Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Members | Log In | Register

Should creationism be taught in schools? Options · View
Jacknife
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011 5:53:20 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/27/2008
Posts: 196
Location: United Kingdom
hwillnow wrote:
I really love this discussion. When people can't explain something they don't try to counter they only criticize.

What about Ramapithecus: thought to be the missing link between monkey and man, man like ape.
Australopithecus: Ape like skull with man like teeth.


What about them? Ramapithecus is no longer regarded as a likely ancestor of humans.
Please explain how Australopithecus somehow proves creationism?

hwillnow wrote:
Research: I find a brick and from looking at the brick i make an hypothesis that it came from a 15 story building that had 30 windows and 50 bathrooms. Now instead of putting everything to the test I find more bricks and assume they came from the same building until i have the building built.


I have no idea what that means, but I assume it has something to do with how we find animals int the ground. I am guessing you want this beautiful line where you dig directly down and find complete skeletons of ever animal that evolved in neat little line.

hwillnow wrote:
Supposedly dinosaurs lived millions of years before man, yet in Texas a dinosaur and human track are found together.


Congratulations, you will believe anything as long as it supports your argument. You are talking about the Paluxy river in texas and it is one of the great hopes and hoaxes that creationists have tried to pull. The tracks do not stand up to any sort of scrutiny and quite frankly you should know that. Type "Paluxy river dinosaur tracks" in to google and you will get a list of hits that will explain to you why the idea is horseshit

hwillnow wrote:
A living snail was tested and found to be 27,000 years old.


Wow an experiment wasn't carried out correctly big whop. I have seen the light creationism is true. Please...... this is what you are throwing at me


hwillnow wrote:
All dating systems are based on three assumptions, which can’t be proved. They are {I} The system under study is an isolated system. {II} The decay rate is constant. But modern researches showed it is not. {III} The initial quantity of the parent element is known. But it’s not.


Please could you post a link to a scientific paper where it says there are good reasons to believe that these assumptions are bad assumptions. You see I have read about the problems with dating methods and know their limits, but I am fairly sure you haven't. You see there is a huge challenge for you to demonstrate. given the number of dating methods there are and have independently come to roughly the same number that the different methods are wrong. I am not going to claim that all dating is perfect and their isn't a margin of error, but I am fairly sure you don't know enough to properly explain how criticism of dating suggests creationism is true.

hwillnow wrote:
Those "people who knew relatively nothing" sure made an impact in the world. I am not saying live by blind faith, but don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.


Yep, they did make an impact on the world and what an impact. Their particular brand of religion was lucky enough to survive into the modern world. As has Judiasm, Hinduism etc. this has no bearing on whether they are true or not.

hwillnow wrote:
Creationism can be taught, because science does not have all the answers and many of the so called proofs can be disproven.


Of course science doesn't have all the answers otherwise it would stop. If we knew everything there would be no universities, research grants or particle accelerators doing experiments. Your logic is so flawed it has become comical.

Science doesn't know everything- therefore- Creationism can be taught.

Lets expand that to any other field and you will see how ridiculous that statement is. how about say History

History doesn't know everything -therefore - I can make shit up about any historical figure I like.

hwillnow wrote:
Have you ever seen a white crow? Does not mean it does not exist you just have not seen it yet.


Yep I haven't seen a white crow. I also haven't seen Leprechauns, Unicorns, the tooth fairy, Thor, Anubis, Zeus, Pixies, Wizards, etc etc etc. Should I believe in all those too?

hwillnow wrote:
Jackknife would send people away who came to him for a healing, because God is a myth. He would also conclude that it is better not to have faith than have a false faith.


People are coming to me for a healing. Wow cool. I had no idea I had such a reputaion. Let me see what I can do. You are in pain? Please take these painkillers. You have a broken bone. I will set it for you, put a cast on it and it will be better. You have mental problems, I will help get you into an appropriate hospital.

hwillnow wrote:
Evolution offers no hope only a promise of death and that not even science can stop. I am glad we have the solved all the world's problems. Evolution seeks to disprove God. Creation says there is a God and all things are possible. Science has brought us many wonderful things. I do not believe it is a waste of money. But it is not the total answer either.


