I'll be offline for maybe 10 days while we take a vacation in the Smoky Mountains and the adjacent regions. But I'll be back. If I find a feral computer somewhere, I might even log in for a minute or two while we're out and about.
Later,
Stan
Thursday, August 25, 2011
Tuesday, August 23, 2011
PZ Watch 8.23.11: PZ and Reason
PZ lauds a court decision which supports a teacher's attacks on religion in the classroom.
The issue was as follows:
The ignorance here is eyebrow deep: an ignorant Atheist teacher in charge of “educating” California students. The expanding universe convicted Einstein of a universal beginning 76 years ago. Scientists have pursued and accepted this from then until now. But not in this California classroom. So here’s my “call”: the universe had a beginning, and the beginning very likely had a cause; the other option, “it was always there” is too ignorant to even discuss.
But apparently PZ agrees with this. The teacher continues:
Deduction is a full stage of the scientific process. Pared to a minimalist
sequence it is as follows:
Induction : Hypothesis : Deduction : Test : Adjust Hypothesis : Repeat Deduction : continue in this loop until the test results coincide with the hypothesis.
It would be interesting to know what this “teacher” thinks science consists of, if deduction is as evil as he portrays it.
But it is not surprising that PZ agrees with any court decision that favors Atheism, no matter what the fallacies are that support that decision. For PZ, fallacies exist only in the logic of the opposition.
Now, I do agree that "creationism" in the form of "Intelligent Design" seems to be deductive. But deduction is not the problem with ID; the problem with ID is that it is a rationalist pursuit with metaphysical overtones, so it is not science. Science is voluntarily hobbled to materialist pursuits due to the inability to test non-materialist claims. That is the point which should be made when teaching science, its possibilities and its limitations. The Philosophy of Science, and the Philosophy of Knowledge should be taught before any science is taught. But first it would have to be taught to teachers.
The other problem is that science is not the only road to knowledge, or even a major road to knowledge. Science depends on rationalist knowledge for its limited legitimacy: mathematics, logic and axioms. Science teachers seem to be blissfully unaware of the full intellectual landscape, and since that fits in with Atheism, it is just fine by them. But it actually makes them unfit to teach: they are too filled with training theory and are totally innocent of intellectual underpinnings. They can't pass on what they don't know. They also are victims of the Dewey philosophy, and they pass that along to the next generation.
However, ignorance can also be considered willful. For the Atheist who claims reason and rationality, willful ignorance challenges that claim.
The issue was as follows:
”The dispute began in 2007 when Chad Farnan, then a 15-year-old sophomore in Corbett’s class, took issue with comments about creationism the teacher made during his lectures.Deduction is scientific nonsense? Let’s take these issues one at a time.
And you hear it all the time with people who say, ‘Well, if all this stuff that makes up the universe is here, something must have created it.’ Faulty logic. Very faulty logic.”
He continued: “The other possibility is, it’s always been there.… Your call as to which one of those notions is scientific and which one is magic.”
“All I’m saying is that, you know, the people who want to make the argument that God did it, there is as much evidence that God did it as there is that there is a giant spaghetti monster living behind the moon who did it,” the transcript says.
Corbett told his students that “real” scientists try to disprove the theory of evolution. “Contrast that with creationists,” he told his students. “They never try to disprove creationism. They’re all running around trying to prove it. That’s deduction. It’s not science. Scientifically, it’s nonsense.”
”Aristotle … argued, you know, there sort of has to be a God. Of course that’s nonsense,” Corbett said according to a transcript of his lecture. “I mean, that’s what you call deductive reasoning, you know.”Aristotle is dismissed without any discussion of his reasoning, as “nonsense”. The reason given for the rejection is “deduction”. So deduction is inappropriate, according to this person.
“And you hear it all the time with people who say, ‘Well, if all this stuff that makes up the universe is here, something must have created it.’ Faulty logic. Very faulty logic.”Really? And where is the fault? Just what logic are you using?
” He continued: “The other possibility is, it’s always been there.… Your call as to which one of those notions is scientific and which one is magic.”
The ignorance here is eyebrow deep: an ignorant Atheist teacher in charge of “educating” California students. The expanding universe convicted Einstein of a universal beginning 76 years ago. Scientists have pursued and accepted this from then until now. But not in this California classroom. So here’s my “call”: the universe had a beginning, and the beginning very likely had a cause; the other option, “it was always there” is too ignorant to even discuss.
But apparently PZ agrees with this. The teacher continues:
”“All I’m saying is that, you know, the people who want to make the argument that God did it, there is as much evidence that God did it as there is that there is a giant spaghetti monster living behind the moon who did it,” the transcript says.This is buffoon-Atheist-speak, using a straw man as logic. Consider that this person is not only teaching children his Atheist foolishness, but that the courts refused to consider the constitutional aspect (which they repeatedly apply to religious content) – indicating that the courts are unrelentingly Atheist-bound also. And consider that PZ, who is also “teaching” science - consider that all of these approve of this teacher’s fully faulty reasoning and perpetration of that upon his students.
Deduction is a full stage of the scientific process. Pared to a minimalist
sequence it is as follows:
Induction : Hypothesis : Deduction : Test : Adjust Hypothesis : Repeat Deduction : continue in this loop until the test results coincide with the hypothesis.
It would be interesting to know what this “teacher” thinks science consists of, if deduction is as evil as he portrays it.
But it is not surprising that PZ agrees with any court decision that favors Atheism, no matter what the fallacies are that support that decision. For PZ, fallacies exist only in the logic of the opposition.
