Science and the Creation Story.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/scienceNewsMolt/idUKL0417855220071004?pageNumber=1

It seems strange to be arguing about putting the creation story into our science classes. For as far as I'm concerned, as an engineering student, I do not perceive too much scientific truth in the creation stories. But as a Catholic Christian I believe that there is much philosophical, if not theological truth, in the story.

Science classes are no place for religious studies or philosophical studies, although I would not be surprise that a good curriculum includes such contemplations.

None says that whatever the teacher teaches you in science class ought to be believe as truth or facts. In fact, the foundation of science is experiment and verification -- and through which a training in the arts of mathematics, logic, induction, deduction, and so forth. And it is with these tools that we wish to careful examine wisdom of outside and inside.

Some say that the scientific progress of this generation has fallen off, I say that is indeed so, we seem to forget that faith and reason works together to bind actions. One cannot do without the other. If one were to detest the very reason that science is based on and cling blindly to faith -- then not only will there be of no progress technologically, but also philosophically. But on the other hand, reason without faith has no basis, everything is relative, and whence shall reason be as murky as deep pond in dark night.

I guess the current thinkers of the day have forgotten the story of mutual inclusion as opposed to mutual exclusion. And the animosity set forth by those "religious extremities" along side those "scientific atheists" have gain an upper hand in disputing wisdom but quarrel within the realm of education of the young.

---

I have to say though, teaching the creationism story in science class does seem a bit out of place at the present moment the way things stands. A compromise perhaps, is to add an additional philosophical course into the overall curriculum of the pupils in such matters, but not entirely based on the creationists side of it. And so is it with science classes, perhaps a little bit of reason ought to be taught -- the part about experimentation and verification of statements given -- as to avoid teaching Darwinism as the truth of origin, because in fact, to verify existence implies observation, best if observed directly, and hence we're already created and it's been couple thousands plus years of existence, it will surely be difficult to prove the direct observation of whether Darwinism or creationism is the correct one. Darwinism seeks to explore the temporal changes of the created species through changes in the creatures, whilst creationism seeks to explain the origins of the world in a purpose and moral side of the story. I heavily doubt that it will be easy to reconcile both with a simple mutual rejection of each other...

It takes much deeper contemplation and learning I say.

Edible Chicken. Part I.

Like many of my pet-peeves, this is my favorite one. It's chicken and it's edible, what else could be better? Edible Soy? (this part you laugh).

Anycase, life in general has been disorganized to say the least. Although there is one major development in life. And that development is kinda like an epiphany too. So I was in this job fair, we call them the Engineering EXPO, I realized that I really don't want to work in the industry yet, at least of the companies that came. I realized that I wanted to do something else -- not limited to the oil fields in Texas, or the weapon systems of some defense industry...I simply cannot imagine myself doing that for the rest of my life. In fact, admist conversation with the recruiters present, I sort of dwelved into this trance of discussions with the "recruters" in general as I go from booth to booth at the EXPO (of the boothes that I've pre-selected to be my "interest areas").


[I'll let you know how it ends, Oct 3, 2007]