2005
Posts: 10230
Location: Chasing a pink bunny


quote:
Originally posted by Alice In Quantum Land:
I've been thinking about what I would want to see being taught in science classes. Here's what I think.

I haven't been to college or anything, I don't know how they teach science there... But I have been in highschool and I know what I don't like about the way they teach science there. I don't know if its the same on your side of the world, where ever you are, but here in Montréal, this is what I think about it.

I remember we use to have a bit of biology, a bit of physics, a lot of maths and that's pretty much it. I wouldn't really change anything about the maths courses, but as to biology and physics, I would rather see a kind of "Philosophy of science" mixed with a "history of science" kinda class that would act like a introduction to science.

So instead of saying to the students : "So here it is, an hydrogen atom is made out of... blablabla" I think we should teach the students things like : What is science ? How does it work. Where does it come from, what is a theory. What are mathematics. How did theories such as quantum mechanics and general relativity dramatically changed our world and our perception of the world.

So now that they know what science is, and what it's implications means, then you make the students learn about pure sciences such as physics, bio and so forth.



Alice,

I think that would be an excellent idea...teaching science alongside philosophy.

Hugs,
Eiregirl Arrow
_________________
All poems and stories posted by Eiregirl are Copyright 2005 - 2008 Aoibhegréine These literary works are my property under copyright. If you wish to use my work for any purpose please ASK FIRST.

Post Wed Dec 12, 2007 4:30 am 
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  Reply with quote  
Eiregirl



Joined: 21 Jul 2005
Posts: 10230
Location: Chasing a pink bunny


I completely understand what you are saying, what Michael Behe says, what Kenneth Miller says, what William Dembski says…I understand what the advocates of today’s intelligent design and evolutionary theories are saying.

No matter how anyone breaks it down intelligent design is nothing more than the latest in a long line of beliefs that say an intelligent entity created the universe. This current theory can easily be traced back to the watchmaker analogy of Paley in the early 1800’s. His ideas can be traced back even farther and eventually you will end up in Rome before Jesus was born and you can even go back farther to Ancient Greece and keep going back. Comparatively speaking today’s theory on intelligent design is no different than the original theory of evolution and how it has changed from its origin to what it is today. Everything I have read from scientists who openly and publicly dispute intelligent design basically say that intelligent design is just a sneaky way of putting forth a design theory without actually using the word God. It is just the same old concept with a few new wrinkles and a new jacket but it is what it is whether it wants to be or not.

I know there are advocates of evolution who claim that intelligent design is an anti-evolution theory.
Is it? On both sides of the issue there are people who think it is and people who think it is not. Those who think it is anti-evolution and those who do not both have valid points.
There are those who support intelligent design and creationism who say that evolutionists are against them.
Are they? Well it sure seems that way to a lot of people but there are a lot of scientists who are very religious people who believe in evolution. Deb reminded me today that our high school anthropology teacher was also a pastor and he taught evolution in class.

You are suggesting that proponents of intelligent design are trying to block the learning process by saying that the things that cannot be explained by evolution are explained by the existence of a higher being or some form of intelligence and that teaching this in schools would be harmful to science. I have understood that from the start. I simply do not believe that and for good reason. I don’t believe that because history says it will not happen. Religion will not stand in the way of science. Your own example of Lemaitre proves that and it is easily proven by looking at the cosmology theories of today. Just because a bunch of people revise an age old theory that an entity beyond our perception created the universe will never stop science from moving forward. Even if everyone on earth stood up and shouted that “intelligent design is correct and gives us our answers GOD DID IT ALL” science would not stop. People are to curious for that…we want to know how and why everything does everything. You can see the light from the sun…how? Why? You can feel the texture of a blade of grass…how? Why? How is grass green? Why are my eyes blue? How do you think science got to where it is today? It has continually advanced throughout history. Even in epochs when religion reigned supreme and ruled with an iron fist it still advanced. Until the sun expands and gobbles up the earth or until we destroy ourselves we will always want to know the finest details of how things came to be.

Yes I understand what you are saying and I understand your concerns but I am not sure you understand what I am saying. I am saying that religion will not stop science.

Hugs,
Eiregirl Arrow
_________________
All poems and stories posted by Eiregirl are Copyright 2005 - 2008 Aoibhegréine These literary works are my property under copyright. If you wish to use my work for any purpose please ASK FIRST.

Post Wed Dec 12, 2007 5:02 am 
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  Reply with quote  
Alice In Quantum Land



Joined: 04 Dec 2007
Posts: 77


Khaleesi, please don't be insulted, it's not my purpose.

But if you really do understand what I was trying to say... Please act like you do understand, use the proper vocabulary, don't mix completely different concepts like that... Because, it really produce the effect that you don't know what you are talking about... For example, when you say :

Why can't we teach them as THEORIES , because that's all they are !

With a big accent on the word "theory", as if we could teach anything as a valid theory (which is not the case). Really looks like you don't understand what the concept of a theory (scientific that is) is.

I really don't think you are stupid. I know... I'm a freak Twisted Evil , I can be very picky when it comes to words and concepts.

