Korean Job Discussion Forums :: View topic - A ruling on Evolution vs. Creationism

Speak Korean Now!

Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!

Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"

FAQ

Memberlist

Usergroups

Profile

A ruling on Evolution vs. Creationism
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4

Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum

View previous topic :: View next topic

Did the Judge make the right decision?

Yes, and it's about time. Can I get a hallelujah?

95%

[ 22 ]

No, he's going to burn in hell for all eternity.

[ 1 ]

Total Votes : 23

Author

Message

Yu_Bum_suk

Joined: 25 Dec 2004

Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2005 9:57 pm Post subject:

tomato wrote:

Hello, Yu_Bum-suk!

I used to wonder the same thing.
But then I recently read The Geography of Thought by Richard Nisbett.
The book gives two interesting points which would shed light on your question:

Southeast Asian people are not as quick to see contradictions as we are.

Consequently, many Southeast Asian people embrace Christianity without renouncing Buddhism.
In like manner, a Southeast Asian might be less quick to see Evolution and Creationism as contradictory.

Southeast Asian do not put as much emphasis on classifying as we do.

Evolution and Creationism agree on one basic premise: either we are animals or we aren't. Korean people don't know whether they are animals or not, and they don't care.

Interesting and useful points, but aren't we in Northeast Asia?

tomato

Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: I get so little foreign language experience, I must be in Koreatown, Los Angeles.

Posted: Mon Dec 26, 2005 4:31 am Post subject:

Hello, Flakfizer!

Yes, I realize that there are and have been polygamous cultures.
And I realize that it is considered cool to be promiscuous--or at least pretend to be.
But I still say that we come closer to monogamy than many other species, and I still say that we got that way with no help from religion.

Quote:

So, we do not need to be taught anything about good and bad or how to behave? We only need to follow our instincts.

I'm sorry if I left room for such a misunderstanding.
Yes, we need to be taught how to behave, but no, we don't need religion to be taught how to behave. Careful raising of the young is a trait which we share with most of our other compatriots in the Animal Kingdom.

If you are challenging me to designate exactly what traits are nature and what traits are nurture, I pass. Scientists seem to still be working on that.

Quote:

Why all the laws and penal codes? Shouldn't people just naturally do what it "good"?

Quote:

I agree that people monitor their action out of fear of human punishment, but I don't think it is the same as what you are talking about.

Quote:

. . . If there is no God, humans are mere animals, perhaps the most highly evolved on Earth at the moment, but merely animals all the same. . .

I agree.
My stand is not that we are descended from monkeys, it's worse than that: we still are monkeys. Science supports this, too. According to DNA analysis, we are the closest relatives of the chimpanzees.

The next time you see a chimpanzee, give him my regards.

Quote:

Among animals, would having multiple sex partners qualify as monogamous?

No, did I say they are?
I didn't say all animal species are monogamous, I said some.

Quote:

You wrote, "our instincts were firmly established millions of years before Moses..."
Which instincts are you talking about?

Commandments five through eight, for starters:

FIFTH COMMANDMENT: Honor they father and mother.

Filial loyalty is nothing new. We share that trait with all our animalian compatriots.

SIXTH COMMANDMENT: Thou shalt not kill.

This is one commandment which most other animal species follow better than we do. Among most species, it is very rare for an animal to kill a conspecific animal, and even more rare for animals to organize armies for the purpose of mass bloodshed. Our species is a rare exception, and interestingly, so is the chimpanzee species.

SEVENTH COMMANDMENT: Neither shalt thou commit adultery.

I realize I've worked this subject to death.
I'll drop the subject before I lose any readers.

EIGHTH COMMANDMENT: Neither shalt thou steal.

Other species respect private property, do they not?

Quote:

Are you saying that humans have been monogamous for millions of years?

U betcha!

tomato

Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: I get so little foreign language experience, I must be in Koreatown, Los Angeles.

Posted: Mon Dec 26, 2005 4:35 am Post subject:

Okay, Yu-Bum-suk, so we're north of the Equator. I'll change that.

joe_doufu

Joined: 09 May 2005
Location: Elsewhere

Posted: Mon Dec 26, 2005 5:27 am Post subject:

tomato wrote:

Commandments five through eight, for starters:
FIFTH COMMANDMENT: Honor they father and mother.
SIXTH COMMANDMENT: Thou shalt not kill.
SEVENTH COMMANDMENT: Neither shalt thou commit adultery.
EIGHTH COMMANDMENT: Neither shalt thou steal.

