Texas Public Schools Are Teaching Creationism • Hacker News Board

Re: Texas Public Schools Are Teaching Creationism

#121

Post by DanielStraight » Thu, Jan 16, 2014, 5:16 PM UTC

vezzy-fnord wrote: post #111

DanielStraight wrote: post #73

I really think both sides get this issue very wrong. Creationism is not valid science, obviously. But that's because it isn't science at all. It is a religious belief, which is by definition non-scientific. Here is where the science side gets things wrong. Creationism is a NON-scientific belief, not an ANTI-scientific belief. It's not anti-intellectual or stupid or backward either. It's a choice to believe in the sup…

No one is denying your right to believe in unfalsifiable and unjustified theology. Of course creationism itself isn't anti-scientific, but the majority of people who deeply believe it do have anti-scientific agendas. Is it stupid and backward? I'm not going to conclusively comment on this, but you seem to think that just because it's a choice, it has to be legitimate. No, it can be a wrong choice. Schools shouldn't t…

Obviously it can be wrong... but it isn't scientifically falsifiable. This is entire crux of what I'm trying to say. You can no more use science to disprove creationism than creationists can to prove it. It isn't a claim which is subject to scientific inquiry. Science has nothing to say on the subject of supernatural events with apparent natural causes. Science is a tool for providing natural, empirical explanations. Supernatural events are by definition invisible to science, because science chooses not to accept supernatural explanations. That's what makes it science.

You are free to criticize the legitimacy of religious beliefs, but science will not help you. Science cannot disprove what it does not accept or examine (namely, supernatural events). Science simply says that a natural explanation exists. Whether that explanation is "true", science cannot say. If gravity is really caused by an invisible flying spaghetti monster pulling everything with his noodly appendages, science will never see it. It cannot. Science refuses supernatural explanations.

I am not saying that popularity makes supernatural beliefs correct. I'm saying it makes them important. The concept that science is one way, but not the only way, people choose to understand the world is important. Whether science is "true", no one can say. Untestable, supernatural phenomena are just that: untestable. It could be that the flying spaghetti monster really controls everything in universe. All we can know is that if he/she/it does, he/she/it does it in such a way that natural explanations still work. There's no way to actually test the theory of a supernatural spaghetti monster. The distinction is subtle, but I think it's important.

Re: Texas Public Schools Are Teaching Creationism

#122

Post by fnordfnordfnord » Thu, Jan 16, 2014, 5:18 PM UTC

mschuster91 wrote: post #48

fennecfoxen wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmm. Among your premises, it seems you believe that a primary, desirable function of the education system is to limit the influence parents have on their children -- in essence, to protect children from their parents' parenting, including sociocultural influences like religion (and, by extension of that influence, also politics and philosophy). ... Permit me to express a measure of doubt on a variety of levels. The o…

Indeed, yes, you hit the nail. I see certain religious beliefs, including "creationism" and "vaccinophobia" as existential threats to a free and open society.

I am an Atheist, yet I retain skepticism of pharmaceutical industry products, including vaccines (not the science of vaccines, but rather the quality, safety, efficacy).

Re: Texas Public Schools Are Teaching Creationism

#123

Post by gress » Thu, Jan 16, 2014, 5:19 PM UTC

ideonexus wrote: post #55

mschuster91 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Allowing home schooling is even more sick than that kind of bullshit these Texans are doing. In public schools one at least knows what the teachers are teaching. Home-schooled kids are not protected from anything ranging from creationist crap to domestic violence (you as a teacher can spot if a pupil turns up beaten every other day). Not to mention the fact that home-schooled kids are far, far behind "ordinary school…

Common sense tells me home schooled students would do worse, but they in fact perform better on tests: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeschooling#Research I'm still anti-homeschooling, but I have to accept that these students do better... probably benefiting from having one-on-one personalized education from the parents while public school students are mostly lectured and ignored by teachers working with 30-plus stud…

Why on earth are you anti-homeschooling? It sounds as though you want kids to do worse?

Re: Texas Public Schools Are Teaching Creationism

#124

Post by poolpool » Thu, Jan 16, 2014, 5:20 PM UTC

cobrausn wrote: post #39

mschuster91 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Allowing home schooling is even more sick than that kind of bullshit these Texans are doing. In public schools one at least knows what the teachers are teaching. Home-schooled kids are not protected from anything ranging from creationist crap to domestic violence (you as a teacher can spot if a pupil turns up beaten every other day). Not to mention the fact that home-schooled kids are far, far behind "ordinary school…

So, I don't disagree entirely, but I did go to college with a home schooled guy who was one of the most pleasant, hardworking, and intelligent people I met. I have no idea if religious reasons were part of the reason he was home schooled, he didn't really talk about it, but these blanket labels aren't really helping - home schooling sometimes seems to turn out positive results. If one were to read your post cynically…

Yes and I'm sure there are super talented Full Sail grads who got fulfilling careers after they graduated, but it doesn't mean there is anything redeeming about that education process.

Re: Texas Public Schools Are Teaching Creationism

#125

Post by gress » Thu, Jan 16, 2014, 5:21 PM UTC

DanielStraight wrote: post #73

I really think both sides get this issue very wrong. Creationism is not valid science, obviously. But that's because it isn't science at all. It is a religious belief, which is by definition non-scientific. Here is where the science side gets things wrong. Creationism is a NON-scientific belief, not an ANTI-scientific belief. It's not anti-intellectual or stupid or backward either. It's a choice to believe in the sup…

Ray Kurzweil believes in bodily resurrection, as do the customers of Alcor.

