Bush re-ignites evolution debate

Discussion in 'Off Topic' started by ManagerJosh, Aug 5, 2005.

  1. Mirelly

    Mirelly Active Member

    My considered response to Zydeco's concern over my casual statement which asserted my view that intelligent design has a place in education as a means to explain the unexplainable.

    First off, it wasn't tongue in cheek. Spiritually I have not been rooted in soundly held faith in any sort of Biblical God since my childhood. At around that time my faithlessness drew accuastions of athiesm and I was forced to consider this, very much in isolation from any dispassionate guidance, from the standpoint of a defiant and recalcitrant child. It took 3 family funerals, half a dozen church weddings (anglican, roman, jewish and sikh) and goodly number of baptisms to bring me to a position whereby I was prepared (emotionally) to reconsider my position. I realised that I could not be an athiest because atheism, by definition, requires an act of faith at least as great as for any specific religion. The spiritual goodness that -- I imagine -- one is supposed to draw from from ones religion conitinued to elude me but I could not help but feel that there must be some knowledge concerning the way the universe works that is hidden from my perception. By definition, then, the only rational description that applies to me is that of agnostic. I am without direct knowledge. And yet for a species whose first significant mechanical invention was the wheel isn't it odd that we still haven't the remotest possibility of getting a firm grasp on the fundamental property of the shape of the thing ... piece of pi anyone?

    I can agree that everything has an explanation and also that any putative creator isn't "sloppy" but I go no further than that. I do not, for example, believe that all questions have answers because -- in the physical universe -- there must always be a point at which uncertainty precludes the absolute. As for the non-physical well ... I have no knowledge of that, do I?

    What is most worrying, as well as perplexing, to an outsider, is the confused political wrangling over the philosophical content of high-school syllabuses in a politally constituted state that was carefully circumscribed from the beginning to leave the preaching to the preachers in their pulpits. If religious issues become central to political debate no-one benefits ....
     
  2. Lynet

    Lynet New Member

    I have been following this thread with the greatest of interest, amazed at the calm discussion of religion and faith. People are generally quite emotional on the subject. Emotional, I mean, in the sense that they seem to panic, grow red in the face, sometimes getting quite angry and even irrational when you present an idea that is contrary to their own faith. When I say 'they' (always a dangerously vague word) I am actually referring to family members like my parents (who have passed away), my brother, certain coworkers. I decided some years ago that to discuss my own perspective was just not generally a good idea. I explained it once to my daughter over lunch (she was a college student at the time, studying ancient history). She put down her fork, looked at me calmly and stated, "That's depressing." I changed the subject and I'm going to change it just a little bit here, too.

    I decided to pick up and read the Da Vinci Code. I haven't finished it yet but from various other sources I pretty much know what the "big secret" is. What's curious is that the book is not really very good and a lot of it is very clearly silly, written to be an action/adventure movie and make the author a lot of money, and he's probably enjoying the publicity, good and bad. I've been disappointed with the book, and am sorta of surprised at the effort some religious organizations seem to be going to to "debunk" the book and Dan Brown in particular. Seems like a lot of wasted energy (and money.) I guess I'm curious, considering the discussion here of conspiracy theories, history and religion, if anyone else has read this book and what they think of it. (I do believe, by the way, that religion is very important, for many reasons. I sent my children to Catholic schools, got them through all the childhood rituals of baptism, first communion, confirmation, etc. and took them to church on Sunday.)
     
  3. surprised_by_witches

    surprised_by_witches Sleep deprived

    I too have heard the book isn't that good, which has kept me so far from reading it since I am a writer myself and have very little patience for bad writing.

    Dan Brown is probably loving all the controversy his book is stirring up. Everyone knows its name and (basically) what it's about. You cannot buy that kind of publicity, or rather you can but you'd have to put your house in hock first. :D

    All this is a tempest in a teapot. Ultimately, it doesn't bloody matter. The book, that is. Not this lovely debate with you wonderful people ...

    I attend a Unitarian church because I want my daughter to know what religion is and the good it does in people's lives. It's not for everyone, it's not for me, but it could be for her and who am I to deny her that comfort if she wants it. Personally, I think John Lennon had it right in the song Imagine. I've often thought the world would be a lot better off if we had "nothing to kill or die for, and no religion too ... "

    That may sound contradictory, but it's not. My head may occasionally wander into the clouds of idealism but my feet are firmly on the ground. I want to introduce my daughter to the world we actually live in, not the one I wish could be. Which is why I don't live on a commune somewhere and my name isn't Moonflower. Trust me, that has been tempting on occasion. I think the modern world is insane and most of the things we find important simply aren't. But most of us have to live in it, and I'd be doing my daughter no favors by cutting her off from it, as well-intentioned as such a move might be.

