Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Dr Gerald Schroeder
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Hans Blaster" data-source="post: 77172617" data-attributes="member: 396028"><p>Sticking the the core paragraphs...</p><p></p><p>Just let each be its own thing and separate from the other? Have you considered that?</p><p></p><p>That would seem likely. Specifically, physics, nuclear physics, perhaps nuclear engineering, maybe environmental radioactivity.</p><p></p><p>Probably not. Why would he? There is nothing in any of those courses or subjects that require a discussion of religion.</p><p></p><p>Generally, though many courses are custom made and don't have a textbook. (Most college textbooks are written by professors teaching those classes. I had 3 university classes using the draft of the professor's textbook. Other classes had no textbook at all.)</p><p></p><p>Why would any student care about the religion of their professors?</p><p></p><p>On to paragraph 2:</p><p></p><p>Do we? Does it matter?</p><p></p><p>What "double standard"? Are you implying that atheist professors teach atheism? If so you are wrong. No professor ever even mentioned they were atheists in any classroom I was in. (Who knows, maybe none of them were actually atheists.) It wasn't relevant to the class.</p><p></p><p></p><p>There are many ways to use the word "agnostic", but 'round here it usually refers to the "faith position" of individuals. (It is one of the options you can choose in your profile. I didn't not choose that one.)</p><p></p><p>Have you heard about "non-overlapping magesteria"? The notion that science and religion have different realms of competence that are separate? It was coined by some scientist called SJ Gould who tried to avoid conflict between scientific facts and religious beliefs.</p><p></p><p>I don't recall you saying this before, but yes that is true.</p><p></p><p>Not sure what his death has to do with any of this, but ...</p><p></p><p>You do know that there is not significant difference between "agnostics" and "atheists", right? I tend to think of them as "non-believers who identify as atheists" and "non-believers who identify as agnostics". "Agnostic" isn't an intermediate, half-yes-half-no, position between belief and non-belief.</p><p></p><p></p><p>First, cancer isn't caused by "self-conflict". It is the out of control division of cells usually triggered by some sort of genetic damage to the cells.</p><p></p><p>Second, it is a rather nasty and vile thing to imply that Gould died of cancer because he was an atheist, or that atheists are in "self conflict"</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Hans Blaster, post: 77172617, member: 396028"] Sticking the the core paragraphs... Just let each be its own thing and separate from the other? Have you considered that? That would seem likely. Specifically, physics, nuclear physics, perhaps nuclear engineering, maybe environmental radioactivity. Probably not. Why would he? There is nothing in any of those courses or subjects that require a discussion of religion. Generally, though many courses are custom made and don't have a textbook. (Most college textbooks are written by professors teaching those classes. I had 3 university classes using the draft of the professor's textbook. Other classes had no textbook at all.) Why would any student care about the religion of their professors? On to paragraph 2: Do we? Does it matter? What "double standard"? Are you implying that atheist professors teach atheism? If so you are wrong. No professor ever even mentioned they were atheists in any classroom I was in. (Who knows, maybe none of them were actually atheists.) It wasn't relevant to the class. There are many ways to use the word "agnostic", but 'round here it usually refers to the "faith position" of individuals. (It is one of the options you can choose in your profile. I didn't not choose that one.) Have you heard about "non-overlapping magesteria"? The notion that science and religion have different realms of competence that are separate? It was coined by some scientist called SJ Gould who tried to avoid conflict between scientific facts and religious beliefs. I don't recall you saying this before, but yes that is true. Not sure what his death has to do with any of this, but ... You do know that there is not significant difference between "agnostics" and "atheists", right? I tend to think of them as "non-believers who identify as atheists" and "non-believers who identify as agnostics". "Agnostic" isn't an intermediate, half-yes-half-no, position between belief and non-belief. First, cancer isn't caused by "self-conflict". It is the out of control division of cells usually triggered by some sort of genetic damage to the cells. Second, it is a rather nasty and vile thing to imply that Gould died of cancer because he was an atheist, or that atheists are in "self conflict" [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Dr Gerald Schroeder
Top
Bottom