B
buffalo
Guest
That is because an evolutionary formed brain is not a reliable truth detector.
- Status
F
Freddy
Guest
Divine feet won’t be discussed in the science dept. Meanwhile, in said science dept:Freddy:
Now to continue…’ In science class only scientism will be taught. You will have to accept these dogmas because we cannot let the Divine foot in the door.
Teacher: ‘Now we’ll discuss evolution and the processes which have taken a few billion years’.
Student: ‘But sir, doesn’t Genesis tell us that creation was completed in a week?’
Teacher: ‘You are free to interpret Genesis as you see fit. That will be discussed in your theology classes. Some people take a fundamentalist approach to the story and believe that the world is a few thousand years old and others believe it to be allegorical and accept the science - which I am now about to teach you. Now to continue…’
Last edited:
L
lelinator
Guest
Bingo…hence religion.
B
buffalo
Guest
Revealed religion is in its own class.
C
CaptainPrudeman
Guest
Very happy you know a lot of English words. None of that contributes to the discussion at hand. Can we form a framework on which to base our discussion?
Last edited:
C
CaptainPrudeman
Guest
I don’t want to distract from the main discussion, but science class isn’t taught like this. Science classes are taught with a heavy focus on experimentation to demonstrate the truth of the things said. Nothing is blind faith, nothing is to be unquestioned. It’s all about testing and proving. And, just to say something else, there’s a reason God isn’t let into science: He’s outside the realm of the scientific. To allow God as a reason for everything is to allow a cop-out which stifles scientific discovery. God is the explanation of last resort which, as demonstrated in the canonization process, is Church doctrine as well.
Last edited:
R
Rau
Guest
According to the church, a multi-billion year old earth is not in conflict with Revelation. Nor are most aspects of evolution in conflict. I’m happy to assert that there is more to Man and his origin than science perceives, but I’ve no need to reject the rest if the above scientific theories and estimates given weight of evidence.
Last edited:
D
Dovekin
Guest
What do you do if someone starts asking anthropologic questions, doesn’t humanity have a social side? Cultural indicators? Are we really talking about humans if we look only at bilogy?Dovekin:
Purely from a biological standpoint. Species, genus etc.
C
CaptainPrudeman
Guest
Those are beyond the scope of a science class.
F
Freddy
Guest
Then you point the kid to the anthropology lecture. And the politics lecture. And the evolutionary psychology lecture. And the sociology one. And the neurobiology one. And the history one. Etcetera etcetera.Freddy:
What do you do if someone starts asking anthropologic questions, doesn’t humanity have a social side? Cultural indicators? Are we really talking about humans if we look only at bilogy?Dovekin:
Purely from a biological standpoint. Species, genus etc.
Lots to learn. The kid’s going to be busy!
F
felsguy
Guest
All of the scientific, most of the pseudo-scientific, and even some of non-scientific arguments posted above are way beyond my grasp of the topic, but I have to say that a handful of you (won’t list names so as not to leave anyone out) are the most persistent bunch I think I have ever come across in a single thread on CAF.
Meant as a compliment, not derogatory.
Meant as a compliment, not derogatory.
R
rossum
Guest
Your understanding of Buddhism is faulty. Truth exists. Ultimate truth does nor; the problem is with the “ultimate” part, not the “truth” part.
R
rossum
Guest
Science is provisional. Revelation is not. Interpretations of Revelation are provisional.
I might give the examples of slavery and witch-hunting, where the interpretation of Revelation has changed over time. Christians were using Revelation to justify slavery as late as 1860.
L
lelinator
Guest
But we’re not discussing “revealed religion” here, we’re discussing buffalo’s own personal revealed truth. Because God hasn’t actually revealed to the Catholic Church whether the world is 13.8 billion years old, or only 6 thousand years old. And God hasn’t revealed to the Catholic Church whether evolution is true, or false.That is because an evolutionary formed brain is not a reliable truth detector.
lelinator:
Bingo…hence religion.
buffalo:
So you may be right, and revealed religion is in its own class, but unfortunately you’re not espousing revealed religious truths, you’re espousing your own personal truths, so whether the brain is evolutionary formed or not, it seems that it really can be an unreliable truth detector.
Last edited:
O
o_mlly
Guest
Well, Captain, you’re demoted to Private for not not doing your research and putting up a straw man.
B
buffalo
Guest
What experiments do science classes do to reaffirm the taught age of the earth? An experiment that shows the repeatable steps from molecules to man?
Last edited:
B
buffalo
Guest
Way off. I have consistently presented the constant understanding and teachings of the Church’s magisterium. Please produce a document/s that reverses these long held teachings. (and Humani Generis does not do that - it simply permits continued investigation of evolution)
O
o_mlly
Guest
Oh, please. We don’t permit God? You’ve got it backwards, friend.
Before we called it Science, we called it the Philosophy of Nature (PoN), a subset of the Philosophy Department. We did not permit the gear-heads in PoN to appeal to God. That important work was reserved for higher thinking. Restricting PoN to only natural explanations for observed phenomena insured that applying their work to improving lives did not rely on miracles.
O
o_mlly
Guest
Yes, the class in question is not a science class. The evo dog whistle echos evermore.
D
Dovekin
Guest
There is lots to learn. We are all busy!
- Status