So because Creation is a nicer outcome in your eyes does that in some way make it true? If so and your hopes are able to manipulate the reality that the rest of us inhabit please can you concentrate really hard and manipulate it in some way that I win the Lottery next week.
allinabout18times
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011 12:02:46 PM

Rank: Advanced Wordsmith

Joined: 2/2/2011
Posts: 53
If there is a god, she/he must really love beatles! There are over 300,00 thousand different species...

"If you don't do the roadwork in the dark of the morning, you get found out under the bright lights." Joe Frazier
allinabout18times
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011 12:04:14 PM

Rank: Advanced Wordsmith

Joined: 2/2/2011
Posts: 53
...and why does she/he hate us? She/he allows earthworms to regenerate parts of their bodies, but man cannot?

"If you don't do the roadwork in the dark of the morning, you get found out under the bright lights." Joe Frazier
WellMadeMale
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011 3:55:49 PM

Rank: Constant Gardener

Joined: 9/30/2009
Posts: 10,299
Location: Cakeland, United States
hwillnow wrote:
I really love this discussion. When people can't explain something they don't try to counter they only criticize.

What about Ramapithecus: thought to be the missing link between monkey and man, man like ape.
Australopithecus: Ape like skull with man like teeth.

Research: I find a brick and from looking at the brick i make an hypothesis that it came from a 15 story building that had 30 windows and 50 bathrooms. Now instead of putting everything to the test I find more bricks and assume they came from the same building until i have the building built.

Supposedly dinosaurs lived millions of years before man, yet in Texas a dinosaur and human track are found together.
A living snail was tested and found to be 27,000 years old.

All dating systems are based on three assumptions, which can’t be proved. They are {I} The system under study is an isolated system. {II} The decay rate is constant. But modern researches showed it is not. {III} The initial quantity of the parent element is known. But it’s not.

Those "people who knew relatively nothing" sure made an impact in the world. I am not saying live by blind faith, but don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Creationism can be taught, because science does not have all the answers and many of the so called proofs can be disproven.

Have you ever seen a white crow? Does not mean it does not exist you just have not seen it yet.

Jackknife would send people away who came to him for a healing, because God is a myth. He would also conclude that it is better not to have faith than have a false faith.
Evolution offers no hope only a promise of death and that not even science can stop. I am glad we have the solved all the world's problems. Evolution seeks to disprove God. Creation says there is a God and all things are possible. Science has brought us many wonderful things. I do not believe it is a waste of money. But it is not the total answer either.


WellMadeMale wrote:
You're new here (since April as a registered Lushie) with 21 forum posts, so I will cut you some slack...However, I am assuming (not the best tactic nor habit to utilize) that you haven't been lurking Lush forums (for 3 to 24 months before joining up).


hwillnow wrote:
Boy constant gardner must be a democrat. He thinks we should all believe like him. You know what they say. If you can't amaze them with your brilliance, baffle them with your bullshit. If you can't take the heat get out of the kitchen. But then again i would fight for his right to believe in what he does even if it is wrong.


So...with your novelty noted, I'll just say...You seem to be quite the assuming dichotomy yourself, Sir. I with over 6700 forum posts (less than 1000 in the trivial areas of this forum) I should have a healthy body of thought, personal philosophy, questions-posed, beliefs-guessed and all manner of flavor of idea - discussed ... on full view for everyone to read, disregard, digest or poke fun at.

Perhaps you would be served well to do so (for many people, not just me) before you begin slinging and maligning? The same etiquette at other forums is appreciated here, as well.

And welcome to The Think Tank, by the way. wave

Lush is the place for open minds (and we all do not think alike...a good thing, if you ask me). Enjoy yourself, but not at the expense of others, please. no




If ya can't beat 'em... pay someone to do it for you.
Nighthawk18
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011 4:56:25 PM

Rank: Active Ink Slinger

Joined: 7/4/2011
Posts: 20
I think as it is will all things there are two sides to every story. With that being said I believe creationism belongs in a church not schools. A church is were you are supposed to learn about the teaches of the bible. A school is meant to be acadmic so darwins theory is better suited to that enviroment. However I believe people should have an understanding of both so that they may make there own decisions about there beleifs. Personally I tend to agree more with darwin but I also believe creation is possible. There are some things we are just not meant to understand and only blind arrgance leads us to answers we have no business looking for.
Guest
Posted: Saturday, August 13, 2011 1:34:05 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 537,401
Please spare the shit for other sites.