Wait a minute! Those aren't right. I just looked it up (google Exodus 34):

1. Thou shalt worship no other god (For the Lord is a jealous god).
2. Thou shalt make thee no molten gods.
3. The feast of unleavened bread shalt thou keep in the month when the ear is on the corn.
4. All the first-born are mine.
5. Six days shalt thou work, but on the seventh thou shalt rest.
6. Thou shalt observe the feast of weeks, even of the first fruits of the wheat harvest, and the feast of ingathering at the year's end.
7. Thou shalt not offer the blood of my sacrifice with leavened bread.
8. The fat of my feast shall not remain all night until the morning.
9. The first of the first fruits of thy ground thou shalt bring unto the house of the Lord thy God.
10. Thou shalt not seethe a kid in its mother's milk.

flakfizer

Joined: 12 Nov 2004
Location: scaling the Cliffs of Insanity with a frayed rope.

Posted: Mon Dec 26, 2005 4:59 pm Post subject:

tomato wrote:

Hello, Flakfizer!

Quote:

Why all the laws and penal codes? Shouldn't people just naturally do what it "good"?

If I said that all of us follow the rules perfectly, I make a graceful retraction.
Apparently, animals of other species don't either, because their fellow denizens see to it that they stay in line.

Why all the laws and penal codes? Because they were established by instinct, and they were established long before the story of Adam and Eve was written.

I find it odd that you contend that not only our actions, but also our making of laws (which helps direct our actions in other ways than our instincts) are mere instinct. At the same time, you consider us chimpanzees because we are genetically, "so similar." But the penal systems, moral codes, and consciences of humans are so much more complex than those in the animal kingdom. And if we had all this fine morality and penal code stuff long before religion came about, then why did we have an "instinct" to create religions and attach morality to them?

Quote:

I agree that people monitor their action out of fear of human punishment, but I don't think it is the same as what you are talking about.

I try to teach my English students as well as I can, even when I know that the director isn't watching. When I want to buy merchandise which is displayed outside the store, I contact the cashier, even when I think nobody sees me. Why? Because I have a conscience!

I trust that you do the same. I also trust that you would do the same, even if you were not told about Heaven and Hell.

You overestimate me. If I did not love God, I would certainly behave differently and would frequently do what was "bad" if I thought it would benefit me and I wouldn't get caught.

Quote:

. . . If there is no God, humans are mere animals, perhaps the most highly evolved on Earth at the moment, but merely animals all the same. . .

Quote:

Among animals, would having multiple sex partners qualify as monogamous?

No, did I say they are?
I didn't say all animal species are monogamous, I said some.

My point here is that humans are not monogamous either, regardless of current marriage customs, because most do not have sexual relations with just one partner for life. Seriously, maybe you don't want to admit that, but in my society, having sex with one partner in a lifetime is becoming very, very rare.

Quote:

You wrote, "our instincts were firmly established millions of years before Moses..."
Which instincts are you talking about?

Quote:

Are you saying that humans have been monogamous for millions of years?

U betcha!

So, all those guys that had more than one wife, they didn't have the gene? Or can humans choose to follow instincts or not?

Ya-ta Boy

Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994

Posted: Mon Dec 26, 2005 6:51 pm Post subject:

Quote:

1. Thou shalt worship no other god (For the Lord is a jealous god).
2. Thou shalt make thee no molten gods.
3. The feast of unleavened bread shalt thou keep in the month when the ear is on the corn.
4. All the first-born are mine.
5. Six days shalt thou work, but on the seventh thou shalt rest.
6. Thou shalt observe the feast of weeks, even of the first fruits of the wheat harvest, and the feast of ingathering at the year's end.
7. Thou shalt not offer the blood of my sacrifice with leavened bread.
8. The fat of my feast shall not remain all night until the morning.
9. The first of the first fruits of thy ground thou shalt bring unto the house of the Lord thy God.
10. Thou shalt not seethe a kid in its mother's milk.

Actually, these are not in the Bible. They just appear to be in the Bible, to test people's faith.

tomato

Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: I get so little foreign language experience, I must be in Koreatown, Los Angeles.

Posted: Tue Dec 27, 2005 5:20 am Post subject:

Quote:

I find it odd that you contend that not only our actions, but also our making of laws (which helps direct our actions in other ways than our instincts) are mere instinct.

Then why do other animal species make laws?

Quote:

At the same time, you consider us chimpanzees because we are genetically, "so similar." But the penal systems, moral codes, and consciences of humans are so much more complex than those in the animal kingdom.