    Forgive me for waxing so philosophic. It's late and I'm a bit punchy. I've had a hell of a weekend and it's not even over ...

    I say "goddess bless" because I don't really subscribe to a God but truth be told I think the almighty is nongendered ... but "It" sounds disrespectful and that's something I don't wish to be.

    So, goddess bless.
     
  4. zydeco

    zydeco New Member

    I, too, have enjoyed this thread. Discussions on forums seem to be intolerant on both sides. Its “cool” to be an atheist on most boards and those that believe otherwise are denigrated. The “pro god” side starts quoting scripture. I’ve always enjoyed calm discussions on this subject. I find them interesting. No one should have to be right and the other wrong. I’ve never been one to sit back and just study this subject, though. I’ve jumped in and lived it. I think it gives me a different perspective than most people. Shoot…I actually talk to the Jehovah’s Witnesses at my door and invite the Mormon missionaries in to chat!

    So…in case no one has ever met one…I was raised as a charismatic Pentecostal as a young child…a holy roller. From about 8 until I went to college, I was a southern Baptist…an evangelical Christian. I went to church with everyone, though. I’ve been to a lot of mainstream, as well as, unique sects of faith and have attended everything from snake handler to synagogue. During college I was a practicing Wiccan and even rode around with a group of hippies who were followers of the Bahai faith. I became an Episcopalian when I married one and later converted to Catholicism so my children could go to the parochial school. I raised my children Catholic but sent them to other churches with family members and neighbors so they had a broader perspective. I wanted my children to question and not accept any doctrine blindly. Faith doesn’t require membership or adherence to the rules of an institution. A church should be a community. I move on when a church becomes punitive rather than a place of joy. The most interesting thing I’ve discovered is that each group has something uniquely beautiful and something equally ugly.

    I read both of Dan Brown’s books, The Da Vinci Code and Angels & Demons. I enjoyed them. I’m stunned at how seriously people have taken them though. They are simply novels. They were meant to be nothing more than an evening’s entertainment. The author has always had an interest in codes. (His other books are techno thrillers about code breaking and government conspiracies.) His dad was a big deal mathematician and his mom played sacred music professionally. I think his wife is an art historian. It appears he took his interests and those around him and wrote a novel about a professor of iconography and religious art who uncovers a mystery involving the Catholic Church. I’m certainly not surprised those at the higher levels of the Vatican banned it though. Of course, by doing so, they made Mr. Brown a very wealthy man. ;)
     
  5. Lynet

    Lynet New Member

    In college my daughter studied ancient history (Greek, Roman, Egyptian) and ancient languages. I was fascinated by the subject for a while and read a number of books on my own. (My favorite people were the Sumerians.) I asked her once, how long the Golden Age of Greece lasted. The answer? 30 years. That's all.

    What I learned from my reading is that the history of mankind is a history of conflict. There have always been wars. Always. There was a time when archeologists thought the Mayans were peaceful. Not so, as it turns out. The hunter gatherers on Easter Island just about destroyed themselves, long before Europeans showed up. People have been fighting over the fertile crescent (Iraq, Israel, Egypt) for thousands of years.

    I can't bring myself to blame religion. People will always need to believe in an afterlife of some kind or another (they always have, since ancient times) and to hold this belief responsible for war and conflict implies there is no solution to the problem.

    So what do the animals fight over? Territory, food, mates, and (read Jane Goodall and other studies of the Chimps) politics. Maybe we should stop talking about the 'harmony' of nature (wild animals don't die easy, holding hands with loved ones) and pay closer attention to the conflicts in nature and why they occur. We are animals, after all. And this is where I jump back onto the topic and explain why I get upset with those who want to take creationism out of church and present it as an 'opposing' view in science class. Asking questions is what science does. Religion discourages questions. And we really, seriously need to keep asking questions if we ever hope to solve our problems, the biggest one being our inability to live in peace with each other.

    All those who read this long-winded essay through to the end raise your hands. **no hands**all chairs empty**

    By the way, anyone read The Name of the Rose by Umberto Eco. Loved that book.
     
