It makes me sad every time...

[DrJohnZoidberg]

Morals and values come from Christianity and other religions, the values and morals that secular humanists hold, are largely adopted from Christianity. Where else would you get them?

This is a myth. You should do some reading on the following subjects:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altruism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Rule

Any society is going to develop some moral code otherwise they would cease to exist if they just went about all willy nilly.

 

[porchrat]

But it can be invalidated, and any honest skeptic should acknowledge this.

In my experience the skeptics I meet all readily admit this. It is a cornerstone of scientific enquiry. In fact if I recall you yourself were schooled on that very topic on these forums by some of the various skeptics here. Were you not also one of the "it's just a theory" crowd at one point?

Of course none of that makes the act of rejecting as rubbish something that is supported by evidence and has yet to be conclusively disproven any less asinine.

Note though that we are of course still talking about the Theory of Evolution and not evolution itself. Evolution itself is an observable phenomenon with a relationship to the theory much like gravity and the Theory of Gravity. The theory might one day be proven wrong but gravity exists finish and kla.

That something might one day be demonstrated to be in error doesn't make rejecting it now based on pixie farts any less stupid.

 

[porchrat]

Silly posts like this that say nothing make me sad. Others include ones like RiaX's that calls my religion (and therefor me) pathetic for no reason. Tell me why it makes you sad and I will try reply.

because you don't want to be tolerant. If you had your way you would wipe other ways of life from the world and force your beliefs onto others.

You want your beliefs taught in schools. You don't care if that means others that don't share your beliefs have them forced upon them, screw human rights Christianity is da bomb.

I don't want any of that. I see religion as a personal choice not to be forced upon anybody and you simply don't want that, you will settle for that because the world is too tolerant to allow "your side" a monopoly any longer. That is why it makes me sad.


Don't even get me started on how you perceive that you are part of a "side". That also makes me sad. What a needlessly combative mentality. We are all humans living life together, I consider the vast majority of us to be on the same side (I exclude the crazy sociopaths that want to use my skull as an ashtray). It sounds like you move through life looking for opportunities to further your side over the other sides. Kind of sad.

 

[porchrat]

Morals and values come from Christianity and other religions, the values and morals that secular humanists hold, are largely adopted from Christianity. Where else would you get them?

Which values exactly come from Christianity?

 

[S.Harris]

Which values exactly come from Christianity?

The fact that stable societies existed around the world, long before any of the religions where formed suggests strongly that these religions have no effect in creating their moral codes and values.

 

[AntiThesis]

A couple of things

1) I love how discussions here can spiral all over the place Makes me not sad.

2) Lady in question doesn't "not teach" evolution and she doesn't ever give her opinion to the kids as that would be counter-productive in a classroom environment.

3) We are a publicly Christian school - part of that is you can choose to send your kids here or not, knowing that they will be exposed to Christianity.

4) All religions of which we have children members are given some exposure - anything else would be stupid. So the kids are taught about the Golden Rule and exposed to Islam, LDS, Buddhism and a whole slew of other religions and allowed to make their own choice. We take a very dim view of anyone who tries to bully their religion onto someone.

5) Since I myself am a Christian, I feel like I should be able to say this to other fellow Christians - don't be silly people (really, I'm not allowed to say arsehat?). Our religion is the best and correct and wonderful to us - just like Islam is to anyone who follows its teachings. Assuming anything else is ridiculous in so many ways.

6) That's why I capitilised "Theory" in the OP versus "theory". My "theory" that gravity is actually caused by the sneezing of ducks is "just a theory" (and not terribly well backed up I'm afraid). The peer reviewed, demonstrable "Theory" of Evoution is backed up by millions and millions of years of evidence. Sure, it could turn out that the particular phase of the moon is what causes the observable fact of evolution to occur but it's very unlikely.

Carry on

 

[Techne]

Morals and values come from Christianity and other religions, the values and morals that secular humanists hold, are largely adopted from Christianity. Where else would you get them?

I don't think this is right. Religious people don't generally say that morals come from religion. Religion is a virtue, and traditionally understood it is the pursuit of ethical or moral excellence. It does not provide any moral framework per se. However, religious people (here, taking Christianity as an example) will typically say that what it means to be good (or doing the right thing and hence being moral) is laid out or derived from the following Christ and that the foundation of all moral good is found or resides with God.

A positive aspect of many religions is that it has a very positive effect on transmitting and inculcating life-guiding and life-enhancing ethical standards for average people. Ethical standards that are often considered absolute (e.g. lying, murdering innocent human beings etc.)

A problem with secular humanism is that it does present any robust defense of a particular ethical view point or system and thus does not provide a system that can be transmitted from one generation to the next. It essentially collapses to meta-ethical moral relativism.

