Protecting your H.S., College children from scientific gibberish

  • Thread starter Thread starter Linusthe2nd
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
ThinkingSapien said:
I read through the link and would summarize it by saying that elite scientist are less likely to be religious. Are you saying that you think this is a direct consequence of these “elite” having had their faith attacked when they were students?
Click to expand...
In my experience, there is a culture of atheism in the academic community. No matter how smart someone is, we are all products of our cultures. I would suggest that the deeper someone goes into this culture, particularly with a poorly grounded faith, the more likely they will eventually fall away.

I would say this doesn’t demonstrate a causal relationship between intelligence and atheism as some would like to believe. I would submit the past 3 Popes as evidence to the contrary, as well someone like Dr. Scott Hahn and the like.
 
ThinkingSapien said:
I read through the link and would summarize it by saying that elite scientist are less likely to be religious. Are you saying that you think this is a direct consequence of these “elite” having had their faith attacked when they were students?
Click to expand...
I think the elite scientists, in their early years, slowly began to look at science as the only source of true knowledge. And, even though science cannot study the supernatural, it has either affirmed their disbelief with scientific proofs (Richard Dawkins) or caused them to abandon any beliefs they might have had because science provides them with what they regard as all they need to know.

I can’t know if they had their faith attacked when they were students, but here’s the problem: If they decide to blend an anti-religion philosophy with their science teaching, they could deform or cause to bring young minds into agreement with their philosophy by supporting it with scientific data which they can claim proves the point. For example: “Human beings are nothing special. We’re just like other animals, with a few differences.” If this happens over a professor’s career, how many were affected? Hundreds? Thousands?

Then we have The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins. From the book’s description on amazon: “A preeminent scientist – and the world’s most prominent atheist – asserts the irrationality of belief in God and the grievous harm religion has inflicted on society, from the Crusades to 9/11.”

Having seen Professor Dawkins on a TV program, he was asked a question about God being involved in bringing man to life. He simply replied: “No.” How can a scientist rant about a being he believes is a delusion - a fantasy?

Footnote: While he has stated that the existence of such a being is unlikely but he can’t rule it out, his other words and actions clearly show that this can’t be true. You don’t rail against a being you think is a fiction.

Peace,
Ed
 
Archangelic said:
Perhaps I phrased that lazily. That it agrees with Catholic doctrine is a given. Can you give me any scientific theory that has been investigated fairly and without bias that conflicts with our faith?
Click to expand...
We can start with the heliocentric model of the universe.
 
edwest2 said:
Having seen Professor Dawkins on a TV program, he was asked a question about God being involved in bringing man to life. He simply replied: “No.” How can a scientist rant about a being he believes is a delusion - a fantasy?
Click to expand...
Ed, has a Christian ever debated a Muslim, Hindu or a Mormon?
Footnote: While he has stated that the existence of such a being is unlikely but he can’t rule it out, his other words and actions clearly show that this can’t be true. You don’t rail against a being you think is a fiction.
Click to expand...
Ed, again, has a Christian ever debated a Muslim, Hindu or a Mormon?
 
VeritasLuxMea said:
Ed, has a Christian ever debated a Muslim, Hindu or a Mormon?

Ed, again, has a Christian ever debated a Muslim, Hindu or a Mormon?
Click to expand...
Are you trying to suggest there is no interest in this dicussion? I can assure you there is. I hope this isn’t your suggestion, because Muslims are debated right here on CAF frequently enough, if you bother looking at “non-christian forums”, as is any faith group that comes here. This only represents one small corner of the internet.
 
Razanir said:
  1. It’s kinda illegal to teach religion at public schools. That whole separation of church and state thing
  2. Real science is not bad. It only becomes evil when it oversteps its bounds, like trying to prove a negative. It’s actually horrible logic for them to try to disprove God. You can’t prove a negative
  3. I’ve never gotten that sort of feeling from my teachers or professors. I actually got a St. Ignatius medal from my English professor at a public university
    **4) You do realize many scientific discoveries/advances/theories were made not just by theists but by Catholics. The Big Bang, genetics, penicillin, the heliocentric model of the universe…**5) Catholic doctrine is Creationism (God created everything) NOT Young-Earth Creationism (Genesis 1 is completely literal and it only took a week). Theistic evolution is entirely compatible with Catholic doctrine
Click to expand...
Catholics are just as prone to error as anyone else. Look around you at the current state of Catholicism in the U.S.!! When 92% of “practicing” Catholics use artificial birth control, that tells you the level of commitment these folks have in the teachings of the Catholic Church.

Your point, it seems, is that there is nothing to fear from public school. After more than 25 years as a teacher and principal, I can tell you that public schools are the first line of communist ideology and indoctrination perpetrated on innocent children. Of course by the time they’re in high school, they are fully brainwashed and see nothing odd or unusual about the marxist-atheistic-communistic spin on things.
 
crazzeto said:
are you suggesting heliocentrism conflicts somehow with Catholic theology?
Click to expand...
No, but I am suggesting that there’s a shell game going on here with stuff like the heliocentric model, the theory of evolution, etc.

