TimeForGuinness wrote:...and I disagree with Popeye, most high school kids can handle philosophy if they can handle the bible.
I encourage you to hang out with a group of average high school kids for a while, and see if you come away with the same conclusion.
...Then why do they want to debate evolution vs. the bible...according to this thread, most students want to do that...not the religious right pushing their agenda.
...plus I think you are selling high schoolers short. They could have an honors class where they could discuss philosophy and religion (all religions not just christianity)...and I would be all for that.
I don't think I am. I remember my freshman year of college with a dorm room full of former honor students discussing philosophy and religion. Ugh. I certainly wouldn't deem it very intelligent discussion, even though the room was full of intelligent people.
who said anything about intelligence...i was talking about discussing the bible
(joeybomb)
seriously though, with educators teaching to a standardized test so that their school can keep their funding in this day an age...a little philosophy could go a long way.
btw...my philosophy & ethics teachers in college were great
TimeForGuinness wrote:
btw...my philosophy & ethics teachers in college were great
Oh, the professors were fine. I was talking about the amateurs that seemed to gather in my dorm room, because my stupid roommate loved to discuss philosophy with the Bible-beaters down the hall. I'd usually try to JoeyBomb their discussions by asking about the morality of various sexual positions, and hoped they would leave so I could go to sleep.
ghostrunner wrote:I don't know. I've never had a class of any sort where philosophical discussions didn't come up. That's a good thing and part of learning. People are too hard core about this, IMO. I'm not saying teach both, but I'd be all for having the discussion and letting the science win.
I hate how the hard-core religous right candidates still believe and push creationism. It's highly likely if not down right proven that evolution occured and babbling on about how the world may only be 6000 years old just makes them look stupid. Even really smart guys come off looking ridiculously dumb and uninformed... That said, I'm all for debating it because, well, the debate won't last long and it will go something like this:
Person A: Well, the Bible says God created Adam and Eve and they were the first people on Earth and then it said he created all these other animals. So, that's how it happened.
Person B: Science has proven evolution occured. The Bible also said people lived in whales stomachs and this that and the other. It's not all factual. I win.
You need this easy-to-understand guide.
Than make that, or something like that the class. 1/3 of the class is reading/discussing the darwinism argument, 1/3 is reading/discussing the anti-darwinisnm argument like you show, the last 1/3 is debating the two.
Regarding your stance on high school kids, I couldn't disagree more. I would argue, and vehemently do so, that I was more mature in high school than I am now. And, further, the sky should be the limit for high schoolers. Saying they can't handle an intelligent conversation is really silly, imo. Not every subject involving maturity and intlelligence should be left out of high school.
Last edited by AWvsCBsteeeerike3 on September 9 08, 10:16 am, edited 1 time in total.
TimeForGuinness wrote:...and I disagree with Popeye, most high school kids can handle philosophy if they can handle the bible.
btw...my philosophy & ethics teachers in college were great
Ethics? Is that taught anymore? At least in the business political worlds, ethics has been replaced by a course called CYA.
lol...Yes, it was still taught. Granted, I was at St. Louis University and it was a requirement to have two philosophy classes for engineers. I don't know if it was/is required at public or state colleges.
07come11 wrote:Whether you agree with Mccain's position on the war or not doesn't matter. The POW thing is mentioned because it shaped him and because it puts him in the light of having formed his decision while being sympathetic to the tragedies of war. This isn't some favored son who's never faced horror and atrocity. Whether you agree with him or not, you do have to acknowledge that he has an understanding of the horror of war. That's why it is constantly highlighted.
Absolutely. But he also was right behind Bush in the run-up to the war in Iraq. That's the part that matters to me. I'm sure everyone in Iraq today has an understanding of the horror of war. It doesn't mean that they would have good judgment in making decisions about whether or not to lead us into another one.
So was Hilary Clinton, Joe Biden and most of Congress....
TimeForGuinness wrote:What good is the point of bringing up a theory that can't be proven in a science class for debate? Debating an opinion of faith or morals isn't science...well it's the science of philosophy...and I disagree with Popeye, most high school kids can handle philosophy if they can handle the bible.
Plus a little philosophy would probably go a long way in school...it teaches them to think, not just memorize.
Funding is another issue...
It's really not the funding that would be a problem, but the time. They increased the number of credits you have to have to graduate, there is very little wiggle room for any classes outside of the set standards. Also, IMO religious issues shouldn't be taught or discussed in the public school system, private schools can do whatever they want, but not public.
If you guys really want to debate these issues, why don't you take the view point that you oppose and debate the other way.
TimeForGuinness wrote:What good is the point of bringing up a theory that can't be proven in a science class for debate? Debating an opinion of faith or morals isn't science...well it's the science of philosophy...and I disagree with Popeye, most high school kids can handle philosophy if they can handle the bible.
Plus a little philosophy would probably go a long way in school...it teaches them to think, not just memorize.
Funding is another issue...
It's really not the funding that would be a problem, but the time. They increased the number of credits you have to have to graduate, there is very little wiggle room for any classes outside of the set standards. Also, IMO religious issues shouldn't be taught or discussed in the public school system, private schools can do whatever they want, but not public.
If you guys really want to debate these issues, why don't you take the view point that you oppose and debate the other way.
How can private schools find time to meet the requirements but not the public schools?
07come11 wrote:Whether you agree with Mccain's position on the war or not doesn't matter. The POW thing is mentioned because it shaped him and because it puts him in the light of having formed his decision while being sympathetic to the tragedies of war. This isn't some favored son who's never faced horror and atrocity. Whether you agree with him or not, you do have to acknowledge that he has an understanding of the horror of war. That's why it is constantly highlighted.
Absolutely. But he also was right behind Bush in the run-up to the war in Iraq. That's the part that matters to me. I'm sure everyone in Iraq today has an understanding of the horror of war. It doesn't mean that they would have good judgment in making decisions about whether or not to lead us into another one.
So was Hilary Clinton, Joe Biden and most of Congress....
But they have also admitted (to an extent at least) that they were wrong. McCain believes in this war as passionately as Sarah Palin believes God blinked and made a tree.
