talkmagic.co.uk

Tomo wrote:Peter, I'm not going to get into an argument with you. I stand by my original post. Creationism is gibberish.

That's that stuff body builders drink right?


Erm, I mean I'll stand on this side of the fence too. Hell the Vatican has agreed that evolution happened.

Peter Marucci wrote:A lot of good Americans died so that others had the freedom to "spout gibberish" or anything else.

But this isn't a question of free speech, surely it's a question of what is happening to these very young and impressionable minds when they are taught this stuff, as the truth, by people they trust.

Children are not mature enough to act with clear judgement when making up their own minds, and this should be borne in mind.

Especially when spouting gibberish.

This isn't free speech, it is quite the opposite. These children have no choice.

The thing with creationism isn't that people believe it, of course people are intitled to believe what ever they want but it's teaching a theory that's got very little if any scientific grounding to children as fact.

I've never really understood why certain religions shun science, if looked at from the right angles, science can backup quite a few religious ideas.

I'm against the easy target, anti-Americanism that the "educated" of the UK often revel in, but stories like this make it quite hard for folk to agree that the USA are intelligent, responsible and open-minded enough to be one of the largest world powers.

This thread has nothing to do with creationism so how about we lie that dog down, but a bit of something to do with free speech, in that it clearly isn't welcome in the classrooms of America, at least that one in particular.

Firing someone because you're so reactionary and superstitious that you think a little trick with a toothpick is some kind of occult influence on your kids is in my opinion every bit as bad as causing an uproar because a teacher named a teddy Mohammed.

But, as mentioned, it's possible this guy is playing up on what could be a small aspect of the truth for sensationalism's sake, and to cover up the fact that he was fired for generally being a bad teacher. It's harder to believe that they fired one of the best teachers the had over something like this...

There are crazy, ignorant decisions like this one being made in every country in the world. I don't take this as an indictment on the USA at all, just on certain types of attitudes which you could find by just throwing a dart at a world map.

North America is huge and officially Christian, so there's bound to be parts of it where people gravitate towards religious fundamentalism and fear of what they see as "wizardy" or the "black arts". It's just a shame that apparently innocent people like this teacher have to suffer because of a collective ignorance. Course, like others have said, none of us really know what went on - maybe it was just because he was a bad teacher and they were looking for an excuse to get rid of him that would fly in the community.

Also, there's not much point singling out creationism as loopy, because to an atheist every aspect of a given religion will seem loopy. It's where these beliefs start to become tools of oppression that I start to raise an eyebrow.

I'm still working on a plan to unite the world in awe by inventing The Best Card Trick on Earth.

Yes you're right Farlsy. (edit: and queensie)
The guy was probably an idiot.

You tend to get three types of substitute teachers; firstly those who do it professionally; those who are new or inbetween jobs; lastly those who cannot get jobs.

There are several million of the latter. It's very difficult to tell these types apart and generally the only way to find out is by putting them in a job for a few weeks. The only saving grace is that the schools can simply ask them not to come back. No lengthy procedures.

I've seen some right sights. One guy who never spoke. Not a word - and simply wrote his lesson instructions on the board. Another (we called him L'oreal) who would come in as either a man or a woman depending on his mood.

Mind you, I learned one of the most effective ways of dealing with recalcitrant youngsters from a subsitute teacher. This little sod kept complaining of a headache, and it was beginning to grate. The sub reached into his pocket and pulled out a silk handkerchief which he unfolded. There in the centre was a single white tablet.
"There you go, son" he said. "Have a headache tablet".
To this day we don't know what it was, but after 20 minutes the lad was out cold. It lasted for three days and he couldn't come into school unitl the week after.

We never saw that sustitute again but if I ever do, I shall buy him a pint.

To be fair it's not just in America that you get these types of teachers. I remeber at school, we had an RE teacher who would often refuse to listen to anyone elses opinions that conflicted with her strictly Christian ones.

I remember having an RE lession about how humans were put on Earth by god and are above the other animals on the planet. Out homework that day was to write an essay on the differences between man and beast. Now I totally disagreed with what she said and I put togther a really well structured essay arguing the opposite. It was probabaly the best, most researched RE essay that I'd ever done, going through a Wiccan phase at the time, I included pagan, north american, hindu and even some christian ideas to support what I said.

I got my mark back and it was a big fat fail.

To redress the balance, can't we organise a headline and news story entitled, 'Wizard fired for teaching' ?

Marvo Marky writes: "surely it's a question of what is happening to these very young and impressionable minds . . ."

