aC. Sidebar
I really don't know why people get into a fuss about between the theories of creationism, intelligent design, and evolution, except for the religious and scientific community. I do know that all of their arguments invest a lot of antagonists and protagonists. Now the issue is that Bush would like to introduce Intelligent Design into the curriculum of grade school.
There's a lot of criticisms and educational value to Intelligent Design. I do not know a lot about Intelligent Design. From my research, Intelligent Design's main argument is to discredit how traditional fact finding science is flawed to find solutions, answers, and theories on certain research, theories, and problems. A couple of these problems are from the big-bang theory and the creation of man, or the chicken or the egg dilemma.
As a person who hates fundamentalism and how people really go beyond criticism and straight to fanaticism, I do not endorse Intelligent Design. All I'm saying is that ID should be closely looked at and considered. You may say why?
According to dictionary.com, science is defined as:
1) The observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena.
2) Methodological activity, discipline, or study.
3) An activity that appears to require study and method
4) Knowledge, especially which gained through experience.
In theory, ID is a theory. Intelligent Design is a theoretical explanation of phenomena, so that could explain man and hopefully about women as well, but never-the-less ID is an explanation. Specifically, look how the definition of science as a correct observation or a precise, accurate methodological activity.
This is where I think people get all ruffled up. As much as I love precision, correct and accurate information, room for error will always occur. Look at the last space shuttle launch. Look at the Titanic. Look at space, we're finding more "planets" and galaxies that we originally thought there were. My point is that science is not suppose to be precise, because if everything in this world is precise, then why study it? We don't live in Utopia and man is certainly not perfect and known to err. Just ask any women about her spouse.
So we are not perfect, and that means that we have to strive towards precision and perfection. That is why we study. I mind, it is for this precision and perfection of information, from the lost city of Atlantic, to the ancient civilizations of Mesopotamia, Olmec, Mayan, and ancient civilizations along the Fertile Crescent, Indus, Nile, and Amazon River valleys. We study these examples because they spark our interests, but also there isn't perfect information. Relics only tell specific stories and answer few questions. Generations of stories of oral traditions are faded and blended with lies, fantasy, fiction, and hyperbole.
I could say something about the Bible right now, but that's another blog. Mr. McCollough was my favorite teacher of all time. He said that history is a pack of tricks played upon the dead. We can't rely on textbooks just to tell us the truth and facts about the past. The best research is primary source information, but what if this information has been dead for thousands of years? Well, then that is why we research. That is why we have science to initiate the solution or explanation of phenomena.
We should teach ID, not because people we say that we shouldn't, but because students need to research and have resources, theories, and information available to them as possible to better find answers for themselves. Yes, I'm talking about self-actualization and truth. Not for the censorship of free ideas, thoughts, and explanation for precision and search for precision. If we can have the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, then we should be able to pursuit what we want for what we want for the name of science. I really don't think people realized that, but now do you and our President may have realized?
I really don't know why people get into a fuss about between the theories of creationism, intelligent design, and evolution, except for the religious and scientific community. I do know that all of their arguments invest a lot of antagonists and protagonists. Now the issue is that Bush would like to introduce Intelligent Design into the curriculum of grade school.
There's a lot of criticisms and educational value to Intelligent Design. I do not know a lot about Intelligent Design. From my research, Intelligent Design's main argument is to discredit how traditional fact finding science is flawed to find solutions, answers, and theories on certain research, theories, and problems. A couple of these problems are from the big-bang theory and the creation of man, or the chicken or the egg dilemma.
As a person who hates fundamentalism and how people really go beyond criticism and straight to fanaticism, I do not endorse Intelligent Design. All I'm saying is that ID should be closely looked at and considered. You may say why?
According to dictionary.com, science is defined as:
1) The observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena.
2) Methodological activity, discipline, or study.
3) An activity that appears to require study and method
4) Knowledge, especially which gained through experience.
In theory, ID is a theory. Intelligent Design is a theoretical explanation of phenomena, so that could explain man and hopefully about women as well, but never-the-less ID is an explanation. Specifically, look how the definition of science as a correct observation or a precise, accurate methodological activity.
This is where I think people get all ruffled up. As much as I love precision, correct and accurate information, room for error will always occur. Look at the last space shuttle launch. Look at the Titanic. Look at space, we're finding more "planets" and galaxies that we originally thought there were. My point is that science is not suppose to be precise, because if everything in this world is precise, then why study it? We don't live in Utopia and man is certainly not perfect and known to err. Just ask any women about her spouse.
So we are not perfect, and that means that we have to strive towards precision and perfection. That is why we study. I mind, it is for this precision and perfection of information, from the lost city of Atlantic, to the ancient civilizations of Mesopotamia, Olmec, Mayan, and ancient civilizations along the Fertile Crescent, Indus, Nile, and Amazon River valleys. We study these examples because they spark our interests, but also there isn't perfect information. Relics only tell specific stories and answer few questions. Generations of stories of oral traditions are faded and blended with lies, fantasy, fiction, and hyperbole.
I could say something about the Bible right now, but that's another blog. Mr. McCollough was my favorite teacher of all time. He said that history is a pack of tricks played upon the dead. We can't rely on textbooks just to tell us the truth and facts about the past. The best research is primary source information, but what if this information has been dead for thousands of years? Well, then that is why we research. That is why we have science to initiate the solution or explanation of phenomena.
We should teach ID, not because people we say that we shouldn't, but because students need to research and have resources, theories, and information available to them as possible to better find answers for themselves. Yes, I'm talking about self-actualization and truth. Not for the censorship of free ideas, thoughts, and explanation for precision and search for precision. If we can have the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, then we should be able to pursuit what we want for what we want for the name of science. I really don't think people realized that, but now do you and our President may have realized?
No comments:
Post a Comment