  6. Mirelly

    Mirelly Active Member

    Perhaps, Lyn ... but perhaps that view is looking at the effect rather than the cause. Conflict arises from environmental pressure without which all life is content with its status quo. As sentient creatures it is our bane that our environment is not limited to our perceivable domains but includes the infinite realms of the past and the future -- especially our not unreasonable preoccupation with our own selfish desire to hang on to our own consciousness as along as possible. Most human problems stem from the unpleasant fact that the window of opportunity is too obviously limited: to our sentience driven anticipation of our own mortality.

    Still in doubt? If we were immortal and we knew it for a fact, how many would choose to live in eternal poverty forever without consciously choosing to improve their condition? The irony, of course, is that even immortals would be driven by inconceivable elements of their own peculiar environment and would become embroiled in eternal bloody conflict. The ancient Greeks seemed to have that idea pretty well nailed down ... none of their Olympian deities were especially happy immortals ... ;)
     
  7. Kristalrose

    Kristalrose Wakey-Wakey!

    I have a similar perspective on all of this. I too was raised in church. My Grandparents are "Hell-Fire and Brimstone" Baptists. If you do not believe the way they believe, then you are a sinner and you are going to hell. Period. End of discussion. There is no other way to worship but the Baptist way. Notice I didn't say "Christian" or "Protestant." I said "Baptist." Once my mother told my Grandmother that she had started attending a nice Methodist church, and my Grandmother freaked out and started yelling, "Don't let them sprinkle Claudie! (my youngest sister, who was about 5 at the time.)" She was convinced that if a Methodist minister sprinkled my little sister, she would be condemed to eternal damnation. The woman sends my children and myself religious tracks with every birthday and holiday card. My mother just doesn't understand why I take such offense at this!! In trying to save us, I believe that my Grandmother did more to turn me against organized religion than she will ever know. Because the very Bible that she bought me as a child talks about loving thy neighbor as yourself and turning the other cheek and judge not, less ye be judged. And yet, she does not follow her own Biblical Teachings. She judges me and my children and other religions. She does not love her neighbors, because they go to the Methodist Church or the Catholic Church or (gasp) don't go to church. She gets on her knees at night and prays for all her children and grandchildren and great-grandchildren to attend a nice Baptist Church somewhere and recieve the gospel and "walk with the Lord" so that she can have us all together in Heaven. She refuses to see that there are other philosophies, other ways to worship God, other names for God, whatever. She is a narrow-minded right-wing fanatic. She loves Billy Graham and George Bush.

    These are the people who are leading our country, boys and girls. They are in control. There are thousands of people out there just like my Grandma, and they vote, and they are retired and have nothing else to do but write letters and meet in Baptist Conventions and Retreats and organize themselves into groups like the "Moral Majority". They send money to Bush and Rush Limbaugh and Pat Robertson (shiver). Bush is running the country for them. Not for the real majority of Americans, who do not want Fundamentalism taught in Public Schools, who do not want war in Iraq without just cause, who do not believe that being born-again and Baptized in the name of the Father is the ONLY way to worship God, and therefore the only way to live.

    The Bible and the Christian faith is wonderful for teaching morals and values. I personally have no problem with the ten comandments being posted in a county courthouse, because our modern day laws were based on them. Nor do I have a problem with the words "One Nation Under God" in the Pledge of Alegance, because of the history of it. I just don't believe in shoving them down someone's throat and telling them to believe that way "or else." And that's why my Grandmother includes religious tracts in my kid's birthday cards. :rolleyes:

    (sorry for the mispellings. I stayed up Simming until almost 2 am and haven't woken up yet.)
     
  8. Lynet

    Lynet New Member

    I'm trying to keep up. Forgive me if I misunderstand (my education is accounting, unfortunately, and not philosophy, literature or anything particularly thoughtful. Numbers are wonderfully simple creatures.)

    To expand on my thoughts a little, I am fascinated by the behavior of animals, but I do NOT anthropomorphize. On the contrary, I'm inclined to believe that a great deal more of human behaviour arises from the animal in us then we are willing to accept.

    Environmental pressure? Absolutely. Some animals and birds are gregarious--they flock--safety in numbers and all of that. Others are extremely territorial and will fight off interlopers--these animals tend to be the predators. Some predators are loners, like cats, and some run in packs, like wolves. Humans seem to fall into the category of predators who run in packs. We're tribal and territorial, and it's so deeply ingrained that we never, ever question our motives when we form closed groups that restrict membership, whether it be a church, a club, or a country. Heaping on explanations of politics, culture, history, or whatever, doesn't matter. The explanations vary around the world and change over time. The behavior does not.