With the Church’s infallible right hand, she never makes any statements that get thoroughly debunked by scientific research. Meanwhile, her fallible left hand is not as supportive of scientific inquiry as her right hand would have us believe.
 
Sister_Terese said:
Catholics are just as prone to error as anyone else. Look around you at the current state of Catholicism in the U.S.!! When 92% of “practicing” Catholics use artificial birth control, that tells you the level of commitment these folks have in the teachings of the Catholic Church.

Your point, it seems, is that there is nothing to fear from public school. After more than 25 years as a teacher and principal, I can tell you that public schools are the first line of communist ideology and indoctrination perpetrated on innocent children. Of course by the time they’re in high school, they are fully brainwashed and see nothing odd or unusual about the marxist-atheistic-communistic spin on things.
Click to expand...
I don’t entirely trust the 90 some odd number presented by certain groups intent on foisting contraception on us. I think there are a lot more of us trying to do it right, though… I am forced to admit that regardless we are looking at the majority =(

Thankfully the administration has helped make NFP hipster =D
 
VeritasLuxMea said:
No, but I am suggesting that there’s a shell game going on here with stuff like the heliocentric model, the theory of evolution, etc.

With the Church’s infallible right hand, she never makes any statements that get thoroughly debunked by scientific research. Meanwhile, her fallible left hand is not as supportive of scientific inquiry as her right hand would have us believe.
Click to expand...
In what way, which doctrine ever depended upon heliocentrism?

Let me put it this way, there certainly was opinion that geocentrism must be true, based upon a misguided reading of Genesis. But never has there been a doctrine that depends upon this world view.
 
crazzeto said:
Are you trying to suggest there is no interest in this dicussion? I can assure you there is. I hope this isn’t your suggestion, because Muslims are debated right here on CAF frequently enough, if you bother looking at “non-christian forums”, as is any faith group that comes here. This only represents one small corner of the internet.
Click to expand...
No. That would be silly! I have a podcast feed filled with hundreds of debates between Christians and non-Christians of various kinds. Christians, Catholic or otherwise, on CAF or otherwise, debate non-Christians all the time.

Ed asked, " How can a scientist rant about a being he believes is a delusion - a fantasy?"

My point was this: that non-belief in an entity does not mean you cannot discuss the belief in that entity, or have serious moral reservations about the beliefs of that entity’s followers. And there is plenty of evidence of Christians doing just that—that we do not believe the existence of Allah or Krishna or whatever, that does not mean we cannot discuss it.
 
For the record, google search results for ‘Christian debating hindu’

google.com/#hl=en&output=search&sclient=psy-ab&q=christian+debating+hidu&oq=christian+debating+hidu&gs_l=hp.12…0i22i30.284.284.0.3505.1.1.0.0.0.0.79.79.1.1.0.les%3B…0.0…1c.1.6.psy-ab.44G2_wrUleo&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_cp.r_qf.&bvm=bv.43828540,d.dmg&fp=7c13f566c4e68d5a&biw=1212&bih=789

I think you will find many such debates, with about any given faith group. More over, these debates aren’t negatives, they are positives.
 
crazzeto said:
In my experience, there is a culture of atheism in the academic community. No matter how smart someone is, we are all products of our cultures. I would suggest that the deeper someone goes into this culture, particularly with a poorly grounded faith, the more likely they will eventually fall away.

I would say this doesn’t demonstrate a causal relationship between intelligence and atheism as some would like to believe. I would submit the past 3 Popes as evidence to the contrary, as well someone like Dr. Scott Hahn and the like.
Click to expand...
That’s why need to know our faith and understand why we believe what we believe. And we need to pray daily:

Those who pray, have hope
Those who pray little, are in great danger
Those who do not pray, are lost.
~ St. Padre Pio ~

I refuse to be a “product” of the current culture. That’s why I had to stop certain habits and severely limit what I see, hear or read. The same should be true for Catholics entering college for the first time.

Odds are, they will hear all kinds of things that basically say, “What’s wrong with you?” And that includes being presented with alternative and wrong worldviews, some based on science, that will be reaffirmed to them over and over and over again.

I disagree about the intelligence part. There are some very skilled and intelligent people who believe the wrong thing and either purposely or, because they believe they are right, unintentionally pass along wrong ideas to their students, but we cannot rule out the possibility that some hate religion and will subtly pass that on to their students with great eloquence.

Students should get the facts and no more. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that Catholics and other Christians who, after leaving college, begin to practice a lifestyle based on some really damaging “knowledge” which they picked up from their instructors and spiritually deformed peers. Or just leave the faith.

Peace,
Ed
 
VeritasLuxMea said:
No. That would be silly! I have a podcast feed filled with hundreds of debates between Christians and non-Christians of various kinds. Christians, Catholic or otherwise, on CAF or otherwise, debate non-Christians all the time.

Ed asked, " How can a scientist rant about a being he believes is a delusion - a fantasy?"