 

[OrbitalDawn]

You think secular humanism is an all round better idea than Christianity? That makes me very sad.

That's not what I said, but I do happen to think that, yes. I'd much rather we busy ourselves with solving the problems and quandaries that face us as a species than fret over unsubstantiated supernatural speculation.

Yes, falsifiability. So there is always that possibility that evolution can be invalidated. According to you.

Of course. The fact that it has withstood 150+ years worth of attempts at falsification points to its strength.

Morals and values come from Christianity and other religions, the values and morals that secular humanists hold, are largely adopted from Christianity. Where else would you get them?

Nonsense. Mahāvira (guy that developed the core tenets of Jainism) surpassed the morality found in Christianity 500 years before JC lived, in one sentence. "Do not injure, abuse, oppress, enslave, insult, torment, torture, or kill any creature or living being." Imagine how different human history would have been if this simple sentence was found in the Bible.

 

[Techne]

Nonsense. Mahāvira (guy that developed the core tenets of Jainism) surpassed the morality found in Christianity 500 years before JC lived, in one sentence. "Do not injure, abuse, oppress, enslave, insult, torment, torture, or kill any creature or living being." Imagine how different human history would have been if this simple sentence was found in the Bible.

Yeah, humans would be herbivores. No KFC or McDonalds for you .

 

[Unhappy1]

Morals and values come from Christianity and other religions, the values and morals that secular humanists hold, are largely adopted from Christianity. Where else would you get them?

So during the time before Christianity we had no morals or values? How did we get to the point of Christianity if this is the case? Surely we should have all been slaughtering one another?

 

[Solarion]

A teacher here just asked me to print out a poster on Evolution for her and then proceeded to tell me that "It's OK if it's got something funny in it, it's junk anyway. It's just a theory."

I don't know if I have the strength to explain the difference between "theory" in English and "Theory" in Science again. :erm:

Just let that sort of thing flow off you like water off a ducks back next time. Half my family are hardcore creationists, but at the end of the day it really doesn't matter what view you hold, means little and you can't take it with you when you die so what's the point letting it bother you. No point

 

[be.plato]

but it hasn't been and so rejecting it outright is anti-science. Like HIV denialism.

But there is the possibility. That's my point, no need in arguing about it.

 

[porchrat]

But there is the possibility. That's my point, no need in arguing about it.

Sure it is a possibility I have acknowledged that point multiple times now. In fact it is fundamental to all of science.

Will you now acknowledge my point please.

 

[be.plato]

Sure it is a possibility I have acknowledged that point multiple times now. In fact it is fundamental to all of science.

Will you now acknowledge my point please.

About rejecting it outright?

 

[porchrat]

About rejecting it outright?

Yup.

While it is certainly a possibility that the Theory of Evolution might be falsified at some point in the future currently there is no evidence to suggest that it is false and so rejecting it as though it is false is stupid.

Especially when those who reject it so often reject it from a position of ignorance. I mean that is just piling more stupid on top of an already stupid act.

 

[be.plato]

I accept that evolution is a scientific theory that can very well be invalidated at some point in the future.

Edit: The "facts" also need to be looked at correctly.

 

[porchrat]

I accept that evolution is a scientific theory that can very well be invalidated at some point in the future.

Isn't what i said and isn't what I asked of you. Please either acknowledge my point or refute it.

Rejecting the Theory of Evolution outright when there is currently no evidence that falsifies it and bucket loads that supports it is anti-science.

Also acknowledge that so far from the evidence we do have it looks like the theory is correct.

 

[be.plato]

Isn't what i said and isn't what I asked of you. Please either acknowledge my point or refute it.

It is.

 

[porchrat]

It is.

My point was that because there is no evidence that falsifies the Theory of Evolution that rejecting it outright at this point is anti-science, like HIV denialism.

Also that so far from the evidence we do have it looks like the theory is correct.

If you could just acknowledge those points that would be great.

 

[porchrat]

Edit: The "facts" also need to be looked at correctly.

The people looking at the facts have dedicated their entire lives to the study of the natural world and are experts in the field. They are better qualified than anyone else on the planet when it comes to looking at the facts correctly.

So don't you worry about that.

Most of the people I have encountered rejecting the theory do so from a position of horrendous ignorance and are not a threat when it comes to looking at the facts correctly. Most of them don't even know what the facts are, and instead choose to fixate on strawman interpretations of those facts, let alone comprehend the contexts in which they are observed.

Now if you could just acknowledge my points about rejecting the theory being anti-science and that so far the evidence says the theory is correct then that would be great.