Need to be more reasonable, and have a good scientific approach towards things.

Gone are the days when they thought that the earth was created in days and universe was created within minutes..

We are not living in the "Bronze age"...


And please.... schools.. need to be kept out of this ..otherwise the coming generation will be full of deluded retards!!!!!!

****

I will not prolong the agony, on my part any longer. The reason I jumped into the fray was because of the about statement. What was said does not fuel discussion it tries to eliminate it by suppressing views other than their own. There are certainly a lot of intelligent people on both sides of the aisle. The reason why I stay on Lush is because everyone has respect for everyone else. In general society most of the stories, including my own, would be looked upon as a deep rooted sickness in need of a therapist. Both systems have many holes, neither one has a definitive answer as to how it all began in the first place. My particular view is an OLD Creation that allows for evolution. Am I positive, No, because I struggle with first cause. Is one more scientific than another, maybe. In the same token I cannot dismiss many miracles that continue to happen without scientific approval or disapproval. The world is a big place and has many wonderful things to discover.
All I wanted to say, maybe poorly, was that all have a right to an opinion and deserve the respect of those who do not hold the same.
WellMadeMale hit the nail on the head. Hats off to you sir. Jack Knife I did go back and read what you suggested which leads to many interesting topics on the subject. I appreciate your well written ideas on the original topic.
Jacknife
Posted: Sunday, August 14, 2011 3:13:53 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/27/2008
Posts: 196
Location: United Kingdom
hwillnow wrote:
Please spare the shit for other sites.

Need to be more reasonable, and have a good scientific approach towards things.

Gone are the days when they thought that the earth was created in days and universe was created within minutes..

We are not living in the "Bronze age"...


And please.... schools.. need to be kept out of this ..otherwise the coming generation will be full of deluded retards!!!!!!

****

I will not prolong the agony, on my part any longer. The reason I jumped into the fray was because of the about statement. What was said does not fuel discussion it tries to eliminate it by suppressing views other than their own. There are certainly a lot of intelligent people on both sides of the aisle. The reason why I stay on Lush is because everyone has respect for everyone else. In general society most of the stories, including my own, would be looked upon as a deep rooted sickness in need of a therapist. Both systems have many holes, neither one has a definitive answer as to how it all began in the first place. My particular view is an OLD Creation that allows for evolution. Am I positive, No, because I struggle with first cause. Is one more scientific than another, maybe. In the same token I cannot dismiss many miracles that continue to happen without scientific approval or disapproval. The world is a big place and has many wonderful things to discover.
All I wanted to say, maybe poorly, was that all have a right to an opinion and deserve the respect of those who do not hold the same.
WellMadeMale hit the nail on the head. Hats off to you sir. Jack Knife I did go back and read what you suggested which leads to many interesting topics on the subject. I appreciate your well written ideas on the original topic.


Well done. and in that statement it is wonderfully demonstrated why creationism should not be taught in schools. You see you are entitled to your own opinions. You are not entitled to your own facts. This is why evolution vs creationism is different from say atheism vs theism.

Now someone may say that they believe in God and they are perfectly entitled to that opinion. I would disagree with them, probably quite strongly. but at no point would I say that it is a fact that God doesn't exist. It is simply a position I take and I think I have sound reasons for it and I am sure an interesting conversation could be had about it.

Now if someone then makes the statement there is a God and 6 thousand years ago he made the universe in 6 days creating man in his own image and all species of animal as they appear now: then we have a problem because there is no credible basis in reality for making such a statement. You will notice that there a people who believe such things as holocaust denial, the earth is flat, geocentrism and that the Apollo missions were a hoax. You will also notice we don't give these people places in classrooms where they are able to teach children their particular brand of lunacy.
_mal_
Posted: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 11:01:41 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 11/27/2010
Posts: 191
Location: Somewhere, United States
It's great to discuss the philosophical implications of creationism and science and to discuss a religion vs. science worldview, which is what this thread seems to do thoroughly.