    Mortal or immortal, belief in an afterlife or not, we want food and safety for our young and if it runs short in the immediate area then that is big time 'environmental pressure' to improve our lot where we sit, or if the land won't tolerate any more crops, to migrate. That's fine if the land we want is free of competitive human life, but not so if it's occupied. Then you get invasion and war. Of couse, now that humans have migrated to just about every inhabitable place on the planet, there is nowhere left to go.

    Should we kneel and pray and except the inevitable and continuing conflict as God's will? Armageddon? Christ will come again soon?

    Should we let science continue to pursue the reasons and solutions for famine, drought, polution, disease, climate change, and of course, the apparently inescapable and resultant human conflict? Maybe the answer is in our evolution.

    Bush and his ilk are content with the human conflict as is and want the rest of us to stop asking questions. Just kneel and pray for victory.

    Maybe we can't and won't stop these horrors. Maybe giant and very well fed cockroaches will inherit the earth and crawl over human remains for the next millenium. But I think we should make an effort.

    Man, I've really got to stop this and just go and play in the simple Sims universe. :eek:
     
  9. Lynet

    Lynet New Member

    I can't believe I posted all that stuff. Looks real stupid now. I wrote it all after midnight and thought it sounded very clever :rolleyes: . I'm going to take my buggy little face away and play Sims. I will not comment anymore on this subject. No siree. Never again (unless, of course, I have three glasses of wine with dinner, which is very rare :p.)

    Bye
     
  10. Mirelly

    Mirelly Active Member

    Oh Lynet. You just made me laugh. In vino veritas eh? I though it was pretty clever so don't beat yourself up over it. It was heartfelt is all. One thing seems clear. You and I are not on fundamentally different philosophical planes so I guess we agree with each other that religion plus government is a bad move in the wrong direction.
     
  11. Lynet

    Lynet New Member

    :D Too true. And thank you.
     
  12. surprised_by_witches

    surprised_by_witches Sleep deprived

    Actually, I was with you on the animal front and I'm not drunk. ;)

    We are animals, and our behavior is largely determined by our animal side, and understanding that helps in understanding why we act the way we do. We have more developed brains than some animals, but I'm convinced there are animals that are wiser than we are. Elephants for example would never harm their own young ...

    Sometimes all an overdeveloped brain brings you is confusion.

    Of course, elephants don't get to play Sims 2. :)
     
  13. Kristalrose

    Kristalrose Wakey-Wakey!

    You know, my husband points at certain breeds of dogs and says that because of their breeding and the shapes of their head, they are "brain damaged" (in a sense) and more prone to agressive behavior. Maybe that's what's wrong with all of us. Our minds became overdeveloped, our skulls did not make sufficient room (Or else we'd look like some aliens on Star Trek with those comically-huge heads!). :D :p

    Lynet, you keep right on posting! I was following you on the animal-theory too. And besides, anything you post sounds a whole lot cleverer than anything I post! :rolleyes: ;)
     
  14. Lynet

    Lynet New Member

    Ah, well, if only I had the wits to properly defend my convictions. They ARE defensible, just not by me :rolleyes: .

    From one animal to another, though, I must confess that I wasn't exactly drunk :p. 1 glass = contentment, 2 = giggles, 3 = verbosity, 4 = sleep. Don't seem to have the constitution to actually get drunk. I fall asleep first. :knockedout:

    Lunch break over -- back to work!
     
  15. zydeco

    zydeco New Member

    They are doing major road construction at my home and have chosen my front pasture as the place to park the heavy equipment. They manage to knock out my phones, cable, and internet on a regular basis. Mine was out all weekend. We've gotten to know our phone repair guy on a first name basis. I believe this was visit number 8. :( He showed up late Saturday and I had limited access on hubby's laptop with dialup. (I was lucky I got to read the forums..my hubby is a stingy man when it comes to sharing his computer. :mad:) I felt bad I couldn't post something after Lynet. I thought it an interesting topic, too.

    Good to know I'm not the only cheap date around here. I'm afraid I hit giggles at glass one. Glass three can make dancing on the bar or singing in public sound fun. (Since I can't do either...this would not be pretty.) Perhaps a girls night out? Apparently at glass two most of us would be amazingly profound.

