Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ExistentialDisorder
The only teachings that should be mandatory for students to learn are those that are proven as fact. Example: Mathematics are factual; the structure of the English language, and other languages, is factual; the history of our country is factual. The concepts of both Intelligent Design and evolution are both theory.
|
The concepts?, the how and why is theory, but evolution
does happen. Like gravity, they both obviously exist, the theory is the how and why. Unless you mean in scientific terms, in scientific terms only mathematics is proven, history certainly isn't.
On the other hand, Intelligent Design is supposition, not theory, and certainly not scientific theory. By directly comparing them by two different meanings of the same word is just dishonest.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ExistentialDisorder
My biology teacher - Mr. Berkowski - was very much Jewish, and when he lectured on evolution he did it the only way it should be done, and that is as theory. He made it very clear to all his students that evolution is theory, and when students questioned him about more religious aspects, such as intelligent design, he also made it very clear that it too was theory. But he didn't lecture on ID, in or out of class, because it was, at least at that time, against the rules of our school for any teacher to discuss any form of religious concepts with their students. He gave limited answers as best he could when people asked about his religion (for some reason a lot of kids found it odd that he was Jewish, I never understood why). I'll also add that I was never one of those who questioned him, unless he stated something that I didn't understand (he and I went round and round on the subject of dna because at the time I just couldn't understand it. I do now, but I didn't understand the way he was trying to explain it). I respected him as a person and as a teacher, and I also respected the fact that he was jewish, regardless of whether or not I personally agreed with his religion.
|
You owe him no respect as a teacher. It's disgusting that a science teacher would even give intelligent design marketing the faintest veneer of scientific credibility by saying they're both theories as if they're even comparable.
That job is the politician's, not a teacher's. They are supposed to teach, not confuse terms.