0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Religion is a good example often taught as a fact but it is just a belief and today science as got on to this bandwagon. Every teacher has a responsibility to make clear to everyone the difference. Newton believed his view on gravity was a fact until Einstein pulled his rug from under him.
So, if I drop my coffee cup, it will fall to the floor... FACT. If I burn 1 mole of oxygen and 2 moles of hydrogen, I will get 1 mole of water. While you may claim it is still a theory, the experiment can be run and the results verified.
Hopefully, science teachers teach science, which is a process (observe, hypothesise, test), not a collection of facts, and has absolutely nothing to do with belief (acceptance of a hypothesis in the absence of facts) or faith (acceptance of a hypothesis in the face of facts).
This is a good point, and I'd be upset with any teacher who presents science as undeniable facts set in stone. But while there are always going to be poor teachers out there, most are good teachers and they they instead teach the scientific method, which, as Clifford pointed out, describes how new theories are developed and tested against observations. It also allows for the possibility that well-tested theories aren't complete, and that if flaws are found in them, they can be replaced.
It would take a good science teacher about an hour to explain how simple set diagrams avoid the sort of logical nonsequiturs that puzzle philosophers.
It concerns me that many students are being taught beliefs as facts. Just because a teacher believes something is a fact doesn't make it so.Religion is a good example often taught as a fact but it is just a belief and today science as got on to this bandwagon. Every teacher has a responsibility to make clear to everyone the difference. Newton believed his view on gravity was a fact until Einstein pulled his rug from under him. Mod edit: Please phrase post titles as questions, thanks! You're free to edit it if you'd like a different title.
Who said science teaches beliefs as facts ? = a paradox .Science and religion are 2 different things .
Quote from: DonQuichotte on 18/08/2013 17:54:18Who said science teaches beliefs as facts ? = a paradox .Science and religion are 2 different things .I would say science is merely the best way we have to explain the data we have. There might be other ways to explain the data and in the future our explanations may not fit new data. So if you look at it like this science is a belief. The current belief. And the one that explains the most data.
And just to make things absolutely clear and unambiguous, the definition of consciousness is....?
Not me being lazy. I'm asking you what you mean by a word you used.
author=alancalverd link=topic=46893.msg416620#msg416620 date=1377048866]To slighly misquote Dawkins: the one thing religions have in common is that each one teaches you to despise all the others. The sciences, on the other hand, complement each other.
Thus civilization (which I define as collaboration for the wellbeing of mankind) advances by the acquisition of scientific knowledge
but that advance is frequently mired, halted or even reversed by the influence of religion.
Hence by their very nature, science and religion can only "settle into relationship" if one religion exterminates all others (since the existence of more than one religion necessarily breeds division rather than collaboration) and that religion is indistinguishable from science.
But since religion is founded on the statement "x is true" and science proceeds by asking "is x false?", they cannot be indistinguishable.
So how does a stridently monotheistic religion like Islam judge, e.g., Hinduism? And on what evidence?