Re: Texas Public Schools Are Teaching Creationism

#126

Post by michaeldhopkins » Thu, Jan 16, 2014, 5:27 PM UTC

DanBC wrote: post #91

michaeldhopkins wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is not true. Parents use quality textbooks and lesson plans. They also get together to pay specialists to teach difficult subjects one or more times per week. Also, by the time a homeschooled child is of the age that their subjects can only be taught by specialists, they either know how to teach themselves or take courses from local junior colleges or correspondence courses. There is no one proper pedagogy. Teac…

You point about abuse is incorrect. Abuse (physical, sexual, or emotional abuse, or neglect) is more likely to happen in the home, perpetrated by a family member. I'm not sure why it's a reason to avoid home schooling. Schools are not great at spotting and reporting abuse.

I think that you misunderstood me. The majority of child abuse happens at home (~72,000 parents vs. ~58,000 known non-family [0]), but it happens in broken homes, second marriages, etc. Most homeschooling parents are together and in their first marriage, so they, just going by the statistics, aren't likely to abuse their children.

For a source on the uneven distribution of abuse by family members, I would suggest to start with this HHS report: [1]

"Children living with their married biological parents universally had the lowest rate, whereas those living with a single parent who had a cohabiting partner in the household had the highest rate in all maltreatment categories. Compared to children living with married biological parents, those whose single parent had a live-in partner had more than 8 times the rate of maltreatment overall, over 10 times the rate of abuse, and nearly 8 times the rate of neglect."

[0] http://www.nationalchildrensalliance.org/NCANationalStatisti...

[1] http://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/opre/nis4_report_...

Re: Texas Public Schools Are Teaching Creationism

#127

Post by thirdtruck » Thu, Jan 16, 2014, 5:27 PM UTC

DanielStraight wrote: post #73

I really think both sides get this issue very wrong. Creationism is not valid science, obviously. But that's because it isn't science at all. It is a religious belief, which is by definition non-scientific. Here is where the science side gets things wrong. Creationism is a NON-scientific belief, not an ANTI-scientific belief. It's not anti-intellectual or stupid or backward either. It's a choice to believe in the sup…

I'm not clear on what is left to know that falls outside the reach of science.

We can trace the very sense of "I am me" to the brain, as seen when it and other anthropocentric systems fail, which leaves the idea of a "soul" in doubt.

We can ask "why" something exists instead of nothing, but advances in quantum physics suggests that "nothing" lacks a correlate at that level. If we want to ask "why" the quantum foam exists, in turn, the non-scientific inquirer must explain how this potential for infinite regress is anything more than a shortcoming of language.

If any "big" questions exist that physics or neuroscience can't explain, let us know. If not, the burden lies with the non-scientific explanations to offer more complete, repeatable, and actionable insights.

Re: Texas Public Schools Are Teaching Creationism

#128

Post by pdonis » Thu, Jan 16, 2014, 5:28 PM UTC

mikeash wrote: post #80

jtbigwoo wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> Evolution is a theory that is almost self-evident. I wish that were the case. To give one example, housecats are so vastly different than monkeys that initial observation wouldn't necessarily point toward a single primitive mammal ancestor. The theory of evolution gets so expansive when you consider billions of years that it's easier to believe in intelligent design. In a clever twist, many creationists have start…

There are really two completely different concepts contained within "evolution". First there is the concept of gradual change over time in a population of self-replicating entities subject to selective pressure and heritable variation. Second, there is the theory that all life on Earth descended from a single common ancestor that lived billions of years ago, and the current scale of biodiversity comes entirely from t…

The second is definitely not.

Actually, the single common ancestor part is now, since we have DNA evidence.

Re: Texas Public Schools Are Teaching Creationism

#129

Post by fnordfnordfnord » Thu, Jan 16, 2014, 5:29 PM UTC

mschuster91 wrote: post #52

freehunter wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every study I've seen contradicts this common sense argument. Combined with the fact that home schooled students still must take and pass state standardized tests means the students have to be at least meeting the minimum educational requirements. I have a family member in Texas with a home schooled child. They attend group teaching sessions, sit in on other classes, and use the many reference books that are provided…

Ah, so there indeed are required standards for home schooling? I did not know that. What are the consequences of not meeting these standards?

* No high school diploma for Junior.

* Inability of Junior to survive outdoors (or indoors) for any length of time without assistance?

Re: Texas Public Schools Are Teaching Creationism

#130

Post by gress » Thu, Jan 16, 2014, 5:30 PM UTC

poorelise wrote: post #36

vezzy-fnord wrote: post #7

Although this is a heinous butchery of education, it's been practiced for a long time and I do believe that all private schools (including charters, who have higher control of their curriculum despite receiving public funding) have the right to teach whatever inanity they decide. It's depressing that such a primal culture of anti-intellectualism and deceit like this is thriving in the Deep South, but given the deeply…

"I do believe that all private schools (...) have the right to teach whatever inanity they decide" In a way I agree, because it's kind of like free speech. On the other hand, shouldn't a society be responsible for protecting children? Schools teach children, after all. It's different from somebody voluntarily picking a topic to learn about. Seems to me children being taught Creationism might be seriously disadvantage…

I went to one of the top 5 private high schools in the country. Evolution was split out into a separate class, and alongside it, there was a creationism class. Parents could choose one or both classes.

I can guarantee you the kids who did the creationism only track were not 'disadvantaged' compared to 99% of kids in public school who were taught evolution.