Why is evolution taught in our schools?

[Justatruthseeker]

Aristotle predated science. He was a philosopher at best. Modern science began roughly in Galileo's time. The scientific method involves testing one's ideas and trying to show that they are wrong. And then learning from those failures. Proper failures are successes in science since they show the way not to go. Sitting there and just thinking, or relying on a holy book is not science since no or very little advances can be done doing that. Especially in religion no advances can be made if one demands that one is right no matter what.

Aristotle founded the very biology you still follow.

Was Aristotle the inventor of science?

"Aristotle was arguably the first to attempt an evidence-based natural philosophy (or “science”), melding empiricism with logic."

 

[Subduction Zone]

Aristotle founded the very biology you still follow.

Was Aristotle the inventor of science?

"Aristotle was arguably the first to attempt an evidence-based natural philosophy (or “science”), melding empiricism with logic."

A puff piece is hardly science. All that article is does is to give Aristotle credit for lacking a belief in magic being the cause of life. Modern science began with the practice of forming a concept and then testing it. What tests did Aristotle do? How did he try to refute his ideas?

 

[RDKirk]

A puff piece is hardly science. All that article is does is to give Aristotle credit for lacking a belief in magic being the cause of life. Modern science began with the practice of forming a concept and then testing it. What tests did Aristotle do? How did he try to refute his ideas?

Aristotle was rather anti-empirical. In his view, any old dunderhead can arrive at a truth when he actually sees it. It took an intelligent man to think through to a conclusion logically without seeing it.

Unless, of course, he's proven wrong by empirical evidence.

 

[AV1611VET]

Aristotle predated science.

Nice try.

Daniel 1:4 Children in whom was no blemish, but well favoured, and skilful in all wisdom, and cunning in knowledge, and understanding science, and such as had ability in them to stand in the king's palace, and whom they might teach the learning and the tongue of the Chaldeans.

Wikipedia: Daniel was a righteous man of princely lineage and lived about 620–538 B.C. He was carried off to Babylon in 605 B.C. by Nebuchadnezzar, the Assyrian, but was still living when Assyria was overthrown by the Medes and Persians.

Wikipedia: Aristotle, 384–322 BC, was an ancient Greek philosopher and scientist born in the city of Stagira, Chalkidiki, in the north of Classical Greece.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Aristotle was rather anti-empirical. In his view, any old dunderhead can arrive at a truth when he actually sees it. It took an intelligent man to think through to a conclusion logically without seeing it.

Unless, of course, he's proven wrong by empirical evidence.

And since so much of science goes against "common sense" the best way to find out the truth is by investigation and experimentation. It is "common sense" that a big object falls faster than a smaller one. It is "common sense" that something that one cannot see could make one ill. When people tend to rely on pure reason too often the are relying on common sense which is only following one's personal prejudices.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Nice try.

Daniel 1:4 Children in whom was no blemish, but well favoured, and skilful in all wisdom, and cunning in knowledge, and understanding science, and such as had ability in them to stand in the king's palace, and whom they might teach the learning and the tongue of the Chaldeans.

Wikipedia: Daniel was a righteous man of princely lineage and lived about 620–538 B.C. He was carried off to Babylon in 605 B.C. by Nebuchadnezzar, the Assyrian, but was still living when Assyria was overthrown by the Medes and Persians.

Wikipedia: Aristotle, 384–322 BC, was an ancient Greek philosopher and scientist born in the city of Stagira, Chalkidiki, in the north of Classical Greece.

LOL!! Literalist fail. Just because the word "science" is found in a translation does not mean that they were using what we call science today.

 

[AV1611VET]

LOL!! Literalist fail. Just because the word "science" is found in a translation does not mean that they were using what we call science today.

I'm detecting a No True Scotsman argument here.

 

[JackRT]

The Greeks were not particularly empirical. A lot of their logic involved the way things should be rather than the way things actually are. A few examples:

--- there can only be four gospels because there are only four corners of the earth

--- Hippolytus (170–236)suggested that the date of Jesus' birth was December 25, but the trouble was that he had not backed up this claim with sound arguments. Dionysius Exigius , however, had just the argument: His contemporaries claimed that God created the earth on March 25. It was inconceivable that the son of God could have been in any way imperfect. Therefore Jesus must have been conceived on March 25. This meant that he must have been born nine months later—December 25. Dionysius also concluded that, as a perfect being, Jesus could not have lived an incomplete life so he must have died on March 25 as well!

 

[AV1611VET]

The Greeks were not particularly empirical.

Neither is myopic academia today.