Post Thu Dec 13, 2007 4:16 am 
 View user's profile Send private message  Reply with quote  
Alice In Quantum Land



Joined: 04 Dec 2007
Posts: 77


And I want to add that I have no problem if you don't agree with me. I am a nobody and I don't claim that I have any kind of absolute truth.

But it's important that we all understand each others here.

See ya

Exclamation

Post Thu Dec 13, 2007 4:23 am 
 View user's profile Send private message  Reply with quote  
Eiregirl



Joined: 21 Jul 2005
Posts: 10230
Location: Chasing a pink bunny


Slips in...looks around Wink

Stop worrying about the word "theory" and get back to the discussion at hand...mumbles to self 'been talkin bout the word "theory" for 3 pages now'...I have lots more so lets get back to it. I don't want to end up talking to myself here ye know Shocked

And besides Alice I have some stuff that goes back to something you said...
"A civilization that teaches pseudo-science or faith based knowledge as science is bound to scientifically collapse as it happened in Islam in the 11th century. The islamo-arabic civilization was the center of the intellectual and scientific world until science has been corrupted by faith based ideas. I don't want to see this happening to our western culture."
Specifically dealing with Islam, science, and technology and how Islam did have an affect upon technological advancement in Islamic countries. But what kind of affect? Hmmm you better start digging because I dug deep Smile

Hugs,
Eiregirl Arrow
_________________
All poems and stories posted by Eiregirl are Copyright 2005 - 2008 Aoibhegréine These literary works are my property under copyright. If you wish to use my work for any purpose please ASK FIRST.

Post Thu Dec 13, 2007 4:33 am 
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  Reply with quote  
Alice In Quantum Land



Joined: 04 Dec 2007
Posts: 77


Ok, you're right Eiregirl Very Happy Don't hesitate to whip me when I diverge from the conversation Wink

Yes ok, so about Islam... Here is what I meant. While Europe were in the dark ages and after the Muslim conquests in the middle east, north Africa up to some regions of Europe. We entered an era called the "Golden age of Islamic science". From 800 to 1100 A.D. or something like that, the center of the world was Baghdad. From every part of the Muslim world, profiting from a common language, Arabic , philosophers, scholars, scientists, theologians and free-thinkers gather in this, now ruined, beautiful city to exchange ideas.

This was a very fertile period for science. They completely integrated the use of the zero in mathematics that the Indians developed earlier. Algebra (al-jabr), algorism, and a lot of mathematical prowess were developed in this period of time by these people.

Arabo-Muslims astronomers were outstanding, they developed beautiful instruments to look at the sky, the Persian Astrolabe for instance. The constellation names are Greek but the stars are Arabic. They named 1000's of them. Here is a short list, just to show you the immensity of their observations : http://www.voynich.nu/extra/donstars.html

Now, why don't we see any Arabs winning Nobel prizes in science today, a civilization that was so good, so brilliant... What happened ? Where is the Saudi-Arabian space program ?

Something happened. Around the years 1100 or 1200 a very influential philosopher showed up, Hamid al-Ghazali. This man wanted a more literal view of the Quran and he succeeded in doing this. Mathematics were now the work of the Devil and as an American astronomer, Neil D. Tyson, put it very well "Revelation replaced investigation". And their once, best in the world scientific culture collapsed.

Of course it's more complicated than just this... The Mongol's invasion of Baghdad etc... Didn't help either.

But history tells us that science can go away. As it did for Greece, as it did in Europe during the dark ages and as it finally did in Islam. So yes, science will continue to go on... But not necessarily in our western world. I doubt that it will go away but... who knows ?

Post Thu Dec 13, 2007 5:24 pm 
 View user's profile Send private message  Reply with quote  
Alice In Quantum Land



Joined: 04 Dec 2007
Posts: 77


Here is another example on how faith based beliefs attempted to slow down science once more:

According to Stephen Hawking, at a conference on cosmology in the Vatican, the Pope John Paul II said the following :

It is OK to study the universe after it began (talking about the big bang), but we should not inquire into the beginning it self, because that was the moment of creation and the work of God.

In other words, stop investigating... God did it.

And if Hawking had listened to the Pope, you would not have this cyclic universe model that you were talking about in the post on M-theory.

You can find him saying this here, at 2:00 minutes into the movie: http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=MzO5eSjgocA&feature=related

Post Fri Dec 14, 2007 4:23 am 
 View user's profile Send private message  Reply with quote  
cupcakes



Joined: 18 Sep 2005
Posts: 324
Location: NY


Shocked

FSM!

That's all I have to say... ::restrains self::

Post Fri Dec 14, 2007 1:45 pm 
 View user's profile Send private message  Reply with quote  
Hawaiian



Joined: 01 Dec 2005
Posts: 816
Location: Transplanted to Africa


LOL, cuppy....perfect!

~hugs cuppy while she restrains herself

Pastafarians unite! Laughing
_________________
'A'a i ka hula, e waiho i ka hilahila i ka hale.
Dare to dance, leave your shyness at home.

Post Fri Dec 14, 2007 2:09 pm 
 View user's profile Send private message  Reply with quote  
  Display posts from previous:      
Post new topic Reply to topic

Jump to:  
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Last Thread | Next Thread  >

Forum Rules:
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

 


Search For Posters!


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

In Association with Amazon.com
     
Terms & Conditions Privacy Statement Acknowledgements