    I've been meaning to ask...what do you write SBW? Is this what you do for a living or just working in that direction? (If this has been discussed..point me to the thread.)
     
  16. Sylla

    Sylla New Member

    OK, confession, being Australian, and it just about being part of our culture, I imbibe way too much, could drink you ladies under the table, do shots with the younger ones and still keep going till dawn :eek:.
    Don't get me wrong, this is not a regular practice, but once in a while, myself and the girls will go out and have ourselves some fun, very few ppl in my corner of the world are any different, I think it's a part of our lifestyle (maybe Aussies have a different 'brain shape' which makes us more tolerant to alcohol?).
    Which in a round about kind of way, brings me back to our political/religious debate, I would not condemn a person because they choose not to drink, they can have that opinion that drinking is wrong and they wish to not partake, I'm not about to think less of that person because of it, same as religion, believe what makes you feel good about life, you choose your own path, but nor do I what that view rammed down my throat at every opportunity they get, I will listen once, nod politely, consider what they have said, and then go on with my own thing. Fortunately as an adult, I can do this, what choice do children have sitting in a classroom? They will have to listen to the view point that some have not been brought up to believe, at least when I was in school, we could get exempt from religious studies and do something else while that class was in session.
    We are animals, intelligent animals yes..... We all play an integral part in society, I mean, the non-drinker is great for a safe lift home :p .
     
  17. Lynet

    Lynet New Member

    I have been moved to get up and run down to the basement where all the books are shelved and look at the titles. I found Shadows of Forgotten Ancestors (Sagan), Planetary Interiors (Hubbard), Ancient Iraq (Roux), The Sumerians (Kramer), Mesopotamia (Bottero) and lots more. These survived the move to this house two years ago. Quite a few books didn't make it. My husband (who organized and shelved the books) doesn't understand my need to collect so many. (He reads alot but it's technical tax and accounting stuff.)

    I haven't looked at these in years. I'm so excited. :D I'm going to read them again. All this discussion has inspired me to revisit these very dusty friends.

    Remember word problems in math class? To solve a problem you have to state it correctly. Ask the right questions. That's what science is, for pete's sake, a problem solving method, especially for complex situations. It's not religion, nor a substitute for faith. And it doesn't stand still. The theory of evolution is evolving :p, and that's a good thing (people who don't understand science think that the changing, evolving theories = mistakes, errors, failures. But it's just the way science works.) Bush is playing politics. And aging baby boomers in a culture that worships youth are frightened by old age. Goodness, it's scaring me :eek: .

    Now I gotta go and explain a Sims game problem in the troubleshooting forum :( .
     
  18. Mirelly

    Mirelly Active Member

    Steady on girl! You're breakin' trail for me and Zydeco! We'll be stuffed if you go tharn on us, now! :p
     
  19. suitemichelle

    suitemichelle Gramma's here!

    I know this will probably make me vastly unpopular with the rest of you, but I am one of those that believes in "intelligent design". When I was in high school, evolution was being still taught as a theory not fact. However the implication was if you didn't accept it, you were kind of stupid. So I never really studied it out.

    However one big problem I have with evolution is timing. I mean you take man for example, not only did the transition have to happen once, but twice (male and female) and in the same location otherwise they never get together.

    A simplistic argument is: How many hummingbirds had to die, before they got it right?
     
  20. Lynet

    Lynet New Member

    I figured it was safe to talk about aging boomers here since I'm a few years older than most of you. ;) I'm not coloring my hair or getting a face lift, but I admit I think about it now and then. *sigh* Actually, it's what I'm sitting on that's in serious need of a lift. Excercise would take care of that.

    Michelle, don't stop questioning evolution. It's STILL theory. Certainly, a preponderance of the evidence supports the idea of change over long periods of time, but there are a whole lot of curious things that remain unexplained, like the orchid that attracts a certain kind of bee in order to reproduce. How did it get to that point? Did the bee and the orchid evolve at the same time? Gives me chills just thinking about it. My mother, a poet at heart, got very upset at talk about evolution. My father, the ever practical electrical engineer (and the only guy in his college class at Drexel who understood Einstein's theory of relativity, according to my mother :rolleyes: ) simply concluded that God created evolution. They were both very active in their church.

    It's wrong for teachers to suggest in any way that a student is stupid for any reason. Sounds like the teacher was the stupid one, shutting you out. But I still believe that "intelligent design" and "creationism" should not be taught in science class, because they are religious concepts, not science.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice