Don't get into a theological or philosophical argument with the fundies

[Guaranteed]

They're using the philosophical term "intelligent design" to try to slip their fundie crap into our schools.

I'm seeing two problems with our response to this: One, that we're getting sucked into the argument instead of just saying "Keep your religion out of our schools." We don't want to hinge whether it gets taught on the outcome of an argument over the existence of God, or a god.

And, two, we're not recognizing that the term itself is non-religious, although they're not using it that way. We have to understand the distinction between the concept of "intelligent design," as used in philosophy, and their fundie crap.

There have been many arguments for intelligent design over the past millenium, and admittedly most of them were put forward by religious figures. But they were put forward in a non-religious fashion, by people like Anselm, Thomas Aquinas, Descartes and Kant. There were also arguments from the other side, typically empiricists, like David Hume. They argued over "intelligent design," but in a secular fashion.

The term is just run-of-the-mill philosophy.

But we can't let them use that secular term to try to get their foot in the door. Whatever the truth-value of the argument, religion doesn't belong in schools. They can just forget it.

So that's what's going on, here.

[gkhouston]

1. to a fundie

is there such a thing as a philosophical argument that isn't a theological one?

And as far as "intelligent design" goes, I don't give a rat's ass whether it's philosophy or theology. It's not science.

[Guaranteed]

4. Not when they're constantly quoting the Bible.

BTW, philosophy is based on logic (Western, at least). Science is a part of philosophy- it's an offshoot.

[Deep13]

27. It is also based on experiment and observation.

One needs a factual basis for the logic.

[Guaranteed]

29. Well, what you're speaking of is actually induction.

Which has its place in philosophy- namely, in science.

[undergroundpanther]

5. No.

Because they ultimately argue for SELFISH narcissistic reasons. that have NOTHING to do with philosophy. Fundies are control freaks because they are scared,they want everyone to think,live and believe as they do,and suck THEIR gods ass so THEY can get into heaven unscathed by their god or his "devil" and be free of the suffering and futility of living in this existence forever like everyone else does who has lost the Pollyanna trust that little kids have that is shattered by the time they grow up by the struggles of"real life" in a really flawed existence.

[Justitia]

2. Agree. Nip it in the bud. Don't argue if ID is or is not religion. -eom

[Norquist Nemesis]

3. I refuse to even try and 'argue' with them

It is a pointless exercise. However, I will ask "So, who do YOU think the Designer is?"

Busted!

[evermind]

6. You can be neutral about theism, and still argue that

intelligent design doesn't belong in a science curriculum.

If you accept that the intelligent designer is meant to be a god of some sort, and therefore beyond human comprehension, then no human theory can make predictions about the consequences of actions by that designer. But testable predictions are a sine qua non of science. Hence, no theory of intelligent design can be a scientific theory. Hence "intelligent design" shouldn't be taught (except maybe as a footnote) in science class.

This argument is neutral about the existence of a god or gods, and in fact neutral about whether intelligent design is true. It just makes the point that even if true, it is impossible to verify in a scientific way.

[Guaranteed]

7. No, it doesn't belong in a science class, at all. nt

[lildreamer316]

8. Here's my (admittedly roundabout) argument.

Ok Mr. Fundie. You think that creationisim should be taught in school. Well, I say if you don't agree with what's being taught, why don't you teach your child your beliefs for an hour every evening?

Oh, you're too busy; you don't have time. Like the rest of us. Ok; I got that.

Wait a minuite. Aren't you the same person who told me that all government sponsored programs should be abolished? And all schools should be privatised? Paid for independantly, "not with MY taxes!"?
Well, wouldn't that include the school your kid is going to?
If you don't have enough time to impress upon your own child your views and values, where are you going to find the time and money to educate them EVERY DAY because the school they are going to FOR FREE(essentially) is closed because your government shares your beliefs?
Put your time where your mouth is.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

9. I haven't heard that one before

I like it!

[lildreamer316]

12. Thanks but now my brain hurts! n/t

[Deep13]

10. They would argue that government schools ...

... are undermining their religion by telling children that their religious beliefs are wrong. Then they would fall back on their "this is a Christian country" argument to justify teaching their views and not those of other religions.

[anarch]

11. also, don't try to discuss economics with a houseplant

sorry, just seemed like a similar proposition as far as the other party understanding your discourse.

but seriously, you are correct, they are trying to obfuscate the issue and just force religion on people. Regardless of one's philosophical perspective, unless the school is an overtly religious institution, this kind of stuff has no business being taught in school.

[undergroundpanther]

13. Fundamentalism ia all about CONTROL

Domination..Covert or die because if you do not BELIEVE and be like the fundie the believer dies at the hands of their own angry god. To me they are all insane and if fundamentalism is a symptom of a disease it is all a big virulent controlling reactionary kind of social delusion(and I suspect it is) and no wonder people are scared humanity is killing itself by stifling and dominating and depriving and gas-lighting and abusing each other and science has a big hand in the ruining process with it's shortsightedness and greed as well. We are fucked.Because reality it makes no sense yet it makes sorta sense but not enough to justify the suffering,us all suffer and die senselessly randomly unjustly and it hurts a big catch 22....it makes us crazy for want of escape.

[Deep13]

14. It's worse than that.

It is not just that they want public schools to be Evangelical parochial schools, but they want people to stop thinking. Evolution has become their poster child of Satan because it teaches people to rely on observation and critical thinking to ascertain facts, even if those facts contradict religious doctrine. They don't want people finding facts and being critical in thought. They want people's only source of information to be them. The Fundies want people to depend on them for their world-view, for their identity and for their reason for being.

[undergroundpanther]

18. Thinking leads to Nihilism

nihilism leads to anguish over the way things are and the task of changing ourselves until we overcome the human condition.If we overcome the human condition there will be no need for the mind fuck games we play to deal with each other and existence itself and we might become more like gods than fundies want or can dominate and their system comes crashing down and the scam of ages id seen for the scam it is..and they can't have THAT Free minded people might be as miserable as believers are..,but they are not slaves to reward and punishment anymore and must be responsible with their freedom and develop empathy.Dominator's really hate having to listen to someone they see as a lesser being,they'd rather blame the victim and keep a good scam going.Than ever change themselves or let others change and find happiness and peace their own way without the church's controlling hand or the markets controlling hands or the politicians controlling hands or parental controlling hands ect...

[Hardrada]

20. It's hard for people to think through the stuff

they were force-fed as children. But they have to make the effort to develop critical thought, so necessary for survival in a world full of hooie! Charlatans other than fundie preachers do NOT want people to develop an analytical capacity. Think of all the "motivational speakers." Think of all the advertising agencies. It's an uphill task but one that must be undertaken for the survival of the species.

[wtbymark]

15. I agree with you BUT.....

St. Thomas Aquinas wrote the 5 proofs for the existance of God, so I wouldn't say that he came to the argument in a secular point of view. DesCart and Kant were really early existentailists, hell they had problems believing that they existed, let alone god. And on a personal note; one of the papers I wrote was logically debunking all 5 of Aquinas' proofs (sophmore paper, got an A)

[Guaranteed]

17. Right, I said that he was a religious figure.

The proofs themselves, though, are quite secular (and the 3rd is probably the closest we'll ever come to actual "proof.")

[DoYouEverWonder]

19. St Thomas lived

during the dark ages. He probably believed the earth was flat too.

If you want to teach religion then call it religion. It is not science and should not be a part of a science curriculum.

Besides if fundies want to teach creation myth, then what about all the other religions. Everyone should be taught all of the other creation myths too.

[AValdoux]

16. My sister-in-law...

... was offended by the exhibit @ NYC Natural History Museum that dealt with the search for intelligent life. She said as soon as they started talking how we are all made up up "space stuff" ie carbon, oxygen, etc and when the first spark of life started that made her mad. She said, "When you start talking about the beginning of life you are talking about God and science will never be able to explain it.".

The concept of when life started on earth will always be theological to some people.

AValdoux

[Deep13]

22. Have you noticed how God's sphere of influence keeps shrinking?

It used to be that everything had a religious explanation. Now we know how most ordinary things works, so now God seems to be restricted to creating the universe and giving the spark of life, things that science cannot presently understand. I read a quote from an 18th century astronomer once who was convinced that we would never know the properties of the stars other than apparent brightness and color. Later, spectral analysis was discovered and now we know most of that stuff.

