Bernard L. Madoff

New Science Curriculum

44 posts in this topic

I'm thankful my kids will have skipped this garbage.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/politics/curriculum-puts-dreamtime-first/story-e6frgczf-1225834964274

SCHOOL students will learn about Aboriginal Dreamtime stories, Chinese medicine and natural therapies but not meet the periodic table of elements until Year 10 under the new national science curriculum.

The curriculum, obtained by The Weekend Australian, directs that students from primary school through to Year 10 be taught the scientific knowledge of different cultures, primarily indigenous culture, including sustainable land use and traditional technologies.

The indigenous strand is part of a topic called Science and Culture examining different cultural groups and their perspectives on science.

The curriculum, to be released on Monday for public consultation, sets out a course of study from kindergarten to Year 10 that takes in physics, chemistry, biology and earth sciences but teaches them as one rather than in separate disciplines.

The curriculum is organised into three inter-related strands of science: inquiry skills, about the collection of data; science as a human endeavour, about the history and nature of science; and science understanding, which teaches fundamental concepts.

Start of sidebar. Skip to end of sidebar.

End of sidebar. Return to start of sidebar.

Australian scientists and their discoveries are prominent in the curriculum, with students at different years learning about Nobel Prize-winners including Ian Frazer and the cervical cancer vaccine, Alexander Fleming and Howard Florey and the rise of penicillin and antibiotics, as well as scientists such as Graeme Clarke and the bionic ear. The curriculum has had to take account of the different year levels for high school, which starts in Year 8 in some states and Year 7 elsewhere, and as a result the curriculums for those years are more general in content, covering public health guidelines, the law and science, sustainability and recycling, with less experiment-based work than in some existing state curriculums.

The periodic table of elements is not introduced until Year 10, when the curriculum is packed with scientific ideas including DNA, genetics, evolution, the universe and plate tectonics.

"Specific knowledge and understanding of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples is incorporated where it relates to science and relevant phenomena, particularly knowledge and understanding of nature and of sustainable practices," it says. "For example, systematic observations by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures over many generations of the sequence of various natural events contribute to our scientific understanding of seasons in Australia."

Primary students will look at traditional bush tucker and natural remedies used in indigenous cultures as well as the use of fire to promote new plant growth and their strategies for finding water. For Year 4 students, the curriculum says they should research "historical examples of different cultures' knowledge about the national environment and living things (e.g. Aboriginal peoples' Dreamtime stories that explain significant characteristics of the Earth's surface and interactions between living things)".

The curriculum for Year 7 directs that students research "Aboriginal X-ray art to investigate Aboriginal knowledge of the internal biology and physiological processes of animals" as well as "traditional Chinese knowledge of the structure and function of human body systems".

In Year 8, students will discuss "traditional stories of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as a basis for understanding complex ecosystems at local and regional levels" and through "personal interaction or stories" research the "special relationship" of indigenous people with the land and its flora and fauna.

I'm a fan of all the subjects but science is science(biology, chemistry and physics) not social studies and cultural awareness.

Australia - the clever country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We did the Aboriginal and local stuff in a subject called Australian Studies. We went out and made spears, watched some aboriginals make boomerangs, didn't watch them kill and gut a kangaroo and we all had to eat it after it was cooked in a hole in the ground. We learnt a bit of Pitjitjintjara history. We also learnt important things like where Iron Knob is on a map, but not where Adelaide is. It all had absolutely nothing to do with science and was closer to geography.

The Child already does a lot of stuff in science I wouldn't call science, because she's in a school in a very farming oriented community. They are breeding chickens and goats and have an extensive vegetable patch so she's forever coming home with food from 'science', which is something we never did at school. And they call insects and things like yeast 'minibeasts' and get the kids to bring ones they find to school, and I'm still better at finding bugs and interesting things than she is. I found some weird green beetle thing with red horns on its back yesterday eating one of my shrubs, and caught some nice grasshoppers to feed the chooks; she simply can't spot bugs like that ...

Is there any actual curriculum left anyway? They keep jamming in extra stuff. 3 years after the 'healthy eating' subject I'm still trying to undo the horrible stuff they taught The Child, and they're forever trying to get extra phys ed and self esteem and body image and food crap in there that is a total waste of time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even starting in grade 6 with rudimentary gelogy, ecology, biology, chemistry and physical sciences is probably leaving it late.

with less experiment-based work than in some existing state curriculums.

