Should creationism be taught as the foundation of science?

[Mohammad Nur Syamsu]

This is called a red herring. It has nothing to do with the claim you made as factual, you cannot back up.

How do you create something then? You create with free will, by choosing. That is how freedom is related to creationism.

And it is a fact what the resulting decision is, and an opinion who you are as being the owner of your decisions.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

This whole thread is an excercise in futility. The OP esposes to circular reasoning....

And it's making me think of this right here.....!!!!!

 

[Mohammad Nur Syamsu]

This whole thread is an excercise in futility. The OP esposes to circular reasoning....

There is no circular reasoning in creationism. What we have in this topic is a lot of evolutionists who have not considered what it means for freedom to be real. Evolutionists who have not considered how forming an opinion about what is good, loving and beautiful works.

All the arguments of evolutionists have been besides the point. I am quite sure the majority of evolutionists still do not even understand what the argument for creationism is?

Why would the existence of the creator have to be proven, if love and hate cannot be proven? Love, hate and God are all relevant to the issue of what makes a decision turn out the way it does, therefore they are all a matter of opinion, not fact.

It is pseudoscience the neurology, phrenology, physiognomy, evolutionary psychology, which all assert love and hate can be measured. Science cannot address what is good loving and beautiful, those are a matter of opinion, not fact.

 

[Shad]

Love and beauty are relevant to what it is that makes a decision turn out the way it does. And creationism describes how the universe is chosen to be the way it is. Creationism relies upon the fact that freedom is a reality, but then it regards it as a matter of opinion what it is that makes the decision turn out the way it does.

So:
- you have not dealt with the fact that freedom is real and relevant in the universe
- you have not provided room for forming opinion on what is good, loving and beautiful

Subjective values are still irrelevant and have no merit in your burden of proof that creationism is fact. Your fixation with opinion without addressing the fact side of your argument renders your opinion unsupported and is dismissible as such. I have no need to address your red herring as I am not talking about opinions I am talking about objective facts. Beside I already told you I addressed subjective opinions, its influences and it's failures.

You are welcomed to your opinion but not all opinions are good nor equal and certain not equal to objective facts.

Until you actually make an argument rather than requiring those that reject your view make your argument for you there is little to discuss. It is your argument, do the hard work yourself.

 

[Mohammad Nur Syamsu]

Subjective values are still irrelevant and have no merit in your burden of proof that creationism is fact. Your fixation with opinion without addressing the fact side of your argument renders your opinion unsupported and is dismissible as such. I have no need to address your red herring as I am not talking about opinions I am talking about objective facts. Beside I already told you I addressed subjective opinions, its influences and it's failures.

You are welcomed to your opinion but not all opinions are good nor equal and certain not equal to objective facts.

Until you actually make an argument rather than requiring those that reject your view make your argument for you there is little to discuss. It is your argument, do the hard work yourself.

Now you are getting it that there is a fact side and an opinion side to creationism, the fact that freedom is real and relevant in the universe, and the opinion what it is that makes the decisions turn out the way they do.

Again, if you are interested in science which proves freedom is real I could give you some pointers. But my acceptance of the fact that freedom is real is not based on that science, it is based on the direct knowledge of freedom in my daily life.

Frankly i care little about the science which establishes freedom is a reality, though I support it. What's important to me is the general view that there is a spiritual domain which chooses over the material domain. That we can have opinion about what is good, loving and beautiful. And have faith in God ofcourse!

 

[Midnight Rain]

There is no circular reasoning in creationism. What we have in this topic is a lot of evolutionists who have not considered what it means for freedom to be real. Evolutionists who have not considered how forming an opinion about what is good, loving and beautiful works.

This is demonstrably false. The creation of opinions, choice, free-will and concepts of beauty and why we think that way have been studied rather extensively. Sure we don't understand everything yet and probably never will but creationism is not some answer that provides a feasible answer to all of those questions.

 

[outhouse]

How do you create something then?

Good question.


What would you teach?

 

[Mohammad Nur Syamsu]

Good question.


What would you teach?

Well for the fact part I would teach restraint, just copy what you see. Obtaining facts is a very passive thing, most of the effort in obtaining facts is in keeping your free will cool, and not let any choices of yours change the facts.

For the opinion apart I would teach that there are many ways that you can choose. Like democracy and dictatorships are vastly different ways for a country to choose, there are also different ways an individual can choose.

You can choose to believe in God, but you can also choose not to believe in God, and you can also choose not to choose on the issue.

But I think one should mainly focus on love and hate in explaining. For instance that if you call somebody hateful, then that opinion says as much about who you are as being the owner of your decisions, as it does about the person you are calling hateful. That is because you choose the conclusion hateful yourself, you express your own emotions, in saying somebody is hateful, and the term hateful is about somebody else as being the owner of their decisions.

etc. etc. a simple course, which should have demonstrable enormous benefit. Academic achievement should go up at least 10 percent whatever, the emotional atmosphere markedly improved also, or if not then really I am wrong about it.

But I would not have it taught in public schools, but only in religious schools. That is because people have an addiction to making what is good, loving and beautiful into a factual issue, they get a kick out of it. And no way can you deal with that addiction in the setting of a public school, the students will have the teacher for lunch for messing with their kicks.

 

[Shad]

Now you are getting it that there is a fact side and an opinion side to creationism, the fact that freedom is real and relevant in the universe, and the opinion what it is that makes the decisions turn out the way they do.