But, it seems the point is being missed. Creationism seeks to be a counterpoint to Darwinian evolution and creationism advocates itself as a science (hence the reason it seeks to be included in science curriculums).

For something to be taught in a science classroom, it needs to be science. Something is science if it obeys and can be approached with the scientific method:

1) it can be characterized through observation (i.e. empirical)
2) a hypothesis (theory aka explanatory statement) can be draw from the observations but this theory also must have PREDICTIVE power (i.e. it needs to predict future physical phenomenon).
3) The hypothesis needs to be brittle enough so that it can be tested (i.e. you have to set up scenarios in which your theory can be proven FALSE)
4) Interpret the data and draw conclusions (this step and the appropriate tests may disprove your original theory, but it may also provide you richer insight into the physical phenomenon so that one can make a new, more explanatory theory that covers the phenomenon missed the first time around)

Steps 1-4 can be repeated numerous times until you don't find any more anomalies in your theory AND the theory is robust enough to satisfy all your tests AND the theory predicts all the applicable phenomenon.

5) Results are publish so that your results can be REPRODUCED independently of you. This is called "reproducibility" and is done through a process called 'peer review'.


If the theory isn't about empirical things, cannot have a chance of being proved false by experiments, is not reproducible by other scientists using the same tests, or is able to predict future physical phenomenon then IT IS NOT SCIENCE.

And that is the point of teaching creationism in the classroom -- proponents say that it is a scientific rival to another scientific theory called evolution.

Creationism isn't empirical (it's purpose is to prove or confirm the existence of God, who is not a physical/empirical being), it doesn't have physical predictive power (which physical phenomenon is creationism trying to predict? God exists? But God isn't physical/empirical), it cannot be tested (how can God be tested, anyways. And it is not a predictive theory, so there is no phenomenon that it can predict and and have a chance to be proven correct or incorrect), and it can't be reproduced by other scientists (if it fails ALL of the preceding requirements, then what is left to reproduce and test?).

Creationism and evolution simply are not equivalent. One is philosophy (creationism) and the other is science (evolution). They are not equivalent or within the same discipline. Not even slightly.

To put it another way, evolution doesn't advocate itself as a worldview but simply a physical theory about how cells divide, mutate, and change to environmental pressures and, consequently after millennia and millennia of small changes, how that affects whole species. That's all it says. Did you see the words 'God', 'Universe', 'Spirituality', 'Anti-Religion' or anything in that sentence? Was there even a hint of those topics in that description? See. Creationism and evolution are not the same and are not even referring to the same topics.

It really is that simple, folks. Creationism is not science and, therefore, doesn't belong in the science classroom.

The church, philosophy classes, or comparative religion classes are the best place for it. Schools are for academic pursuits, not to make better Christians.
Guest
Posted: Thursday, August 18, 2011 7:23:08 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 537,401
Governor Perry is a dimwit. Good luck there, cowboy.

Oh, by the way, I think you're wrong.
Guest
Posted: Thursday, August 18, 2011 7:39:24 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 537,401
eviotis wrote:
Governor Perry is a dimwit. Good luck there, cowboy.

Oh, by the way, I think you're wrong.