A generation of wildebeeste.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Science is a method, not a view. Religion is method and not a view as well.

Science; Proposition, possibility, probability.

Religion; lightening strike, WOW!.....There is something beyond this......an invisible and angry god, I better watch my ass.

Edited by wulfgar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm thankful my kids will have skipped this garbage.

http://www.theaustra...f-1225834964274

I'm a fan of all the subjects but science is science(biology, chemistry and physics) not social studies and cultural awareness.

Australia - the clever country.

But it's too hard TP for us Aussie's to do proper subjects, we only like the easy stuff.

Went for a long walk with daughter (15yo -yr 9) today and discussed a lot about school. She's at the Australian International School and is the only non-Chinese kid in the advanced maths class. All her friends have dropped out of Mandarin this yr because it's 'too hard', and even more embarrassing she says that many of the Chinese kids are outperforming the Aussie kids in ENGLISH. Our country needs to take a good look at where we are going with education and parents need to think long and hard about the values they instill in their kids.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only values you need to instill in an aussie kid, is that of real estate!

But seriously, no periodic table until yr 10, but heaps of mystical feelgood nonsense instead :rolleyes::angry:, why don't they introduce creationism whilst they're at it. It might not make much diffence for the non academic kids, but that's terrible for the bright ones who have an interest in science and how things work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i hear china graduates more engineers than the rest of the world alltogether. mainly to manufacture products that hold together long enough to get the wrappers off, but still we already lost the war of smart kids.

i think as long as kids do something science related they get tafght scientific method at uni, and thats where they really need it. no need to have any working brains at maccas or bunnings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The role of parents is understated.

My father and mother taught me so much. My wife and I in turn taught/teach the kids stuff (they could basically read and write albeit simply and add and subtract before grade 1), as an example, my youngest is a Greco-Roman history and mythology guru, he just gobbles it up yet he has never touched it at school.

Its all pretty hard when two young parents are both out from dark o'clock AM to dark o'clock PM so they can pay the mortgage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very much up to the kid though. I really fought with my oldest to get her to read - she FINALLY got it at the end of her first year at school after much arguing, hair-pulling and pain. I'm currently fighting with her about spelling. She is a serious bookworm but is a terrible speller (outside of spelling bees and specific spelling lessons). She has been arguing with me that HER spelling is correct and mine and book spellings are incorrect for years now.

Teachers at her new school were so impressed with her reading level (which is about 6-8 or so years higher than her age) that they just assumed she had been taught to read at a very early age and were very surprised to hear how late she learnt.

I also have extreme trouble interesting her in the vast majority of science concepts, investigating bugs and animals, how plants grow, basic physics, all things food related (the chemistry of cooking and nutrition outside of what happens on Biggest Loser - her favourite show) and generally all that stuff I was interested in as a kid. She's always been more inclined to start arguments with me when I point out interesting facts and snippets than go "oh cool, I never knew that". The one passably scientific fact she's latched onto recently - and by 'latched on' I mean she asks the same question at least daily and has been doing so for far too long now - is whether or not penises float. She has an enormous quantity of lego but isn't interested in the simple engineering behind getting lego buildings to stand up better and stronger, so the rare occasions she makes something out of lego are always followed by 6 months of having to constantly repair it after the cat and baby investigate it. I hamstrung her completely when I took away all her lego instruction manuals because all she wanted to do was make the little things in the manuals instead of just having fun with the half cubic metre or so of random lego she has. We haven't found many computer games that hold her interest for any length either - mahjong so far is the best one, followed by some other similar pattern matching type games.

Meanwhile the other kid is just soaking it all up like some kind of small curly sponge and only argues over bedtime, is getting pretty good at making things out of unattended lego, and is starting to get a handle on how computers work too. It is so painfully obvious one is going to grow up into a 'princess' and the other will be a geek.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find that interesting.

My oldest has an IQ around mine, around 140ish and he can absorb anything and is a natural born problem theoretical solver but he finds young adult hood non-directed a battle and is easily distracted after a childhood of A's with limited study.

The younger one (Greco-Romam mythology expert) at 14 is in a purple patch with moderate study and we thought he wouldn't cut it. But time will tell.

The oldest has no time for pets, whilst the youngest will have both dogs, the cat, any feral passers by in his bed.

When I was at school, my best mate (still my best mate, way wealthier than me, in Perth) was doing advanced maths with me and was in a 'special class' for English. In the late 70s, dyslexia was not really identified.

What makes kids learn (pedagogy) is trial and error for me, I have no background. but we adapt.

I wrote a paper once on andragogy and personality types for uni (in the aviation environment). It fascinates me. I see guys/girls mutter to themselves in difficult times, stone cold; and banter types (me). We are all different.

Us Tinheads are mean't to be ESTJ on Myers-Briggs according to HR, yet I and many others whom are well adjusted succesful are ENTP.

I argue ExTx being the nominal identifier. They eliminate so many and yet have such failure rates.

Oh well, there is always tomorrow and another nice red.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...Myers-Briggs...

MB is a pile of steaming HR crap. Makes the SB IQ test look awesome in comparison.

The test was developed starting in the 1940s by the mother-daughter team of Katherine Briggs and Isabel Myers with the goal of sorting people based on Carl Jung’s theory of psychological types. The best that can be said about the Swiss psychiatrist’s ideas is that they were ingenious — he made no attempt to validate them via experiment. Briggs and Myers, for their part, had no expertise in psychology other than what they picked up from Jung and consultation with people in the testing business.

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2922/does-the-myers-briggs-personality-assessment-really-tell-you-anything

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MB is a pile of steaming HR crap. Makes the SB IQ test look awesome in comparison.

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2922/does-the-myers-briggs-personality-assessment-really-tell-you-anything

I think you are correct. I think they have back filled indentifiers. In last weeks Weekend Aus magazine (not last Sat, the one before) they had a 'your life is in their hands' on ATC, Sydney specific AND it the ESTJ got brought up again. I do believe that analytical, logical types do well, BUT what happens to me (?) where I 'sense' and go with experience induced intuitive decisions hard won? 15 years ago, I mentally 'flow charted' albeit quickly. Its not good indicator IMO except that for ExTx.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From my limited experience in teaching Maths/Science (I trained and but decided I didn't want to live in Thargomindah) There seemed to be three broad groups.

1. Those who were keen and read ahead. They ask questions you have to take on notice. You need to have some extension activities for these dudes, a pat on the head and they're happy. A pleasure to teach.

2. Those with the ability to learn but less interest. They require more work. I used to run a tutorial session at lunch time and was heartened with the number of this group that would turn up. All of group one showed all of the time. :rolleyes: I used to get group one to help explain the subject to group two. Group one liked this as it was the pat on the head some of them craved. Some of group two had simply been left behind at some stage maybe due to bad teachers or personal situation. I got the feeling that once you lose some of this group to science/maths study they can get too far behind and give up. I think this happens to a lot in Aus schools.

3. Not interested in science and no ability. This group should be placed into a different stream altogether IMO. Maybe a more vocational stream like the old technical schools. Very difficult to teach if they have zero interest and the bright ones are usually intent on disrupting the rest of the class.

A large part of teaching is recognising the comprehension in the faces that you teach. Teachers that can do this can better allocate their time toward most need.

I agree that the science curriculum should not be dumbed down. It is what it is. Other nations will be at a competitive advantage to us if we do. There does seem to be a notion that science isn't cool and is for geeks. :jawdrop: Not sure how to fix this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...and is for geeks. ...

Real geeks (not the idiots that claim to be geeks and wank on forums about companies selling out, honestly what geek would care?) get the cash and get the chicks and appear to be getting the lifestyle power.

Who needs to do anything? The obvious becomes more obvious.

The problem when it comes down to it is that most people are not geniuses. Most people are not even smart.

But they all think they are. Which means the evil bastards will always win.

Do you want me to tell you I am smarter than you and you are f*cked because I will always be smarter than you? I will always earn more than you, my girlfriend is probably better looking than your wife and she doesn't pressure me into breeding or coming home from work because, quite simply, she realises she has a good catch and changing the situation would only ever be a net loss to her.

Realistically most of you are so incompetent that you have actually transferred all of your goals into simply raising mediocre children and incessantly spouting their praises. Guess what, your kids are probably just as crap as you are and are exceptionally unlikely to ever compete with me.

You lost your objectivity when you bred and found a somewhat sad albeit common way of transferring your proven failure into a possible second chance in that, like a member of a country claiming sporting excellence on the basis of watching a professional do something hard, you have your child that you are proving is awesome by simply saying so repetitively.

Or would you prefer I explained why I "look" smarter than you and how you too can look as smart as me? Only costs $50.

Now tell me honestly how many of you rankled at the first option and wanted to punch me. Then tell me that you don't think you are just another human that can be emotionally manipulated through fairly simple and easy techniques.

Now tell me you honestly think that geeks can be created. And tell me that they will beat the evil bastards that know how to manipulate peoples emotions.

Because if you can manipulate their emotions you get their money. Why bother trying to be smart.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you want me to tell you I am smarter than you and you are f*cked because I will always be smarter than you? I will always earn more than you, my girlfriend is probably better looking than your wife and she doesn't pressure me into breeding or coming home from work because, quite simply, she realises she has a good catch and changing the situation would only ever be a net loss to her.

Realistically most of you are so incompetent that you have actually transferred all of your goals into simply raising mediocre children and incessantly spouting their praises. Guess what, your kids are probably just as crap as you are and are exceptionally unlikely to ever compete with me.

You lost your objectivity when you bred and found a somewhat sad albeit common way of transferring your proven failure into a possible second chance in that, like a member of a country claiming sporting excellence on the basis of watching a professional do something hard, you have your child that you are proving is awesome by simply saying so repetitively.

Or would you prefer I explained why I "look" smarter than you and how you too can look as smart as me? Only costs $50.

:D Only $50. And you're saying I can look smarter? Where do I sign?

Real geeks (not the idiots that claim to be geeks and wank on forums about companies selling out, honestly what geek would care?) get the cash and get the chicks and appear to be getting the lifestyle power.

Who needs to do anything? The obvious becomes more obvious.

I think I have a broader definition of "geek". The aspergers syndrome, anti-social genius type geek. (Thinking of Isaac Newton as described by Neal Stephenson.) These are quite rare. I define geeks as pursuing a body of knowledge unbidden by parent, through a self motivated curiousity. These are more common but still a small minority.

The ones capable of the manipulation to get your money also need to be intelligent. They are different from the geeks in that they have more psychopathic tendencies.

I think a key part of any education system is to promote critical thinking. We shouldn't be sending sheep out into society. They need to know about the evil bastards. From "Stranger danger" up. This is not easy as you instantly run into the problem of parents. You could well be stepping on their toes if you start talking about morality or ethics that don't coincide with their own. (And how do you know if your own are balanced?) Some teachers I know try to teach it anyway.

I think critical thinking might actually be best accomplished through teaching the scientific method. This wasn't much covered when I was at school but you could tell a few stories about the controversies in science and shifts in thinking. The idea of evolution overtaking the creationist view as the dominant paradigm. There must be less controversial examples. :D

Spelling

Edited by staringclown

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you are correct. I think they have back filled indentifiers. In last weeks Weekend Aus magazine (not last Sat, the one before) they had a 'your life is in their hands' on ATC, Sydney specific AND it the ESTJ got brought up again. I do believe that analytical, logical types do well, BUT what happens to me (?) where I 'sense' and go with experience induced intuitive decisions hard won? 15 years ago, I mentally 'flow charted' albeit quickly. Its not good indicator IMO except that for ExTx.

We had all that done to us at HR at work too, back in the day. In our branch, the vast, VAST majority of people turned out to be INTJs, one or two S's, a few Ps and *gasp* some E's. They made it hard for us E's - all three of us were ENTP. Basically the personality guy said scientists and programmers tend to be xNTx types, and he'd never seen an F at our workplace but when he goes to do a group of nurses they are invariably all F's. There were around 2000 people at the workplace - overwhelming majority of those were male - at the time so that's a fairly healthy sample set to make generalisations on. You're more likely to be an F if you're female and T if you're male, FWIW ...

Its all pretty vague stuff and is only a waffly sort of indicator of what someone is like. My ex is an INTJ and self and partner are ENTPs (barely scraping in on the E though but you can tell the difference). The Child is too young to tell and the way she thinks is so peculiar I can't even begin to understand how she thinks, let alone pigeonhole her.

For the rest of you -

I/E is introverted/extraverted

S/N is sensate/intuitive - details vs big picture

F/T is thinking/feeling - logic vs emotion

P/J is perceptive/judgemental, which I tend to think of as messy/neat. J people are organisers.

The Child could be a J, come to think of it. She's constantly cleaning the house and sorting things (when she was a baby she used to sort my sock drawer by colour), which I find quite bizarre. The rest of us just mess it up :huh: But then her room oscillates between complete pigsty and immaculate too ...

Still no clue what she's likely to end up as when she grows up. Horror writer, supermodel and lawyer are topping the list at the moment - anything that involves one-way communications and doesn't need any empathy at all. Should I be adding air traffic controller to the list?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We had all that done to us at HR at work too, back in the day. In our branch, the vast, VAST majority of people turned out to be INTJs, one or two S's, a few Ps and *gasp* some E's. They made it hard for us E's - all three of us were ENTP. Basically the personality guy said scientists and programmers tend to be xNTx types, and he'd never seen an F at our workplace but when he goes to do a group of nurses they are invariably all F's. There were around 2000 people at the workplace - overwhelming majority of those were male - at the time so that's a fairly healthy sample set to make generalisations on. You're more likely to be an F if you're female and T if you're male, FWIW ...

Its all pretty vague stuff and is only a waffly sort of indicator of what someone is like. My ex is an INTJ and self and partner are ENTPs (barely scraping in on the E though but you can tell the difference). The Child is too young to tell and the way she thinks is so peculiar I can't even begin to understand how she thinks, let alone pigeonhole her.

For the rest of you -

I/E is introverted/extraverted

S/N is sensate/intuitive - details vs big picture

F/T is thinking/feeling - logic vs emotion

P/J is perceptive/judgemental, which I tend to think of as messy/neat. J people are organisers.

The Child could be a J, come to think of it. She's constantly cleaning the house and sorting things (when she was a baby she used to sort my sock drawer by colour), which I find quite bizarre. The rest of us just mess it up :huh: But then her room oscillates between complete pigsty and immaculate too ...

Still no clue what she's likely to end up as when she grows up. Horror writer, supermodel and lawyer are topping the list at the moment - anything that involves one-way communications and doesn't need any empathy at all. Should I be adding air traffic controller to the list?

The APS uses Myers Briggs. Supposedly to help people "understand" each other and that individuals are different and need to be treated differently to work in harmony. I was ENTP and as such instantly dismissed the whole lot as voodoo science. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As an aside, I attended a Qantas Crew Resource Managemnt Course as a an active participant but passive in effect (observer) in the late 90s, and ENTP was common. Management WANT ESTJ???

So Staring Clown and Rumpled Elf you have the same MB as me??

Birds of a feather?

I suggested to an HR flunky that maybe 'the model' needs review in that I adapt to every country, its system and am easy to get on with but I don't tolerate idiots but am OK with 'battlers' as long as they don't become self important and fall into 'idiot'. As bizarre as that sounds, I just loathe incompetents pole climbing if they give me pain.

They want wannabe managers that play party lines. Guess what? Few can push Tin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As an aside, I attended a Qantas Crew Resource Managemnt Course as a an active participant but passive in effect (observer) in the late 90s, and ENTP was common. Management WANT ESTJ???

Birds of a feather?

I suggested to an HR flunky that maybe 'the model' needs review in that I adapt to every country, its system and am easy to get on with but I don't tolerate idiots but am OK with 'battlers' as long as they don't become self important and fall into 'idiot'. As bizarre as that sounds, I just loathe incompetents pole climbing if they give me pain.

They want wannabe managers that play party lines. Guess what? Few can push Tin.

They might be right about the manager thing in my case. Nothing like realising your own limitations. :) Much prefer the basement and more technical tasks. ^_^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uncanny timing. Q & A with Dawkins and four corners with a focus on scientology. Should creationism be taught as part of science?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They might be right about the manager thing in my case. Nothing like realising your own limitations. :) Much prefer the basement and more technical tasks. ^_^

I'll work with you anytime.

Technically very competent, generally polite, works well in teams tho with reservations with lesser competent team mates but will call a spade a shovel if needed. Great on the job but will need working on to be a true yes man. :laugh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll work with you anytime.

Technically very competent, generally polite, works well in teams tho with reservations with lesser competent team mates but will call a spade a shovel if needed. Great on the job but will need working on to be a true yes man. :laugh:

ROFLMAO. You do me credit where none is due sir. I thank you for it. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the rest of you -

I/E is introverted/extraverted

S/N is sensate/intuitive - details vs big picture

F/T is thinking/feeling - logic vs emotion

P/J is perceptive/judgemental, which I tend to think of as messy/neat. J people are organisers.

Interesting debate.

I prefer to believe that most people are all of the categories of Myers Briggs, and that we each use different categories at different occasions and in different circumstances. I can be introverted or extroverted, dependant upon the company I'm in. Dependent upon circumstance and environment determies what my personality type might.

