Question by im3ngs: What are your thoughts on the recent law suit in California about the Intelligent Design class?
If Intelligent Design cannot be taught in a philosophy class (where it really belongs as it is more a metaphysical discussion than science), then where are our students going to have a forum to discuss and think critically about this and other ideas and thoughts?? I am FOR the separation of church and state, don’t get me wrong… but I think this suit is ridiculous. Basically, religious studies cannot be taught in public schools. But it’s so backwards–because all our other subjects have to do with preparing for LIFE (social studies, math, science, reading, writing)… all subjects that involve religion or influence to some degree, whether we like it or not. Why do we have this all-or-none approach? Is it possible to involve religion with strict oversight/guidance?
I agree that it would be difficult, hence, the need for strict guidelines or pre-planned curriculum. And even the clear understanding of the teacher/instructor of who is selected to be nonbiased as possible. It is possible. Not teaching it is not an option simply because of difficulty.
Teachers will ALWAYS have a view… it’s finding teachers that emphasize critical thinking over specifics of one particular view.
Best answer:
Answer by Not Today
thats an interesting question, we just learned about that whole issue in self and identity class (dont ask)…we talked about the origins of earth, man, etc. and how this stupid lawsuit is ruining everything…i think that a person should be entitled to their opinion, and adding lets say religion to a Catholic teaching anyways wouldnt do ANY harm…and the most common belief relious wise is the whole God created the world in seven days thing…i think that religion can carefully be incorporated into schools without overdoing anything…its lame in general
Know better? Leave your own answer in the comments!
I agree with the basic idea of your post, that teaching religion/religious ideas in a philosophy class would be beneficial.
However, the problem with such classes, on a practical level, is that religion is a very touchy subject (unlike math or reading or writing), and it’s also very personal. So how would you hire a “religion” or a “ID” teacher?
Would it be acceptable to hire an atheist? How about a fundamentalist Christian? What about a devoted Muslim? And if not, couldn’t that be called religious discrimination?
To sum up, it’s a good idea, but has too many difficulties to safeguard students from religious proselytization.