Agreed than again what do you expect from a bush appointee?
Guest
Posted: Thursday, August 18, 2011 8:41:12 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 537,401
Ha! Now remember everybody, that is my theory, simple it may be, but based on empirical evidence (google away) thus far, it holds true.
nazhinaz
Posted: Saturday, September 10, 2011 6:08:03 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/16/2010
Posts: 293
Location: Longview, United States
Creationism is a remanant of the era when man, wanting knowledge, used to worship idols, mountains, moon, stars and sun.
Man then worshiped all those that were not understood by him; insurmountable to him and desirous of favors from them.
In the process, mankind moved on from worshipping idols to MONOTHEISM.
Worshipping a creator, a God, whom he cannot see and desiorous of his favors in this world and a percieved next.
Thus is the theory of Special Creation.
This theory is different in almost all religons; including Judeo-Christians and even Muslims.
But as soon as the man knew and conquered mountains, they were no more Gods for him.
When, now, the mankind knows the process of evolution and procreation; the theory of Special Creation is no more a theory; it can at best be considered belief.
And you can't teach believes in schools.
In schooling, you transfer knowledge, not believes.
If someone wants his or her belief to be transfered to his/her kids, well religious schools or home is the best place for that.
Schools must be to cater for knowledge, and knowledge is one that has been proved scientifically.
Guest
Posted: Sunday, September 11, 2011 5:49:04 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 537,401
I guess in the internuts world this may be considered a "bump." But, where the hell is Damon any ways?
nazhinaz
Posted: Tuesday, September 13, 2011 12:50:27 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/16/2010
Posts: 293
Location: Longview, United States
Eviotis;
May I humbly suggest that there is a shade in between the the black and white; grey.
There may be good knowledge or one evil, ignorance.
Fine; but can you place you hand over your heart & say that you or even Socrates had all the knowledge in & of the World? NO
No one can ever claim he does have all the knowledge. Then he ranks himself as GOD. Knowledge is ever growing, taking a spiral path, zig zag course, oblitrating the old & irrelevant and adding new.
Once Penecilline was considered the best antibiotics; but how is penecilline now ranked among the anti-biotics, I don't have to comments upon.
Knowledge is and shall always continue to grow and that is how is evolution moving us ahead.
Hail evolution.
Dancing_Doll
Posted: Tuesday, September 13, 2011 11:36:04 AM

Rank: Alpha Blonde

Joined: 2/17/2010
Posts: 6,293
Location: West Coast
eviotis wrote:
But, where the hell is Damon any ways?


He's chained up in my closet. I only let him out for for good behaviour (rare, as you can imagine).

You can send postcards though! 3601


nazhinaz
Posted: Wednesday, September 14, 2011 2:47:43 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/16/2010
Posts: 293
Location: Longview, United States
Hey Dancing Doll;

But, where the hell is Damon any ways?

He's chained up in my closet. I only let him out for for good behaviour (rare, as you can imagine).

Can You let me peep into your closet?
I promise I won't touch your panties or bra.
hehe hehe.
Guest
Posted: Wednesday, September 14, 2011 10:39:38 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 537,401
Dancing_Doll wrote:
eviotis wrote:
But, where the hell is Damon any ways?


He's chained up in my closet. I only let him out for for good behaviour (rare, as you can imagine).

You can send postcards though! 3601


Would you let him out for a minute? You can keep him on a tight leash.
Guest
Posted: Wednesday, September 14, 2011 10:46:36 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 537,401
I think it should be an alternate choice.
Dancing_Doll
Posted: Wednesday, September 14, 2011 1:50:41 PM

Rank: Alpha Blonde

Joined: 2/17/2010
Posts: 6,293
Location: West Coast
chefkathleen wrote:
Dancing_Doll wrote:
eviotis wrote:
But, where the hell is Damon any ways?


He's chained up in my closet. I only let him out for for good behaviour (rare, as you can imagine).

You can send postcards though! 3601


Would you let him out for a minute? You can keep him on a tight leash.


I can't make any promises... he's pretty unruly, even on a leash.... But I will let him know that he's being 'paged' to the Think Tank. icon_smile


Guest
Posted: Thursday, September 15, 2011 2:32:33 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 537,401
Dancing_Doll wrote:
chefkathleen wrote:
Dancing_Doll wrote:
eviotis wrote:
But, where the hell is Damon any ways?


He's chained up in my closet. I only let him out for for good behaviour (rare, as you can imagine).

You can send postcards though! 3601


Would you let him out for a minute? You can keep him on a tight leash.


I can't make any promises... he's pretty unruly, even on a leash.... But I will let him know that he's being 'paged' to the Think Tank. icon_smile


Good.Good. There's someone I want him to meet. I think Ladyx does too.
Guest
Posted: Thursday, September 15, 2011 5:42:53 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 537,401
And that is why I love Doll and Chef. XO

As to the middle ground Naz mentioned. First, he also said something else that I try to ascribe to, knowing that I know nothing. So no, neither of us could. But that is only in terms of knowledge. If you believe that you know everything, then you will stop learning. However, in my heathen mind, I believe that there is so much more to this plain than continuously harking on about another, especially in school. There is a forum for that, and school is not that forum.