The Greek word "personae" refers to wearing a mask, as an actor on a stage might wear a role.

My personality in constant state of flux and change. If I'm tired or hungry. If I'm amongst friends or strangers. If I'm at a good point physically. Each of these things can affect my personality portrayed to others.

I can be equally sensate and intuitive. I have found that at the beginning of an experience I am more sensate, requiring details, before becoming intuitive. That is; intuition tends to be more an innate factor associated with comfortableness in an environment.

And so on.....

Labelling is the human trait.

We can't stand to not know what label to put on someone, and often without even opening their mouths, we have already labelled each other, within a few seconds of encounter.

Carl Gustav Jung was a friend of Sigmund Freud, but disagreed with a lot of Freud's theories. Especially Freud's notion that the libido was entirely sexual in character, and that all human neuroses were sexually orientated.

Jung argued that the collective "mind" (as distinct from the physical brain), is divided into three separate but interacting parts; consciousness, the personal unconsciousness and the collective unconsciousness.

The Conscious mind is what you know about yourself.

The personal unconsciousness is what you don't know about yourself that others do.

The collective unconsciousness is that which no-one knows about you, even yourself, and is only revealed when encountering some major trauma in your life.

Jung really only identified two personality types. Extroverts and Introverts. Extroverts direct their energy outwards towards the world. Introverts direct them inward concerned with subjective feelings and experiences.

It was Jung's belief that whilst there might be occasional deviations, most individuals will remain true to their personality type throughout their lives.

Hence the Myers Briggs personality types were developed.

I think locking people into believing something about themselves in such a way is unhealthy and probably unhelpful.

That doesn't mean that Myers Briggs is a useless tool, but is only one in a set of way we can determine difference amongst each other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Should creationism be taught as part of science?

Saw a little of the programme. It was just getting interesting when Tony called a halt to the debate on the Christian gospel.

"Creation", the entire Hebrew scriptures were never intended to be interpreted as scientific fact.

It disturbs me, but doesn't surprise me, that a certain part of the Christian community, need to think that it does.

The simplistic end of religion will always look for the shortest and easiest route to salvation. That seems to mean in this day and age, a literal interpretation of religious writing.

Such writings as Genesis, Leviticus, Deuteronomy, Exodus etc, represent an entirely different aspect of human life, more attune with the arts, than with logical argument.

In other words, when we look at a masterpiece of art, we don't say that the painting is reality, but rather depicts reality in an artistic fashion. It isn't the event that's occurring in the picture, but an interpretation of the event. When we say that a painting or musical or movie, was inspirational, we are literally saying "in the spirit". Such depiction supposedly touched us through an emotional pathway. Such as tor mentions previously in this thread.

The creation story in Genesis, as Joseph Campbell explains in The Power of Myth is associated with the capacity of people to tell story. We use the capacity on this website all the time. We tell our story. That collective story becomes the history of Simple and Sustainable. Over time, if this site were to continue for 20 years or more, the nature of myth would re-interpret the story, and certain characters would take on larger than life capabilities.

I remember over at GHPC, that the "Shadow" person had some of those qualities. (Constantly referred to as a connection to the roots of the site)

People like tor, or Tinpusher, or Wulfgar, or Rumpled Elf, would all form part of the mythical account of the formation of how it came into being. Even though that is not the detailed account of RE and her work in writing the code and deciding o the format, etc.

That doesn't mean they weren't real or that reality wasn't being told, but rather that human storytelling had enhanced the process. Finding the beads of truth woven into the story then is the process of discernment of the truth in all of life.

My dad told lots of stories about his life. As a child, I tended to believe them literally. He held me in awe, of how he did things and achieved things in such a rudimentary way. Yet as I got older, I got more discerning, and tended to discern what were the elements of truth embedded into the things he told my children.

Science is at its core is empiricism. Observing the world that is, and making predictions about the world past, from what we observe in the present.

Science is a more formalised and ordered observation, and then experiments are performed to determine whether combinations of elements produce an observable result, from which conclusions are drawn.

Religion is similar, but from a more broader perspective. People observed their world, and wondered how and why it came to be.

I will think a little more about Richard Dawkins comment that at the core of religion is a scientific question. Either God exists or God doesn't.

How you answer that predicates a different result and basis for determing scientific phenomena.

Like I said, I thought they were just getting into Dawkins bread and butter, and Tony tried to keep it "nice".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now