The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Science unlimited > Comments

Science unlimited : Comments

By Andrew Baker, published 20/7/2009

Dogma, in religion or science, is anathema to education, only serving to limit our understanding of the world.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All
“…..the greatest shifts in scientific thinking from Copernicus to Galileo to Newton were not based solely on reason, science’s golden rule”.

Yes Andrew, some great advances in science were made by researchers and thinkers who could not clear their thinking of their past indoctrination so their work was not based solely on reason.

But how much more quickly could human knowledge have advanced had the indoctrination not been present. One post advocates teaching children to think clearly and some schools around the world are achieving this aim much better than are most Australian schools. Buranda State School in Queensland is an exception and Clackmannan schools in Scotland are really showing the way with a 6.5% improvement in cognitive ability after just one year of a different teaching subject with a significant improvement in classroom behaviour as a bonus.

Look at http://www.clacksweb.org.uk/council/press/?release=1024.

Foyle
Posted by Foyle, Monday, 20 July 2009 12:34:54 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I commented earlier on this article and mentioned the succes of some school, particularly at Clackmannan in Scotland, at improving the cognitive ability ( thinking ability) of young students. I intended to post the following link but could not find it at the time.

http://www.rotherham-gt.co.uk/docs/p4c/impact2.doc
Posted by Foyle, Monday, 20 July 2009 12:54:19 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
WTF?

What next?
Tell me Johnny – what do you FEEL about the notion of evolution?
I don’t understand it. Did god make everything?
Hmmm – I’ll give you an E for scientific thinking and an A for feelings.
Now that will even out as a C.
Congratulations! You’ve passed Science
Posted by WTF?, Monday, 20 July 2009 1:09:45 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I entirely agree with Andrew Baker when he says, “The multifaceted characteristics of science remain poorly understood.” Many reduce science and the ‘scientific method’ to mere ‘scientism’ or scientific materialism. Unlike Kant, Nietzsche took the poison pill of scientific materialism with all the steely-willed resolve of the uebermensch, whom he portrayed as the savior of the world. Nietzsche was indeed a nihilist (by denying that we can rationally affirm our intellectual or moral judgments) – but at least he was honest in that scientific materialism, if one is brutally self-aware, leads to nihilism. Despite this confusion, however, (brought about by relativism) there lurks in the human heart a deep need for what we might call objective truth and the secure possession of it. One needs to initially accept all persons and groups have agendas, and identifiable groups inevitably make truth-claims.

Interestingly, Paul Feyerabend said that “In the age of Galileo the Church showed to be more faithful to reason than Galileo himself. The trial against Galileo was reasonable and just.” Galileo certainly was not doing empirical science as we understand it today. He could not demonstrate empirically that his theories were supportable – he was being too imaginative and ‘unreasonable’ for his day with the 'rational' Church eventually proved wrong.

That the archaic age of myth gave way to the philosophical ‘enlightenment’ of the European world is precisely why the role of imagination suffered. The so-called primitive minds of less rational ‘barbaric’ societies - no less women, children, and (of course) the insane were downgraded. The slow devaluation of imagination culminated with Locke and the empiricists.

Quite ironically it was Plato, when writing in one of the most imaginative styles ever, who initiated the Western tradition of viewing imagination as the lowest form of knowledge and not to be trusted. Kant reversed this trend toward denigrating the imagination and accorded it a great metaphysical significance. Religion in our schools (as secular as they be), as inferred by Baker, is therefore more a far healthy and open-minded outcome – it antithesis I would view as trending toward the oppressive,shallow and unimaginative.
Posted by relda, Monday, 20 July 2009 1:10:03 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
All,

One particular aspect on which science and religion differ is questionability. In science, propositions exist to be tested. No one is not meant, to sit on their laurels. Contrarily, religious others live by their creed.

Einstein admitted errors in context with the Gravitation constant and QM phenomena in his life time. The Catholic Church took four hundred years to recognize that Galileo was correct regarding his observations confirming Copernicus. No doubt, there are various schools of thought in science, yet these “alternatives” function to challenge and to progress disciplines.

Scientists might argue over the effects of, asymmetry during the Big Bang fifteen billion years ago on the senescent universe hundreds of billions from now. On the other hand, Christians have pretty much settled on the idea that Jesus Christ was divine and that there is a trinity, barely acknowledging that there was a period of debate on these issues for several generations before and after Nicaea.

With science, often, there is recognition of a new “superior” theory over the old, say, the Solid State Universe yields to the Big Bang. There is a paradigm shift sometimes occurring within a decade. On the hand; while, a few clerics do swap sides across religious divides; we don’t have modern Christians, Jews and Muslims moving “all together” to designate a new “superior” faith. Yet, scientists will do exactly that. “I can now rejoice even in the falsification of a cherished theory, because even this is a scientific success” (Sir John Eccles). Even if Abraham's God exists, and the higher religions are mere approximations; Christians, Muslims and Jews are happy with their exclusive part of the elephant.

Sells,

Perhaps, neither modern science nor religion, are strict advocates of the Truth. The former dealing with tentative truth-like posits or, verisimilitudes (Popper). The latter with “many lies similar to the truth”, i.e., etumoisin homoi (Homer).

Science often “addresses,” whereas religion simply “dresses”. The scientist applies probability and is objective; the cleric applies mimesis (Plato) and reinforcement (Skinner). One studies a bug “through a microscope” (object of study outside); another “lives ‘in’ Jesus” (inside object).
Posted by Oliver, Monday, 20 July 2009 2:41:56 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Most parents want their children educated to help their chances of employment. When people start chuntering about education for 'truth', they usually mean a jolly good brainwashing in their idea of 'truth'. And, sadly, that's what we have in our education system - we are turning out brainwashed kids who can't get jobs.

Leave truth and personal development to individualas and to families to work out.
Posted by Leigh, Monday, 20 July 2009 2:44:04 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy