This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Should Creationism be taught alongside Evolution in science class?

#41UnfairRepresent(Topic Creator)Posted 2/27/2013 2:27:50 PM
kozlo100 posted...
UnfairRepresent posted...
You're overthinking nothing.


I agree. I rather think I am giving the right amount of thought to everything, at least in regards to this particular point.


I could have just as easily said "about" before either Creationism or Evolution. I just didn't. People all over the world say "About" both creationism and Evolution millions of times every day.

There is nothing to look into,
---
^ Hey now that's completely unfair.
http://i.imgur.com/45yVrRr.jpg
#42kozlo100Posted 2/27/2013 2:30:29 PM
You're misunderstanding me, I wasn't referring to you specifically, I'm sure you didn't do it on purpose. I'm talking about the fact that the larger narrative on the issue always uses that language.
---
The problem, then, is that if subjective worlds are experienced too differently, there occurs a breakdown in communication. -- Philip K. Dick
#43UnfairRepresent(Topic Creator)Posted 2/27/2013 3:17:06 PM
kozlo100 posted...
You're misunderstanding me, I wasn't referring to you specifically, I'm sure you didn't do it on purpose. I'm talking about the fact that the larger narrative on the issue always uses that language.


But... it doesn't
---
^ Hey now that's completely unfair.
http://i.imgur.com/45yVrRr.jpg
#44kozlo100Posted 2/27/2013 3:26:25 PM
The trend is there, but I'm not going to go to the trouble of pointing it out to you. If you think I'm wrong about that, that's fine. I'm more interested in talking to people who have noticed it than I am in proving it's there.

If you're interested, you could post some evidence that it isn't there, and I'll have a look.
---
Time flies like the wind,
and fruit flies like a banana.
#45UnfairRepresent(Topic Creator)Posted 2/27/2013 3:40:22 PM
kozlo100 posted...
The trend is there, but I'm not going to go to the trouble of pointing it out to you. If you think I'm wrong about that, that's fine. I'm more interested in talking to people who have noticed it than I am in proving it's there.

If you're interested, you could post some evidence that it isn't there, and I'll have a look.


lol "This doesn't happen but I will only listen to those who pretend it does!"

It's like the Birthers all over again
---
^ Hey now that's completely unfair.
http://i.imgur.com/45yVrRr.jpg
#46Moorish_IdolPosted 2/27/2013 3:44:46 PM
There's a difference between learning how to be a Creationist, and learning about Creationism. Just like there is a difference between learning how to be a Doctor, and learning about Medicine.

That was Kozlo's point.
#47kozlo100Posted 2/27/2013 3:53:16 PM
Like I said, you want to show me I'm wrong, I'm all ears. It's just not important to me that you think I'm right.

In any case, I sort of can't decide if using that kind of language is an intentional attempt to steer the debate, a la what both sides do on immigration, or if it's simply indicative of the way creationists view the subject.
---
Time flies like the wind,
and fruit flies like a banana.
#48cyclonekrusePosted 2/27/2013 4:41:21 PM
kozlo100 posted...
Looking at different subjects, we teach math, history, economics, things like that. We teach about WWII, the scientific method, and the religious beliefs of 14th century French nobility.

Now, I know we all understand what each other means, but I do find it interesting that we ask if we should teach creationism, instead of asking if we should teach about creationism. There's some connotation there that I wonder if it was originally injected into the discussion on purpose.

Hmmm. That's interesting and I hadn't considered that. Teaching about X does have a different connotation in my head than simply teaching X does. I'm not sure where it is yet, but it rings differently to me.

But that might be (partially) due to the fact that they're juxtaposed so clearly here. I get the impression that the two are often interchangeable in everyday speech without confusion.

That said, there is definitely a difference between being taught about karate and being taught karate. The former seems more "academic" where the latter seems more "hands-on."
---
Locke: "Why do you find it so hard to believe?" || Jack "Why do you find it so easy?!" ||
Locke: "It's never been easy!"
#49kozlo100Posted 2/27/2013 4:54:15 PM
Sure, I don't think there really is any confusion caused by it. We do all understand each other here. It's that connotation that I think is interesting, though now that I think about it, I think it probably isn't an intentional thing. It feels like the language comes from the creationist side, but it seems to work against them.

My thinking is that teaching a thing has the connotation of it being valid and true, where as teaching about a thing has the connotation that we're simply acknowledging it exists and describing it. I don't think most folks have a problem doing the latter with creationism, but react fairly strongly against doing the former.
---
Time flies like the wind,
and fruit flies like a banana.
#50Moorish_IdolPosted 2/27/2013 5:10:38 PM
Yeah, I think the different connotations may result in different reactions (even if done so subconciously). I feel that people would have a more defensive immediate reaction to "learning Creationism" than they would to "learning about Creationism."