Tuesday, March 24, 2009

Continuing thoughts

Listening to post-NOVA comments, someone mentioned everyone has their background, inherently biased towards religion. I'm inclined to disagree as I lack such a background, as do others. Of course, that gives me a bias, but I think mine's to think critically about what I believe. One friend of mine is an atheist- never been to a church in her life. I don't believe her parents are also atheist, so I'm not sure how she reached that conclusion.

Interesting thing about young people going out and doing crazy shit- brain chemistry.

I'm going to comment back on DeWitt's comment calling Darwinism a religion. That's one of my pet peeves- Darwinism is NOT a religion; there are no prayers or anything like that to the bearded fellow, and he isn't seen as any kind of deity. Again, if you're even GOING to call me a Darwinist, call me a Wallacist because the biogeographer needs some love as well. Science education in America needs to cover this better if people make the assumption that scientific theory can be considered a religion. Doctrine ≠ religion. There's Marxism, communism, taoism, and various other -isms, but not all are religion. We as Americans seem to be fixated on these -ism things.

Personal beliefs are personal- agh. This guy again, glasses dude from my notes earlier... some of us did NOT receive a religious background when we were younger, so we're somewhat free of 'doctrination'. Evolution wasn't shocking to me, it was more like 'oh, cool!'

If I recall correctly, PZ Meyers had the same perspective that religious indoctrination is child abuse as Dawkins.

Seriously. I'm feeling left out of the having a religious bias thing. :[ Maybe I should've let the Mormons drag me away at a young age.

Oooh, writing project! Oh, on actual pap- oh, e-mail. Will do that then, since I've already got it open. Man, am I glad I blogged this so I've got names.

Liveblog/notes part 2: Evolution: What About God?

Alas, did not have enough time to do the extra credit. I'll try to finish it and post it here, even though I won't receive extra credit for it- reflecting for the fun of it.

Egad, half the students signed on to add special creation to their courses? I might've misheard that. I wonder what those shirts say... if they can give me a book giving detailed support for special creation, awesome. I just don't see it.

Hey Eugenie Scott! :D Interesting how so much fuss can be dispelled by clearly defining evolution and pointing out it does NOT explicitly endorse or deny a God (although personal frame of reference can angle it one way or another).

Students taking the initiative remind me of a YA fiction book called Evolution, Me, and Other Freaks of Nature by Robin Brande. The protagonist is a teenage girl, raised in a religious background. Already somewhat of a pariah for stopping a campaign against a gay student, she further gets caught in the crossfire when the evolution unit comes up. It's an interesting read- more insightful than other YA fiction.

...a petition, with special creation? It sounds like they've already decided without having various theories floated in front of them. I wanted to find a copy of The Genesis Flood in the library, but couldn't find it- that'll be a summer read.

I agree with that teacher- if so many students are into this, did something go wrong in the education process? OH GOD. Not the 'we came from water' or 'cats to dog' nonsense I've seen online. At least the students here aren't like the ones in the Brande book, turning their desks around or just walking out.

Hm, I see how the Ken Miller article was relevant. I almost want to read The God Delusion to see Dawkins' perspective, even though I have a feeling I'll disagree with him.

Mmm.... the 'forms most beautiful' quote. Awesome.

Commentary on Ken Miller ahoy!

I forgot about this extra credit assignment over break... and today really isn't the best of days to squeeze in an extra 2-3 page assignment, but I'll try (at the expense of studying for chem 102... ugh)

Ken Miller describes that the atheist's mistake is to assume that God is included in the natural and can thus be tested along with other phenomena in the coliseum of science. I agree with his point- it's the converse of using the supernatural to explain natural observations. They are separate windows looking on the same patch of grass.

I also notice he uses the word 'delusion', perhaps a nod toward Richard Dawkins' book The God Delusion. While I haven't yet read any of Dawkins' works (despite having a rather large pile of library books around my desk), I am aware of his atheistic standpoint. The use of that word here is to perhaps separate science from the stereotypical godless heathen sacrificing Bibles at the feet of Darwin (not sure if that's actually a valid stereotype, but it's an interesting mental image).

Alas, I've got to be somewhere in five minutes. Will continue this later, if I have the time.

Tuesday, March 10, 2009

Liveblog/notes- Evolution: What About God?

Opens with a Ken Ham lecture in... Ohio? I love looking at the crowd to see a few bored kids... but at the same time it's very disconcerting to see so many young kids singing along with such a vile song.

I find the idea that 'if the Bible is factually wrong, then we should discard its morality too' disgusting. It's like saying 'a pineapple's covered in spikes, let's not even bother eating the thing'. You do not need a literal interpretation of the Bible to take meaning from it. I mean, Jesus himself used parables to convey morality tales (would that make the Bible Jesusmeta then?).

On a more shallow note, is Liam Neeson narrating this?

SERIOUSLY disturbs me how many young kids are listening to Ken Ham, along with his cartoon illustrations. Figures they'd use folksy music as another medium to push their message.

Wheaton College... hm. I didn't think there were that many conservative Christians in the Chicago area, but then, I don't know much about the Midwest. Oh, it's a Christian campus? Ah, ok.

~sigh~ Nathan Baird's family thing is somewhat familiar to me. My family didn't go to church on a regular basis, but recent discussions with my mom indicate she feels she failed by not taking my brother and me to church and thinks something's wrong with me for thinking science is God's touch on the universe (funny how this conversation never came up in my previous 18 years at home). Apologies for the offtopicness, but this does feel a little close to home.

Hee, I like Baird's grandma- echoes my dad's sentiment that I should be able to reason out what I believe. Baird's dad bothers me... guh. I'm afraid that's how my conversation with my mom'll be when I finally sit down and talk to her about what I do and don't believe.

"I don't know how to make sense of that". Simple, Emi- don't take the Bible literally. Oh, Seventh Day Adventist? Ah, ok. There was a private seventh day adventist school next to my middle school.

Indeed, this is pretty much the basis of the debate- the special place of humans in God's eyes. Wait, the faculty has to sign a statement affirming belief in a historical of Adam and Eve? Separ- oh wait, it's a private college. Separation of Church and State doesn't necessarily hold then, I think...?

The letter declaring she'd rather see her daughter dead than lose her faith at college is HARSH. To make the choice between education and faith... to me it seems worse to be blind and faithful.

A student asks Keith Miller about reconciling being made in the image of God with evolutionary theory- Keith says he personally thinks Adam and Eve were specially chosen out of the humans by God. Interesting.

Oh no... not another musical thing for Go- oh, Simple Gifts. I don't think the Shakers had any perspectives on evolution... I didn't catch this anthropology major's name, but he mentioned if he had to make a choice, he'd pick Young Earth creationism because he grew up with it, he's comfortable with it.

Beth S.- grew up in Zamibia(?), open to ideas regarding Bible & science.

Emi Hayashi makes a good point- it's silly for an ignorant fundamentalist to point out 'flaws' in science as it is for a nontheist to point out flaws in Christianity without any theological background.

OH NO NOT KEN HAM AGAIN. "God said it, I believe, that settles it." Hm. Does this video predate the Creation Museum, I wonder? That diorama looked like it'd fit in with that thing.

End of class, will be continued on Thursday.

AHA IT IS LIAM NEESON.