Now, I do agree that "creationism" in the form of "Intelligent Design" seems to be deductive. But deduction is not the problem with ID; the problem with ID is that it is a rationalist pursuit with metaphysical overtones, so it is not science. Science is voluntarily hobbled to materialist pursuits due to the inability to test non-materialist claims. That is the point which should be made when teaching science, its possibilities and its limitations. The Philosophy of Science, and the Philosophy of Knowledge should be taught before any science is taught. But first it would have to be taught to teachers.
The other problem is that science is not the only road to knowledge, or even a major road to knowledge. Science depends on rationalist knowledge for its limited legitimacy: mathematics, logic and axioms. Science teachers seem to be blissfully unaware of the full intellectual landscape, and since that fits in with Atheism, it is just fine by them. But it actually makes them unfit to teach: they are too filled with training theory and are totally innocent of intellectual underpinnings. They can't pass on what they don't know. They also are victims of the Dewey philosophy, and they pass that along to the next generation.
However, ignorance can also be considered willful. For the Atheist who claims reason and rationality, willful ignorance challenges that claim.
Monday, August 22, 2011
A Link: "Removal of Homosexuality", by someone who was there.
This link was provided by J.D. Curtis, and is a reference that indicates the actual process of "normalizing" homosexuality. It deserves its own post. Thanks, J.D.
The Normalization of Pedophilia
I have been reluctant to write about this because it is gut-wrenchingly nasty, yet gut-wrenchingly predictable. The movement to normalize pedophilia is now active and out of the closet.
Normalization is the process started by Kinsey, who declared that all sexuality was merely part of a spectrum, and the whole spectrum is normal behavior. He knew that two ways, by interviewing sexual predator prisoners, and by engaging in all types of sexual behavior himself, along with his team and their wives. The Kinsey Report is the basis for much of what has proceeded in the sexualization of America.
The normalization of homosexuality occurred in the mid 1970’s. Homosexuality was removed as a category of "disorder" from the DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders), which is the rule book established by the American Psychiatric Association. The normalization was forced by internal protests by homosexual members who wanted their own pathology redefined as normal behavior, part of a spectrum of sexual behaviors all of which are normal, according to Kinsey anyway. The slippery slope leading to the normalization of all, ALL, sexual behaviors was denied at the time: we are just homosexual; we are not pedophiles – they are perverts.
But if the argument worked for the normalization of the tiny minority of homosexuals, why should the same argument be denied any of the other minority sexual practices? If homosexuality is normalized, there is no remaining restriction on any conceivable sexual behavior, because the argument is exactly the same… and the potential for moral restraint is entirely dismissed: morals are relative and of no consequence in modern society.
Kinsey reported that child sexuality is normal. It's all just a part of the normal spectrum of human sexual behavior.
So what remains to be done? Merely to normalize pedophilia in the APA’s DSM, and then to remove any age of consent limitations on child sexuality.
Following California’s lead, it can be expected that Pedophilia will be ordered to be taught as an acceptable lifestyle in the government schools. The accomplishments and sterling characters of pedophiles must be taught in history courses. Man/child safe sex practices will be demonstrated. Non-discrimination will be enforced.
While I am tempted to rant on about the consequences of the lack of morals in society, I need to leave off here; it is just too disgusting to continue.
But I have one further thought. If there is just a spectrum of sexual behaviors, all of which are normal, then there must be a spectrum of other behaviors, all of which are normal. In fact, all behaviors could be defined as part of a normal spectrum, leaving no behaviors definable as "disorders". This means that all behaviors are normalized and if a person's behavior is a problem for other persons, then the other persons need to be reminded of their obligation for "TOLERANCE". Thus making Intolerance the only remaining disorder.
Normalization is the process started by Kinsey, who declared that all sexuality was merely part of a spectrum, and the whole spectrum is normal behavior. He knew that two ways, by interviewing sexual predator prisoners, and by engaging in all types of sexual behavior himself, along with his team and their wives. The Kinsey Report is the basis for much of what has proceeded in the sexualization of America.
The normalization of homosexuality occurred in the mid 1970’s. Homosexuality was removed as a category of "disorder" from the DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders), which is the rule book established by the American Psychiatric Association. The normalization was forced by internal protests by homosexual members who wanted their own pathology redefined as normal behavior, part of a spectrum of sexual behaviors all of which are normal, according to Kinsey anyway. The slippery slope leading to the normalization of all, ALL, sexual behaviors was denied at the time: we are just homosexual; we are not pedophiles – they are perverts.
But if the argument worked for the normalization of the tiny minority of homosexuals, why should the same argument be denied any of the other minority sexual practices? If homosexuality is normalized, there is no remaining restriction on any conceivable sexual behavior, because the argument is exactly the same… and the potential for moral restraint is entirely dismissed: morals are relative and of no consequence in modern society.
Kinsey reported that child sexuality is normal. It's all just a part of the normal spectrum of human sexual behavior.
So what remains to be done? Merely to normalize pedophilia in the APA’s DSM, and then to remove any age of consent limitations on child sexuality.
Following California’s lead, it can be expected that Pedophilia will be ordered to be taught as an acceptable lifestyle in the government schools. The accomplishments and sterling characters of pedophiles must be taught in history courses. Man/child safe sex practices will be demonstrated. Non-discrimination will be enforced.
While I am tempted to rant on about the consequences of the lack of morals in society, I need to leave off here; it is just too disgusting to continue.
But I have one further thought. If there is just a spectrum of sexual behaviors, all of which are normal, then there must be a spectrum of other behaviors, all of which are normal. In fact, all behaviors could be defined as part of a normal spectrum, leaving no behaviors definable as "disorders". This means that all behaviors are normalized and if a person's behavior is a problem for other persons, then the other persons need to be reminded of their obligation for "TOLERANCE". Thus making Intolerance the only remaining disorder.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)