My point was this: that non-belief in an entity does not mean you cannot discuss the belief in that entity, or have serious moral reservations about the beliefs of that entity’s followers. And there is plenty of evidence of Christians doing just that—that we do not believe the existence of Allah or Krishna or whatever, that does not mean we cannot discuss it.
Click to expand...
From what I understand, Catholics do believe in Allah, as Allah is seen as the same god that they worship. It is the teachings of that god that are in dispute, not its existence.
 
crazzeto said:
In what way, which doctrine ever depended upon heliocentrism?

Let me put it this way, there certainly was opinion that geocentrism must be true, based upon a misguided reading of Genesis. But never has there been a doctrine that depends upon this world view.
Click to expand...
I’m sorry, I’ve not been clear at all. Let me put it this way:
The doctrine of the infallibility of ecumenical councils states that solemn definitions of ecumenical councils, approved by the pope, which concern faith or morals, and to which the whole Church must adhere are infallible.
Click to expand...
If you’re asking if I agree with this, then yes. And no, no scientific discovery has ever contradicted anything which the Church must absolutely adhere to. Not that I’m aware of.
 
I find this thread to be somewhat strange: protecting children from knowledge?

The fact of the matter is, science can only give us more insight into God. Creation, just as much as the Bible, is the way God speaks to us. It is a form of revelation.

Why should anyone be concerned that their “child” needs “protection” from “scientific gibberish” any more than they may need protection from “Biblical gibberish,” “theological gibberish,” “philosophical gibberish,” and so on?

The fact is, any misunderstanding of “truth” is going to lead to error. Therefore, I think (though I could be wrong) that the OP belies a certain anti-scientific stance derived from an understandable (but unnecessary) insecurity.

Furthermore, anyone who enters into higher education should know that he or she is going to be exposed to new ideas. That’s the point. Even in learning falsehoods we come to understand and appreciate truth. Intellectual inquiry enriches the mind. Now, of course a danger that one may be led astray. But I remind myself of the story told by Anthony DeMello: you are connected by a string to God. And each time you sin or err, the string is cut. But each time you return to God, the string is tied back together, and you come closer to God.

That’s the way it works with intellectual advancement: we come to an idea, we entertain it. Maybe we even accept it. But ultimately, we may realize that it is error, and so we drop it and move away.

Therefore, it is better to have approach scientific discoveries with an open mind, not with suspicion. We can look at science with curiosity, excitement, and wonder! 🙂
 
Stillness said:
From what I understand, Catholics do believe in Allah, as Allah is seen as the same god that they worship. It is the teachings of that god that are in dispute, not its existence.
Click to expand...
I’ve seen people say it both ways. It seems to me that Allah is the God of Abraham too so Christians would necessarily believe in Him, so to speak.

But really, we are getting far afield. Let’s make this very simple: let’s say someone comes to this forum, trying to convert us all into worshipers of Shiva - or some other god/goddess that Christians must necessarily not believe in. In that case, we will “rail against Shiva” despite the fact that Shiva **does not exist.**So one can certainly “rail against” a God that does not exist - one can “rail against” a “delusion.”

Dawkins happens to be wrong, but that’s another matter altogether.
 
VeritasLuxMea said:
I’ve seen people say it both ways. It seems to me that Allah is the God of Abraham too so Christians would necessarily believe in Him, so to speak.

But really, we are getting far afield. Let’s make this very simple: let’s say someone comes to this forum, trying to convert us all into worshipers of Shiva - or some other god/goddess that Christians must necessarily not believe in. In that case, we will “rail against Shiva” despite the fact that Shiva **does not exist.**So one can certainly “rail against” a God that does not exist - a delusion.
Click to expand...
Yes, they can. In that case it would not be the god itself they are railing against, in the sense that you would rail against a person. Rather, it would be railing against the idea, or construct, of that god. So saying that an atheist can’t rail against a god is framing the situation incorrectly.
 
Sister_Terese said:
Catholics are just as prone to error as anyone else. Look around you at the current state of Catholicism in the U.S.!! When 92% of “practicing” Catholics use artificial birth control, that tells you the level of commitment these folks have in the teachings of the Catholic Church.

Your point, it seems, is that there is nothing to fear from public school. After more than 25 years as a teacher and principal, I can tell you that public schools are the first line of communist ideology and indoctrination perpetrated on innocent children. Of course by the time they’re in high school, they are fully brainwashed and see nothing odd or unusual about the marxist-atheistic-communistic spin on things.
Click to expand...
Catholics who are taught not to lie and not to deceive people ARE OFTEN NOT TAUGHT TO RECOGNIZE OTHERS DOING IT.

We are NOT prone to error. We are the victims of a system that was corrupted over time.

If we teach our kids to respect authority, and we’re not in the classroom with them, they might bring home the textbook but be TOTALLY UNAWARE of the spin they got in class. Until later - much later. Not to mention the reinforcement they’ll get from their peers.

And thank you for pointing out the marxist-communist-atheist spin out there. Your contribution definitely puts things is perspective.

Peace,
Ed
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top