[Ian David]

21. Careful what you wish 4. You just might get it.Cautionary tale for fundies

Related threads

Group says Bible course riddled with bias, errors
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x1670435


"Bush: Intelligent Design Should Be Taught" or Are you gagging yet?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4242056

[Ian David]

23. As long as they give equal time to The Flying Spaghetti Monster

OPEN LETTER TO KANSAS SCHOOL BOARD

I am writing you with much concern after having read of your hearing to decide whether the alternative theory of Intelligent Design should be taught along with the theory of Evolution. I think we can all agree that it is important for students to hear multiple viewpoints so they can choose for themselves the theory that makes the most sense to them. I am concerned, however, that students will only hear one theory of Intelligent Design.

Let us remember that there are multiple theories of Intelligent Design. I and many others around the world are of the strong belief that the universe was created by a Flying Spaghetti Monster. It was He who created all that we see and all that we feel. We feel strongly that the overwhelming scientific evidence pointing towards evolutionary processes is nothing but a coincidence, put in place by Him.

It is for this reason that I’m writing you today, to formally request that this alternative theory be taught in your schools, along with the other two theories. In fact, I will go so far as to say, if you do not agree to do this, we will be forced to proceed with legal action. I’m sure you see where we are coming from. If the Intelligent Design theory is not based on faith, but instead another scientific theory, as is claimed, then you must also allow our theory to be taught, as it is also based on science, not on faith.

Some find that hard to believe, so it may be helpful to tell you a little more about our beliefs. We have evidence that a Flying Spaghetti Monster created the universe. None of us, of course, were around to see it, but we have written accounts of it. We have several lengthy volumes explaining all details of His power. Also, you may be surprised to hear that there are over 10 million of us, and growing. We tend to be very secretive, as many people claim our beliefs are not substantiated by observable evidence. What these people don’t understand is that He built the world to make us think the earth is older than it really is. For example, a scientist may perform a carbon-dating process on an artifact. He finds that approximately 75% of the Carbon-14 has decayed by electron emission to Nitrogen-14, and infers that this artifact is approximately 10,000 years old, as the half-life of Carbon-14 appears to be 5,730 years. But what our scientist does not realize is that every time he makes a measurement, the Flying Spaghetti Monster is there changing the results with His Noodly Appendage. We have numerous texts that describe in detail how this can be possible and the reasons why He does this. He is of course invisible and can pass through normal matter with ease.

More:
http://www.venganza.org/

May You Forever Be Touched by His Noodly Appendage!

[Deep13]

25. In nomine pasta spiritus sanctus

[jonkronz2003]

24. Intelligent Design begs the question.....

Who's the designer? I can't believe in any ID'r who would actually design people so stupid that they think GW is smart........

[McCamy Taylor]

26. Equal Time can Kill Intelligent Design. Native Americans, Wiccans

Shinto, Buddhists, Hindus, Maori--all of them have Intelligent Design Theories of the Origins of the Univserse. All that we as concerned citizens have to do is go to court and DEMAND that Our Beliefs be taught in school side by side with the Judeo-Christian Intelligent Design theories.

There is another phrase for this. Comparative Religion. It sends shivers down the backs of Fundamentalists. They will suddenly demand that religion be taken out of school faster than you can say "Pagan Idolater."

Give it a try.

[noonwitch]

28. But it's so much fun to argue with them when you know the Bible as well as

they do.

Things to suggest: The words of the apostle Paul are not the words of God.
The Bible (including the Torah/the ancient law) was written by imperfect men, even if it was inspired by God.

If homosexuality is such an abomination before the Lord, why hasn't he eliminated it yet? Raining fire and brimstone on Sodom and Gomorrah didn't eliminate it. Is God just inept at destruction, or maybe the sin he was trying to stamp out wasn't homosexuality, but something else?


The Pharisees-haters and killers of Jesus, or deeply misunderstood sect of well-meaning men trying to protect the jews from the excesses of the occupying roman forces?

Paul says that the grace of Jesus sets us free from the law, although Jesus said that He came to fulfill the law. Who is right?

If Jesus is right and the law still applies, why aren't we still stoning urban rape victims who don't scream?

Did they have ergot poisoning during New Testament times? Could John have eaten some while exiled to Patmos, thus inspiring the Book of Revelation?

If God is against abortion, why does He so frequently admonish the Israelite army to kill everyone in cities including the children, and specifically include ripping open the bodies of pregnant women on at least one occasion? Is it just rhetorical flourish, sort of like an Ann Coulter column?

Ask a fundie to name one Bible verse that condemns abortion. When he says "Thou shalt not kill", point out the numerous times that God specifically tells people to kill others, either in war or otherwise.