'teach evolution instead of creationism'
[ support:54% : certainty:51 ] · [31 replies] ·
[0 comment]
-
support 100% · Creationism is not science...moderated to 100%; argued down by 0%
by seraphblade on 2005-09-29 20:35:21...and while that does not mean that it is wrong, it does mean that it is not a scientific theory, following the scientific method, and therefore does not belong in a science class, any more than a poetry reading does. The objective of a science class is to teach students how to utilize the scientific method to formulate and test theories utilizing the scientific method. Bringing in a religious view which does none of these things does not further that aim.
If one wants to teach comparative religion in the context of a social studies, sociology, or history class, it may be appropriate, as religion and religious beliefs do figure heavily into many historical and sociological phenomena. But it is not science.
summary
title: 'Creationism is not science...'
text: '...and while that does not mean that it is wrong, it does mean that it is not a scientific theory, following the scientific method, and therefore does not belong in a science class, any more than a poetry reading does. The objective of a science class is to teach students how to utilize the scientific method to formulate and test theories utilizing the scientific method. Bringing in a religious view which does none of these things does not further that aim.
If one wants to teach comparative religion in the context of a social studies, sociology, or history class, it may be appropriate, as religion and religious beliefs do figure heavily into many historical and sociological phenomena. But it is not science.'
tags:
date: 2005-09-29 20:35:21
submitter: seraphblade
effective: 1
support: 0
oppose: 0
stancePos: 3
stanceNeg: 0
stanceEffective:
repliesSupport: 0
repliesOppose: 1
repliesTotal: 4
comments: 0
Powered by Debatepoint.
All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License.