Personally, I tell my kid, short bits on what everyone...EVERYONE, believes. Not just a Christian god, which is, as I have been chastised about going on about previously. And for that matter, bringing the discussion in on minds that have enough to soak in, and parents have enough to keep up with than introducing the fact that there is only one answer. And, arguably so, that is what the whole issue, debate if you want, is about.

Look at the wording of the legislation. Purposefully obtuse, benign, and innocent. As some have put it, including certain Presidents, we just wanna teach the controversy. Ummhmmm.

nazhinaz
Posted: Friday, September 16, 2011 1:30:40 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/16/2010
Posts: 293
Location: Longview, United States
eviotis;
I hardly care what you tell your kids at home; as it is your family affair and I don't like to poke my nose in your family (unless asked for).
But I do care and feel worried if creationism is being taught at schools.
As I emntioned earlier, schools are meant for transfer of knowledge. Let me define knowledge.
Knowledge if the accumulated human responces to the questions posed in various era.
Thus knowledge is the information we have which has proved correct upto date.
If somehow later that information is proved wrong, mind you, by the knoledge acquired by the posterity, well we can and should correct ourselves, As we did in the case of gravity, from Newton to Einstein.
So knowledge is all human, no divinity or revealed information.
I would not like to dabble into teaching technologies at this forum; the Pedrogogy and Androgogy.
But schools are meant for transfer to knowledge from teachers to students.
Colleges and beyond are meant for Pedrogogy; where they can venture to apply their minds to find their own responces to the latest questions.
In school, they need to learn the basics so that they know how to apply their minds to provide their own answers at Colleges and Universities.
So lets not dabble with the future of our posterity, my dear Forum Guru.
Guest
Posted: Friday, September 16, 2011 9:16:39 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 537,401
nazhinaz
Posted: Saturday, September 17, 2011 1:54:26 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/16/2010
Posts: 293
Location: Longview, United States
Mazza, the forum guru;
" I AM RIGHT, YOU ARE WRONG.
That what the knowledge(greek word-Science) is fighting against.
We as matured species on earth, by now, must have learnt that this attitude "I CAN'T HEAR YOU" is bound to kill all investigation, research and self correction of the accumulated collective human knowledge.
Belief is one which hardly any science could and can cure.
Come out of just believing; argue, get convinced or convince others.
Appreciate the facts as recorded by human intellegence (not CIA or M6).
Interpret and enter into a dialogue.
Thats the scientific pathway.
Guest
Posted: Sunday, September 18, 2011 9:05:02 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 537,401
I don't need, as others do not need your definition of knowledge. You continuously speak in parables and nothing clear. It's boring.

Congrats.
nazhinaz
Posted: Monday, September 19, 2011 1:59:31 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/16/2010
Posts: 293
Location: Longview, United States
Dear eviotis;
I thought I did define knowledge; but maybe that was on some other forum posts.
Let me be specific and define it here.
Knowledge is the accumulative human experiences which have been confirmed and reconfirmed time and again.
To further explain,
We all know fire burns and so we all tell our kids not to play with fire.
This is accumulated human experience which has been tested and verified time and again.
Thus knowledge pertain to our past.
Advancement in knowledge is through research; i.e. making new experiences and testing and verifing them so that it also becomes part of accumulative human knowldge.
The knowledge is continously on the growth, as human beings are always making new experiences and testing and verifying them.
The closer the technological advancements bring us together, the testing and verification and confirmation is easier and faster.
Thus the human knowledge is being acculmulated faster, much faster then ever.
It is said that all human knowledge as of 1900, doubled itself by 1950 and this was again doubled by 1980 and since then every decade is doubling it again and again.
Thank you for giving me a chance to clarify this important issue of debate.
swollen
Posted: Monday, September 19, 2011 4:04:23 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 5/27/2010
Posts: 1,001
nazhinaz wrote:
Dear eviotis;
I thought I did define knowledge; but maybe that was on some other forum posts.
Let me be specific and define it here.
Knowledge is the accumulative human experiences which have been confirmed and reconfirmed time and again.
To further explain,
We all know fire burns and so we all tell our kids not to play with fire.
This is accumulated human experience which has been tested and verified time and again.
Thus knowledge pertain to our past.
Advancement in knowledge is through research; i.e. making new experiences and testing and verifing them so that it also becomes part of accumulative human knowldge.
The knowledge is continously on the growth, as human beings are always making new experiences and testing and verifying them.
The closer the technological advancements bring us together, the testing and verification and confirmation is easier and faster.
Thus the human knowledge is being acculmulated faster, much faster then ever.
It is said that all human knowledge as of 1900, doubled itself by 1950 and this was again doubled by 1980 and since then every decade is doubling it again and again.
Thank you for giving me a chance to clarify this important issue of debate.