It's amazing that young people are "impressionable minds" or "insufferable little b******s", depending on what point one wishes to make.

And Tomo says, with no proof or facts whatsoever: "Creationism is gibberish."

No, it's not gibberish; it's wrong, but it's very well argued. You may say the arguments are gibberish; you may say your cat, because it was born in the garage, is a car (but don't try to enter it in the Indy 500)!

The Flat Earth Society is wrong but the members' arguments are NOT gibberish. They are reasoned, well argued, and solid; but still wrong!

A point of view does NOT become gibberish until it is stripped of all basic arguments, leaving NOTHING but opinion.

Sort of like Tomo's view

The brick wall that arguments between deeply religious people and deeply irreligeous people hit is the impossibility that either will change the other's mind.

You can argue that there is no evidence for, say, the existence of "God" (whatever that/it/he/she might be), but the trump card that the devoutly religious hold is usually delivered in the following manner: "Ah, but I don't need proof - that's why it's called faith; I just know it's true." And even the most cynical among us (I think it's me!) would have to shrug their shoulders and admit how impossible that is to argue against.

It reminds me of a story told in a discussion with Richard Dawkins, where he recalled an anecdote in which a Christian was arguing with an atheist scientist, and the Christian said "Well, you believe in quarks, but there's no evidence for them because they're too small to see or detect, so isn't that just as irrational as believing in God?!"

The atheist replied "I don't pray to quarks in the belief they will reward me with eternal paradise."

A fair difference, I thought.

Lady of Mystery wrote:To be fair it's not just in America that you get these types of teachers. I remeber at school, we had an RE teacher who would often refuse to listen to anyone elses opinions that conflicted with her strictly Christian ones.

I remember having an RE lession about how humans were put on Earth by god and are above the other animals on the planet. Out homework that day was to write an essay on the differences between man and beast. Now I totally disagreed with what she said and I put togther a really well structured essay arguing the opposite. It was probabaly the best, most researched RE essay that I'd ever done, going through a Wiccan phase at the time, I included pagan, north american, hindu and even some christian ideas to support what I said.

I got my mark back and it was a big fat fail.

I am probably the most unreligious person you will ever meet. And I do not agree that we are above other animals. I only know that other animals taste good. However I can understand why you failed if you argued my argument that we are not above other animals. The Bible does say that we are above them and they are here basically for our use as we see fit. So in that regard you should have failed because you can disagree all you want, but its in there. You could have disagreed with the bible (as I usually do) but it still doesn't answer the question of the difference between man and beast. And for the record I would have failed also because I would have quoted Frank Zappa, "If god made man his image then god is dumb all over and a little ugly on the side" Then I would have included a picture of my dog or something showing how cute she is. hence showing the difference between man and beast/(a beast).

But now I think I'm way off topic.

bmat wrote:But now I think I'm way off topic.

No worries, not just you but many others! To be honest, we've had threads about faith and religion many times and they always end up ruffling personal feathers and being locked after much acrimony. So far this one is reasonable but I have to say that it's still way off topic which was all about a teacher being fired for alledgendly doing very iffy magic. If we can stick to that we'll be able to leave the thread unlocked. If not.....

Money, politics, religion and how tricks are done-stuff not to talk about, someone famous once said!

This is why I never talk about religion or politics. It invariably ends in tears.

Regarding the teacher who got sacked, I think this may have been a knee-jerk reaction. Perhaps his boss will reconsider once they've had a chance to think about it. I would like to think so but I'm not going to hold my breath.

Replicant wrote:This is why I never talk about religion or politics. It invariably ends in tears.

Many people feel the same, but I think religion and politics get condemned for being the more tangible portrayals of human interaction, instincts, beliefs etc.

Obviously we don't want our friendly magic forum to be full of rants etc, but people blame "politics and religion" as if, if we could only banish them, we'd all live at peace...

But we wouldn't! Personal arguments would start, greed would kick in as people fought over material stuff, people would start to take sides, give themselves a name, write up a manifesto - bam, you've got yourself a political party.

I'm not criticising anyone at all here Just thinking out loud. Extreme prejudice has existed, does exist and will always exist with or without "The Big Two". I don't particularly like the mess that either field represent, but I honestly think that human nature is what's to blame. And in that respect, I think we all have the potential to make bad choices in the way we interact with each other - just because we don't fire someone from a school for doing a silly little trick... perhaps we excluded someone from a social group because of a single unfortunate comment they made?

I dunno.