Again, if you are interested in science which proves freedom is real I could give you some pointers. But my acceptance of the fact that freedom is real is not based on that science, it is based on the direct knowledge of freedom in my daily life.

Frankly i care little about the science which establishes freedom is a reality, though I support it. What's important to me is the general view that there is a spiritual domain which chooses over the material domain. That we can have opinion about what is good, loving and beautiful. And have faith in God ofcourse!

I have always been talking about the fact side since unsupported opinion is useless to me. Have you not been playing attention? Do you have reading comprehension issues? Language issues? You have failed to meet your burden of proof or to even provide anything constructive. You are another useless sophist that saying nothing in reality. I am done until you meet your burden. Peace.

 

[Mohammad Nur Syamsu]

I have always been talking about the fact side since unsupported opinion is useless to me. Have you not been playing attention? Do you have reading comprehension issues? Language issues? Intelligence issues? Education issues? You have failed to meet your burden of proof or to even provide anything constructive. You are another useless sophist that saying nothing in reality. I am done until you meet your burden. Peace.

I have been quite open that I am not interested to discuss whether or not freedom is real. It is in fact real, and to me it is just playing boring mindgames to deny it. You have not requested the scientific evidence about freedom being a reality that I know about, but in truth I wouldn't have provided it to you also, because I find it simply too boring to discuss freedom with a denier / doubter.

 

[Shad]

I have been quite open that I am not interested to discuss whether or not freedom is real. It is in fact real, and to me it is just playing boring mindgames to deny it. You have not requested the scientific evidence about freedom being a reality that I know about, but in truth I wouldn't have provided it to you also, because I find it simply too boring to discuss freedom with a denier / doubter.

I am not talking about freedom. Thanks for clearing point out you comprehension issues and have nothing but unsupported claims. Peace.

 

[Mohammad Nur Syamsu]

I am not talking about freedom. Thanks for clearing point out you comprehension issues and have nothing but unsupported claims. Peace.

That is the fact part of creationism, that freedom is real and relevant in the universe, as I have been telling you many times. The creator part is a matter of opinion, so it would be a strawman to ask for evidence about it, because it is asserted just like an opinion about what is good, loving and beautiful.

 

[McBell]

Only creationism provides room for opinion as well as fact.

you still beating that long dead horse?

 

[Shad]

That is the fact part of creationism, that freedom is real and relevant in the universe, as I have been telling you many times. The creator part is a matter of opinion, so it would be a strawman to ask for evidence about it, because it is asserted just like an opinion about what is good, loving and beautiful.

More sophistry and avoiding your burden of proof. Since you acknowledge your view is just an opinion rather than a fact I can still dismiss it as such and you have agreed with me. This usually happens to sophists when they lose track of their BS.

 

[Mohammad Nur Syamsu]

More sophistry and avoiding your burden of proof. Since you acknowledge your view is just an opinion rather than a fact I can still dismiss it as such and you have agreed with me. This usually happens to sophists when they lose track of their BS.

With an opinion the conclusion is reached by choosing it, as I have explained to you many times. Facts are forced by evidence, and the conclusion is then a copy / model of what is evidenced.

 

[Midnight Rain]

With an opinion the conclusion is reached by choosing it, as I have explained to you many times. Facts are forced by evidence, and the conclusion is then a copy / model of what is evidenced.

And opinion is generally a personal assumption about reality that may or may not be supported by evidence. Universally held concepts or concepts that have enough evidence that one could reasonably claim it to be universally true would be a fact.

It seems that you are having a hard time separating fact from opinion despite saying that "evolutionists" are the ones with this difficulty.

 

[Mohammad Nur Syamsu]

And opinion is generally a personal assumption about reality that may or may not be supported by evidence. Universally held concepts or concepts that have enough evidence that one could reasonably claim it to be universally true would be a fact.

It seems that you are having a hard time separating fact from opinion despite saying that "evolutionists" are the ones with this difficulty.

It seems to me you are saying an opinion is an inferior form of a fact. But this is wrong because it can never become a fact what is good, loving and beautiful. It will always remain a matter of opinion, you will always have to choose the answer, no matter how much evidence you have available

 

[McBell]

This is demonstrably false. The creation of opinions, choice, free-will and concepts of beauty and why we think that way have been studied rather extensively. Sure we don't understand everything yet and probably never will but creationism is not some answer that provides a feasible answer to all of those questions.

I have to agree with Mohammad Nur Syamsu.
There is no reason in creation.
Circular or otherwise.

 

[Desert Snake]

Agreed.

Then religious viewpoint isn't credible to be taught. Makes no sense. Also, "science" is not the topic of the OP...but it does help to know the subject of the thread.

 

[Midnight Rain]

It seems to me you are saying an opinion is an inferior form of a fact. But this is wrong because it can never become a fact what is good, loving and beautiful. It will always remain a matter of opinion, you will always have to choose the answer, no matter how much evidence you have available

Fact trumps opinion in argumental basis. In the absence of a fact you have room for opinion.

For example evolution. Evolution is a fact of biology. This trumps your opinion that it does not.

However there is no objective fact that "red" is the best color. So your opinion is that "red" is the best color. But then we can even re-word this that "red" being "your" favorite color is now also a fact. But that fact is based upon your own opinion. The definition of "fact" and "opinion" are in some cases overlapped but not usually. Typically the major difference is functionality and external certitude.