Sweetie - you kinda don't make a lot of sense !!!!

Seems to me sometimes those who think they have a lot of knowledge, actually revolve in their own sweet, personal state of total confusion !

blah5
nazhinaz
Posted: Monday, September 19, 2011 11:27:01 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/16/2010
Posts: 293
Location: Longview, United States
Dear Swollen;
I will really be honoured to learn from you, as i always considered myself a humble but honest student to lean from every one anywhere in the World.
If you could define knowledge better, not only me, but many students through out the World would be benefitted from it.
And to tell you honestly, I am not a person who thinks that he has much knowledge.
If you care to go through my above post, no person on earth could claim to have lot of knowledge.
We search new knowledge in our respective domains of study, right, but can never even think of having lot of knowledge.
WellMadeMale
Posted: Monday, September 19, 2011 12:55:28 PM

Rank: Constant Gardener

Joined: 9/30/2009
Posts: 10,299
Location: Cakeland, United States
nazhinaz wrote:
Dear Swollen;
I will really be honoured to learn from you, as i always considered myself a humble but honest student to lean from every one anywhere in the World.
If you could define knowledge better, not only me, but many students through out the World would be benefitted from it.
And to tell you honestly, I am not a person who thinks that he has much knowledge.
If you care to go through my above post, no person on earth could claim to have lot of knowledge.
We search new knowledge in our respective domains of study, right, but can never even think of having lot of knowledge.


The older I have grown, and the more information I have gathered and gained, the more I realize I don't know shit or even where to separate facts from fallacy in many different fields which interest me.

Most of the people on this planet are so busy just trying to make enough coin or scratch out enough food from the dirt, just to survive...that they don't have the luxury to spend even a spare hour a day...learning something new (for fun and the hell of it) or to be exposed to something different which may allow them to expand their sphere of knowledge about the world/universe around them.

Many who are able to do so, choose not to. They are comfortable in knowing they won't know everything and they choose to spend their free time in congregation with other people who share their cultist beliefs. More power to 'em.

I am of the school of thought that some of the simplest pleasures of this life, involve being able to have a little bit of freedom to exercise free choice to do whatever the hell I want to do. So far in this life of mine, I've been fortunate for a few years to realize that goal of mine. But I can see the alternatives facing me down the road, as well. And those can occur at any moment.


If ya can't beat 'em... pay someone to do it for you.
nazhinaz
Posted: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 2:45:31 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/16/2010
Posts: 293
Location: Longview, United States
Wellmademan:
Wonderfully expressed. Really appreciate what you posted.
I do endorse that a huge majority hardly knows what to do and to which direction to move.
But my dear;
Let's give them the latitude that after all compulsory eduction in many parts of the World just started about half a century ago or even less.
and still a vast majority of the World population does not have any formal education of any sort.
Still majority of boys go to Madrrasahs in Afghanistan and Pakistan, with no formal education at all.
Maybe it takes another century that people are educated formally, more directed, focused and more productive then.
And meanwhile lets continue to do our bit in that direction.
And the Forum having a Think Tank thus does contribute its bit in providing direction.
Users browsing this topic
Guest 


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS

Powered by Yet Another Forum.net version 1.9.1.6 (NET v4.0) - 11/14/2007
Copyright © 2003-2006 Yet Another Forum.net. All rights reserved.