When science can build a machine that can do this ...

2 Kings 6:17 And Elisha prayed, and said, LORD, I pray thee, open his eyes, that he may see. And the LORD opened the eyes of the young man; and he saw: and, behold, the mountain was full of horses and chariots of fire round about Elisha.

... then I'll give it credit for having glasses.

 

[JackRT]

Neither is myopic academia today.

When science can build a machine that can do this ...

2 Kings 6:17 And Elisha prayed, and said, LORD, I pray thee, open his eyes, that he may see. And the LORD opened the eyes of the young man; and he saw: and, behold, the mountain was full of horses and chariots of fire round about Elisha.

... then I'll give it credit for having glasses.

LSD or magic mushrooms.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

And since so much of science goes against "common sense" the best way to find out the truth is by investigation and experimentation. It is "common sense" that a big object falls faster than a smaller one. It is "common sense" that something that one cannot see could make one ill. When people tend to rely on pure reason too often the are relying on common sense which is only following one's personal prejudices.

Why would common sense say a big object falls faster than a smaller one?

Common sense would say that with the voltage of the earth and both objects voltage being proportional to their size, the big object would be attracted more, but also repelled more (given proportional equality of charge), while the little object would be attracted less, but also repelled less (given proportional equality of charge). So that both would fall at the same speed (minus air)....

And that only by temporarily increasing the voltage in a small area (since we know of no way to decrease the Earth's voltage) and increasing the charge of an object, would its attraction be altered.....

 

[Heissonear]

Neither is myopic academia today.

When science can build a machine that can do this ...

2 Kings 6:17 And Elisha prayed, and said, LORD, I pray thee, open his eyes, that he may see. And the LORD opened the eyes of the young man; and he saw: and, behold, the mountain was full of horses and chariots of fire round about Elisha.

... then I'll give it credit for having glasses.

The downfall of exalting science by many is that they bow down and worship it; they have made it an idol above all others things.

Nice inclusion of pertinent Scripture to show the serious weakness in modern science.

Only by coming to the Creator and exalting Him above all things can one obtain such wonderous glasses. One must be Born Again to see the Kingdom of God in our midst.

 

[Heissonear]

LSD or magic mushrooms.

Such is ridicule.

 

[AV1611VET]

LSD or magic mushrooms.

Interesting that Timothy Leary targeted college students with LSD.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

The downfall of exalting science by many is that they bow down and worship it; they have made it an idol above all others things.

Nice inclusion of pertinent Scripture to show the serious weakness in modern science.

Only by coming to the Creator and exalting Him above all things can one obtain such wonderous glasses. One must be Born Again to see the Kingdom of God in our midst.

Amen. Even those "seeing" the kingdom of God in their midst, failed to see it except for a few.

John 1:26 John answered them, saying, I baptize with water: but there standeth one among you, whom ye know not;

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Interesting that Timothy Leary targeted college students with LSD.

Who better to a scientist to experiment on and potentially traumatize than those whose minds are still forming self.....

 

[Subduction Zone]

I'm detecting a No True Scotsman argument here.

Nope try again. But then people that deny logic should never try to apply logical fallacies.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The downfall of exalting science by many is that they bow down and worship it; they have made it an idol above all others things.

Nice inclusion of pertinent Scripture to show the serious weakness in modern science.

Only by coming to the Creator and exalting Him above all things can one obtain such wonderous glasses. One must be Born Again to see the Kingdom of God in our midst.

Projection again. Your flaws are not the flaws of others.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Why would common sense say a big object falls faster than a smaller one?

Because that was a common belief at the time of Galileo.

Common sense would say that with the voltage of the earth and both objects voltage being proportional to their size, the big object would be attracted more, but also repelled more (given proportional equality of charge), while the little object would be attracted less, but also repelled less (given proportional equality of charge). So that both would fall at the same speed (minus air)....

And that only by temporarily increasing the voltage in a small area (since we know of no way to decrease the Earth's voltage) and increasing the charge of an object, would its attraction be altered.....

Oh my, playing at science to justify your belief in fairy dust.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Neither is myopic academia today.

When science can build a machine that can do this ...

2 Kings 6:17 And Elisha prayed, and said, LORD, I pray thee, open his eyes, that he may see. And the LORD opened the eyes of the young man; and he saw: and, behold, the mountain was full of horses and chariots of fire round about Elisha.

... then I'll give it credit for having glasses.

But there is no valid reason to believe that ever happened. You give examples that you cannot reproduce. Those that use science beat you cold by being able to do what they say that they can do.