TED Conversations

Bernard White

TEDCRED 20+

This conversation is closed.

Does creationism indicate bad education? (If so how can we fix this, and should it be taught?) Does Creationism have any credibility to it?

I started this debate, with a new aspect (or perspective) on our current education problem. Considering many focus on how to motivate students and various other aspects. Yet this (creationism) still remains a big problem to the American education system today, and I don't think many people think about this when they consider the education system today.

I feel I should have probably made this clearer, when I say creationism, I am making reference to the type of creationism which tell people "Evolution is wrong". (Or in other words the "Creationism vs Evolution" debate).

Creationism - http://www.creationism.org/
Does it have any credibility to it? Should it be considered a science?
Considering due to recent polls 46% of American believe in creationism.
Link :
- http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/05/americans-believe-in-creationism_n_1571127.html

Many psychological studies have shown a strong correlation between a lack of education and creationism. These studies indicate that not many creationists actually understand what the scientific method is.
With all this talk of how to "improve education" surely it would be wise, to finally finish the "Creationism vs Evolution" debate, if we wish to ensure a better scientific education!
Watch this 3 minute link : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTedvV6oZjo (By Lawrence Krauss)

Here are some reasons, people believe creationism should be taught in schools, which I believe are false :
http://listverse.com/2013/02/07/10-reasons-creationism-should-be-taught-in-school/
Considering, if the polls are to be believed, 46% of Americans are missing out (in my opinion) on a proper scientific education.

I think it is worth mentioning though, that I am fine with "Theistic evolution".
A good book recommendation on this matter is "Finding Darwin's God: A Scientist's Search for Common Ground Between God and Evolution" by Kenneth R. Miller. I personally have never understood the claim "Atheism = Evolution"...

Share:

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • May 22 2013: "A casual stroll through the insane asylum will demonstrate to you that "belief" proves NOTHING." - Friedrich Nietzsche

    Religious creation is based on belief, because all you have is assumption to “how life may have originated”.

    Abiogenesis is based on belief too, there is no evidence backing the concept of Natural Origins that can be produced showing empirical evidence to such.

    Advancements in all living things can be shown in the lab and any such advancement is called “Evolution”.

    Scientific Design can “advance” life by way of synthetically advancement and is not evolution because the theory lacks any reasonable explanation using design because of the bias set up to detour religious creation through a designing nature.

    To me there are not two but three options at debate…

    1. Creationism in the religious belief.
    2. Natural Origins followed by evolution.
    3. Scientific Design through lineage.

    #1 deals with a stance that can not be tested by the scientific means.
    #2 deals with an assumption that life must have originated somehow by natural means then evolved.
    #3 deals with the fact that life exists and will advance technologically to the point for space flight and synthetic biology and has a drive to spread wherever it ventures.

    To me, there is no way to test religious creationism so I ignore this stance, simple because one can not show evidence to such. Natural Origins seems legit but being a computer programmer, I have never seen code self create and that IS what life is…
    Lineage through scientific design coupled with the ability for life to advance in many ways has evidence backing such a stance in our own advancements and seems to me to be the most logical with the least amount of assumption but lacks a reasonable “origins” belief but stands as proven scientific fact. We need not know “where life came from” to know that life can advance to the point of scientific creation just as we need not know where life came from in the theory of evolution.
    • W T 100+

      • +1
      May 24 2013: Chris, I appreciate your agreeing with me that we cannot measure time the same as God.

      As to Kabbala....well, to be honest with you, I do not know much about it. Other than a bunch of people I see around my city wearing a red string around their wrist. What is the string suppose to symbolyze?
      From speaking to these individuals, I have not discerned any appreciation of scripture, or God, or anything spiritual in the slightest.

      And, if I may ask you, did you grow up with knowledge of the kabbalah?
      Or, did you acquire the knowledge as an adult, of your own free choosing?

      I have read your comments many times on here, but I had never had the opportunity to talk with you directly.

      *As a side note Chris, I see the science within the scriptures....but the scriptures were not meant to be a 'Science Book'. I would think that you would agree that it is much more than that, right?
      We do realize that the Holy book is not just a Bible......It is Holy Scriptures......as a matter of fact, that is what is printed on the front of my copy....."Holy Scriptures"
      • Comment deleted

        • W T 100+

          • 0
          May 24 2013: Your explanation of the Arc of the Covenant reminded me of this:

          http://www.womansday.com/health-fitness/nutrition/foods-that-look-like-body-parts-theyre-good-for-109151

          *******

          "What does that mean to you? What, in your understanding, makes scriptures 'holy'"

          I was referring to the term 'scriptures' and not to the word 'holy' when I made the statement you mention.

          But ok, I'll answer your question.

          Holy, to me is something clean and pure. In the case of the holy writings, or holy scriptures, holy would mean clean and pure writings.

          What is holy to you?

          *********

          And yes, I think Madonna had alot to do with people paying money to buy a piece of red yarn and wrap it around their wrist for protection. So people need this kind of lucky charm to function in society Chris? Is this something found in scripture, or is it just a tradition?

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.