IUBio Biosequences .. Software .. Molbio soft .. Network News .. FTP

Barriers in Neuroscience?

Richard Kerr kerrr at CRYPTIC.RCH.UNIMELB.EDU.AU
Fri Jun 16 02:52:00 EST 1995


so the discussion has run......


>> More to the point, biology class is for science, not bronze-age
>> superstitions.  The seperation of church and state is an important
>> freedom and well worth fighting to preserve.  Still, it is not the
>> only (or even the main) issue in excluding Creation Science[sic] from
>> biology or other curricula.
>
>Since science, by definition, requires evidence to support whatever
>assertions are made, creation 'science', *anybody's* creation 'science',
>is, by definition, *not* science.  This ought to be blindingly obvious. 
.  Teaching various creation beliefs as part of
>a course that looks at the origins of scientific thought is one thing,
>(but that's really a history course, not a science course), but teaching
>them as though they are the same as science is just plain wrong.  Why? 
>Because they are not supported by any evidence.  (A religious text
>detailing the history of a people, or anything else, and supposedly
>inspired by that religion's major deity does not constitute evidence.)

what's the conjecture here?
creation science is really just a nice, power term for exclusively
Christian religious education. It should not be taught in a public school
class as that's not their patch. There are a multitude of private church-
run schools who trade in thistype of tutoring.
I suppose that a humanities grad. may argue that the Bible represents a
secondary source or a recording of oral history & traditions,thus may be a
type of evidence but it's not testable, it'snot reproducible & there's no
confirmatory evidence.
Again, the cultural domination & perpetuation of a series of beliefs &
moral values is not a science, it's sociology /politics.
or to paraphrase a friend of mine..."oh yeah, Creation science that's in
the same line of thought as phrenology"-> reading the bumps on people's
heads as a guide to their fortune & integrity.
what I think is far more worthwhile is holding this discussion on a
newsgroup moderated by Jimmy Swaggart et al, that's where the real
challeges are/will come from.

that's my $0.02
cheers RICHARD







More information about the Neur-sci mailing list

Send comments to us at biosci-help [At] net.bio.net