What is your basic premise--that anything complex cannot have any origins in instinct? It takes most music students years to learn all the complexities of music theory. But it still holds true that loud and soft dynamics and fast and slow tempi tend to have effects which are easily explicable in terms of instinct.

Quote:

And if we had all this fine morality and penal code stuff long before religion came about, then why did we have an "instinct" to create religions and attach morality to them?

To explain natural phenomena which science could not explain until recently. We did not know that the sun is a giant mass of hydrogen and helium, so we had to invent a charioteer who makes a daily trek across the sky. We did not know that the Tourette's syndrome is caused by a neurological dysfunction, so we had to invent demon possession.

Quote:

You overestimate me. If I did not love God, I would certainly behave differently and would frequently do what was "bad" if I thought it would benefit me and I wouldn't get caught.

You stop talking that way about my good friend Flakfizer!

I used to belong to a group of like-minded skeptics. They were orderly people just like most other people. There were married couples in that group, just as there are in 'most any other group.

The only place I have ever come across the slogan "anything goes" is in writings of Creationists who put those words in the mouths of Evolutionists--and all without a whit of documentation.

I wager, then, that if you ever become disillusioned with religion, you will not run out and rape every man, woman, and child who takes your fancy.

Quote:

You've mentioned a lot about "other species" having penal codes and now respecting private property. I'm curious to see your examples of each.

Here's a good one on hierarchy in animal species:

http://www.tribuneindia.com/2003/20030817/spectrum/nature.htm

Here's a good one on terrotoriality in animal species:

http://www.uefap.co.uk/reading/exercise/texts/distance.htm

Books and books and books have been written on animal behavior.
Shall we open a new thread?

Quote:

So, all those guys that had more than one wife, they didn't have the gene? Or can humans choose to follow instincts or not?

Some species are more monogamous than others.
Just like some species are more gregarious than others.
It's not a binary function.
We are more monogamous than most species.
Ever had your leg hugged by a neighbor's dog? That dog was obviously not very monogamous.

EFLtrainer

Joined: 04 May 2005

Posted: Tue Dec 27, 2005 5:46 am Post subject:

joe_doufu wrote:

I think students should learn about scientific method, first, and learn about how experiments work. Then they should see how a hypothesis is made and supported (not "proven"), and that even good hypotheses can be disproven by a single case in unusual circumstances.

Finally, they should be taught about the theory of evolution, the gene, and natural selection. I think it's best if they are taught a little about the history of the search for life's origins, so they can see how theories have been created and refined, and understand that the current set of knowledge is not Truth but the informed consensus of science of today.

They should be cautioned against listening to anybody who claims to Know things that they cannot really know... such as the exact details of our evolution, or the existence of a deity. People who blindly wave the banner of a scientific theory (see the "Global Warming" thread) as if it is Truth are just as bad as evangelical religious people. Some people, I guess, just can't stand the existence of mysteries.

It always throws me off when somebody says, "It's going to rain tomorrow." How do they Know that?

I just realized the sequence of the bold text above is backwards. Scientific method begins with a hypothesis.

joe_doufu

Joined: 09 May 2005
Location: Elsewhere

Posted: Tue Dec 27, 2005 7:19 am Post subject:

EFLtrainer wrote:

joe_doufu wrote:

I just realized the sequence of the bold text above is backwards. Scientific method begins with a hypothesis.

The operative word in my sentence was "see"... They should learn about scientific method and then see how it happens. For example, they could examine a hypothesis like "things contract when cooled" and support it with a few examples. Later, you can use H2O in a lesson to demonstrate that it takes only a single experiment to disprove a hypothesis/theory. I'm not sure, but I believe people learn best not from a textbook but by seeing and doing.

We aren't in disagreement. Not really, anyway. I would propose that hypotheses emerge from the scientist's observations of the world. It's a chicken and egg question.

EFLtrainer

Joined: 04 May 2005

Posted: Tue Dec 27, 2005 8:26 am Post subject:

joe_doufu wrote:

EFLtrainer wrote:

joe_doufu wrote:

I just realized the sequence of the bold text above is backwards. Scientific method begins with a hypothesis.

Actually, I take it all back. I took the "see" in the more colloquial sense.

Bulsajo

Joined: 16 Jan 2003

Posted: Wed Dec 28, 2005 11:03 am Post subject:

DOVER, PA—The controversial "theory of intelligent school-board design," which holds that local school boards are "imbued by their creator with minds of irreducible complexity," was decisively disproven by the actions of the Dover School Board this week.

Display posts from previous:

	Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4
Page 4 of 4

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe