Is The High School Science Curriculum Really This Bad?
While hopping around the Pinoy Blogosphere, I couldn’t help but feel very disappointed, mortified and utterly alarmed by one post made by a certain high school student [who I later found out goes to a science high school]. To protect the identity of the person and the dignity of other students and alumni of this science high school, I choose to keep the name of the person confidential.
Christians believe in God, that there is a God and that God is good and that Satan is evil. Have they ever saw, touched, or smelled their God? No. Have they ever heard their God say their names? No. So therefore, according to the empirical, testable, stable, and demonstrable Science, there is no God.
Science said that people evolved from monkeys. Has anyone of you observed the process of evolution? No one has ever did that, even Charles Darwin who coined that process. So since no one has ever observed the process of evolution and cannot even prove that it did happened, therefore, science teachers are not teaching their students science but an opinion.
Have you ever seen, touched, tasted, or smelled your own brain? I think no one has ever did that and therefore, according to science, you have no brain.
Isn’t that the saddest thing ever?
An incoming junior in high school should already know that the brain is the seat of mentation, memory, motor and cognitive skills in all animals with an advanced nervous system (Biology - Second Year in most schools). Sorry for being too condescending, but do you really need to see your brain to know you have one? Do you need to smell it to know that it’s there?
Ironically, you can smell, feel, hear and touch because you have a brain.
Is this sort of repulsive analysis a product of 1) a weak high school science curriculum (in an urban science high school no less!), 2) a misdirected sense of faith that overrides reason and logic or b) an isolated case of mental retardation seen in a high school student?
Seriously, I’m baffled. I’m hoping that it’s more of number three. If this sort of idiocy is due to bad teaching techniques, I can’t imagine how public school kids are taught.
Disclaimer: I didn’t put the name of the student and school involved in this post. In a effort to defend himself though, he exposed himself in this site resulting to further incrimination due to shoddy grammar and logic that left a lot to be desired. 
Bookmark at:
StumbleUpon | Digg | Del.icio.us | Dzone | Newsvine | Spurl | Simpy | Furl | Reddit | Yahoo! MyWeb
Viewed 4620 times by 1498 viewers
You committed the same mistakes in your blog post and in your comment here - I guess this constitutes as retardation (it fulfills the criteria set forth by Dr Ganns Deen).
Who gave you the notion that there is nothing more to science than SEEING? Have you heard of the scientific method? There are different means to reach a conclusion without necessarily seeing it.
And you have the gall to ask me if I get it… haha. Hopefully you’ll get better in analyzing arguments when you grow older… But let’s keep it real, I REALLY DOUBT IT.
CHEERS!
Okay, I can’t do anything if can’t still get it. We have different opinions and I respect yours. I don’t want an argument. CHEERS to you too!
So there you go people. That just proves that the post was not a case of a joke taken out of context! It’s true! It’s true! Hehe
Carry on.
Tsk. Ei, Benj, do you have any plans in taking up law instead? You’d make a good prosecutor. Harhar. :p
It’s the grammar that makes me sad.
Nah, I was happy with my debate career. Lol.
Oh man, I think the kid brought down the post.
Oh no Alex. Should I bring this post down as well?
I don’t get why there’s so many grammatical errors when the post is not even original. It was circulated through mails a long time ago.
Off-topic: I saw the PDIC on TV again, kangkong UPD sa ADMU on that female empowerment debate ah. hehe.
in my opinion, the kid was partly right.
apropos, present day science is not to be used to test something which can or never be proved.Science is meant to test the observable. where do we place the category of God?
he is right that evolution is simply a theory and had never yet been a law. Of course, it is still science since science is all about possibilities and opinions.
Philosophy. A Philosopher might think you have no brain. It was simply invented by the human mind. This is not science.
the post isn’t original. lets not be too harsh on the teen. let us not blame mainstream education. this is the Philippines. There is much to be improved.
Leni: Exciting ba? Semifinals ang napanood mo (ADMU A vs UPD B) I adjudicated ADMU during the QUARTERFINALS (the round before that). Yung ginawa kasi nila, one match per round yung pinapakita nila. Yung ibang rounds, nasa conference rooms lang. Tapos sila, nasa ball room at may tv coverage pa [NBN]. I was in the UPD A vs UST A semifinals - UPD A won via a 6-1 split.
Curiously, I was never in the debates with TV coverage!!! But here’s the treat! You’ll see me in the Finals this weekend!!! YAY!!!
Treat, huh? Too bad then, I’d be at the beach this weekend. hehe. :p
Hindi kaya poetic license lang yung habol niya? Haha ;p mali pa rin eh
Well isn’t it sad as well that you’re sweeping genaralization? Just because of one post of a kid, you’re taking it against the school’s curriculum already?
Aren’t you as retarded as he is?
READ. Comprehend. It was phrased as a question, you idiot. No surprises there, though.
I even said that I was favoring option three. Option one is clearly the least likely explanation. It was just a human interest piece since the blogger was from a science high school.
Kindly set the comprehension knob to full. And improve the grammar please. No, I’m not “sweeping generalization” [sic].
Thanks.
i dunno about the other science high schools, but MaSci has totally deteriorated…
http://kaide.blogspot.com/2006/06/mascis-demise.html
Guess I am a retard. Oh, and since I’m a retard, I don’t really know what linkbait means, but I guess your title is an example (since you got me there), “Is The High School Science Curriculum Really This Bad?”
Noted. Now stop polluting my blog in hopes of having my readers hop into your blog. Thanks.
Kaide: That’s real unfortunate. I used to live right across Masci.
what timing, benj. ‘inherit the wind’ is playing on broadway right now, and it’s always been the classic literary piece on evolution vs. creationism. i plan to upload the relevant passages on my blog. the character playing the defense lawyer has some nifty jabs at creationism and religious obscurantism. you’d love them (as i do). stand by, you’ll be in my post!
I was gonna comment that the blogger might be kidding, or was being sarcastic, or was simply trying to get attention (he is in high school after all.) Then he commented. So… So much for that.
(come to think of it, he did get some attention)
Cheers to him then.
Hi Benj,
I understand the points you raised here. I even agree with some. However, I hope you understand me, too, when I object to your calling Geo a retard and an idiot. That was unnecessary.
Geo is one of my closest friends and is far from from an ‘idiot’ — grammatical mistakes and comprehension boo-boos (if that’s what it is) don’t make a person an instant idiot. It just pains me to see a person ridiculed when his achievements probably overshadow those of ours: a BPI Science Scholar, student leader, awarded the most well-rounded UPD College of Engineering student of our batch, top dog of UPD’s fencing varsity team, just to name a few. And no, he didn’t ask me to pitch in a comment for him — I just felt that this is a responsibility of mine.
Also, the concept of him using these comments to gain visitors to his blog is, sorry to say, ridiculous — this is a person who doesn’t even care for the concept of ‘linkbait’ and ’site hits’.
That said, thanks for the high-five at Blog-Tutorials.
Looking forward to working with you and seeing your posts. You might not see me posting for the next week, though, as I’ll be in the province (death in the family). Good luck!
Corsarius: Sorry man, but my criteria for idiocy includes (but is not solely limited to) going to other people’s blogs to make illogical posts.
Furthermore, kindly stay objective and look at the tone of the first post that your friend did. It was overflowing with bravado and it certainly called for a thundering rebuke due to its fallacious nature. I don’t take illogical statements lightly - whether it’s adjudicating in the finals of the country’s top debate competition or even just here on my blog.
And yes, happy birthday.
Misuse of arguments. Syllogistically absurd.
Perhaps he/she has just distorted text, as if he’s cracking an unlaughable joke. You know, we lvoe copy-pasting. Then a little editing. Then submit. Kaching! Uno.
brutal naman. natawag na ngang retard, nadamay pa eskuwelahan niya. tsktsk. hindi naman porke’t magkaiba kayo ng paniniwala, may karapatan ka nang tawagin siyang retard.
tsaka alam mo, kung nagiisip ka lang talaga ng mabuti, hindi niya naman sinasabi na according to science, wala talaga tayong utak. ginamit lang yung statement na yun para makapagsabi ng isang mas malaking punto. alam nating lahat na may utak tayo at kaya nga ang simpleng pagsabi na may posibilidad na wala tayo nito ay nakakabigla. sa makatuwid, yung statement ay ginamit para sabihin na hindi palaging totoo na porke’t hindi mo nakikita, hindi na totoo.
parang ang utak. kapag ba ang utak hindi mo nakikita, hindi na totoo.
The statement actually AGREES with you. “…there is (more) to science than just seeing.” kaya hindi porke’t walang nakakakita sa brain, walang brain. at di porke’t walang nakakakita kay God, hindi na Siya nag-eexist.
sana kasi pinalalim mo yung gustong sabihin nung part na yan sa post niya. hindi yung porke’t sinabi niya na “according to science, you have no brain” eh nanggagalaiti at bothered ka na.
Note to self: People with bad logic easily gain sympathy and support from other people… pretty much the same way kids in the Special Olympics do.
leni: Yes, it’s a treat! 6 PM daw yung debate. Umahon ka sa tubig at maghanap ng TV sa oras na yun para makita mo ako! hehehe
Neil: Anong subject naman nakuha yang uno na to? Bad Grammar and Logic 100?
Alvin: I never intended to put the spotlight on him. That’s why I never said his name - not even his school.
Um, I’m reposting the comment because somehow it didn’t show up.
Yeah, but you went out of your way to use the curriculum possibility as your post title. Everybody should know that a title ought to be (if it isn’t already) a summary of a piece—a quicker but ACCURATE version of it.
I didn’t know that human interest meant human bashing as well. You don’t have to use the word idiot on a person you barely even know. And is much younger than you. (Heard of Ad Hominem? It’s the best sign a person has the worst sense of ethics and level of intellect.) Yes, even if it IS your blog we’re commenting on. Says a lot about what kind of person you are. To think you’re a med student!
And if Geo wanted to scrape atheists over to his blog, he wouldn’t have chosen Windows Live Spaces anyway. Besides, you took the liberty of removing his URL on both comments already. Talk about freedom of expression. (Didn’t bother to put in mine. You’d probably remove it anyway, right?) What are you so worried about anyway? WP uses rel=”nofollow” on comments so your visitors aren’t getting any linklove SEO-wise.
Polluting? What about calling other people idiotic? Or retarded? Now those are much more polluting, if you want to be so sensitive about it.
Thank you Ia for grandstanding on my blog.
That just proves that
People with bad logic easily gain sympathy and support from other people… pretty much the same way kids in the Special Olympics do.
Again, read your friend’s reply. It deserved a strong rebuke given the flaws it had. The arguments that you’re pushing aren’t even part of the big picture. You’re harping on my choice of title and my choice of words as opposed to the real substance of the post. I think that’s nitpicking. But I don’t blame you, you’re his friend and you obviously bend logic and reason just to defend him.
I wasn’t even thinking about SEO at all - and yes I know about “no follow”. So who’s making assumptions now? Did you even base that on anything? Such hypocrisy! If somebody is to contest every post that I make with horrid grammar and bad logic, I have the right to edit the posts.
Ok. I’m sorry if I made a comment (or question) on this blog. I guess it’s a wrong decision for me to do so. Please don’t argue, you’re all good writers/probloggers here.
To make things clear, I didn’t pose that question (”Well isn’t it sad as well that you’re sweeping genaralization? Just because of one post of a kid, you’re taking it against the school’s curriculum already?”) to make you look like a stupid writer. It was a question to make you think if it is correct to assume that high school science curriculum is that bad. But you already pointed out that it could just be an isolated case of mental retardation seen in a high school student (Option b on your post.. not Option 3. But I guess you’ll change it later). My bad.
And Benj, I don’t think it is nice to call people “dumb”, “retard”, or “stupid”. But if it is your culture, then I understand - feel free to call me anything you want as it doesn’t matter to me anyway.
The kid is simply making an analogy and if you got brains, at all, you will accept that he is just trying to make a point, silly as it may be. And given the chance it’s not a bad argument as a whole. Let me put it this way….
Given a chance, for example, that you haven’t actually hacked your skull apart with a chainsaw, would you even though that you have a brain as arrogant as it is now or as small as a pair of peanuts? Well, they are there—of course—but you neither see, touch, taste nor smell it (if I may barrow the kid’s silly words) on your own, so how come you think you have a right and left hemisphere for a brain, huh?
There you go, pretty stupid question, illogical even, right?
But not if you’re the only person in this planet or maybe even a donkey! Technically speaking, the only reason you thought you are clever enough to think otherwise was because you were assuming things of others’ discoveries, experiences and stories you learned from the past and present, and in the end it’s the science of the human intellect that made sense. Technically, again you haven’t done any experimenting yourself to even come up with the conclusion that you have indeed endowed with intelligence inside of that skull of yours. So are you are just a victim of social interaction with a functioning brain, but couldn’t make up your own understanding ‘alone’–independent of others? Heck, the world probably wouldn’t even have known that it has a heart if not for Juliet telling her Romeo that her “heart bleeds†upon his dying.
The argument of the kid was simply telling us that not everything you are not seeing are not there at all, like the wind and gravity. And not all things that science can’t explain are untrue. If you did you probably would know how your own pretty brain really looks like. Of course not, but thanks to medicine, a science, you got yourself a pair of brains after all.
And by the way, if only God is 3-dimensional then science would have a way of knowing him. But that defeats the purpose of the concept of god, doesn’t it? Because if science would have a way with god then humans can be better than their gods, wouldn’t they? To probe god with science is futile to begin with if you would have to debate its concept as a higher being. It’s either you believe in god or you don’t (that makes you an atheist and it is fine by me). But science is a lame excuse for not believing in god.., even Einstein knows where empirical science begins to exit and philosophy starts.
I know for a fact that all religions are bullshit and atheist arguments are recycled crap. That kid is actually in the right path for using his common sense to find God.
The kid is simply making an analogy and if you got brains, at all, you will accept that he is just trying to make a point, silly as it may be. And given the chance it’s not a bad argument as a whole. Let me put it this way….
Given a chance, for example, that you haven’t actually hacked your skull apart with a chainsaw, would you even though that you have a brain as arrogant as it is now or as small as a pair of peanuts? Well, they are there—of course—but you neither see, touch, taste nor smell it (if I may barrow the kid’s silly words) on your own, so how come you think you have a right and left hemisphere for a brain, huh?
There you go, pretty stupid question, illogical even, right?
But not if you’re the only person in this planet or maybe even a donkey! Technically speaking, the only reason you thought you are clever enough to think otherwise was because you were assuming things of others’ discoveries, experiences and stories you learned from the past and present, and in the end it’s the science of the human intellect that made sense. Technically, again you haven’t done any experimenting yourself to even come up with the conclusion that you have indeed endowed with intelligence inside of that skull of yours. So are you are just a victim of social interaction with a functioning brain, but couldn’t make up your own understanding ‘alone’–independent of others? Heck, the world probably wouldn’t even have known that it has a heart if not for Juliet telling her Romeo that her “heart bleeds†upon his dying.
The argument of the kid was simply telling us that not everything you are not seeing are not there at all, like the wind and gravity. And not all things that science can’t explain are untrue. If you did you probably would know how your own pretty brain really looks like. Of course not, but thanks to medicine, a science, you got yourself a pair of brains after all.
And by the way, if only God is 3-dimensional then science would have a way of knowing him. But that defeats the purpose of the concept of god, doesn’t it? Because if science would have a way with god then humans can be better than their gods, wouldn’t they? To probe god with science is futile to begin with if you would have to debate its concept as a higher being. It’s either you believe in god or you don’t (that makes you an atheist and it is fine by me). But science is a lame excuse for not believing in god.., even Einstein knows where empirical science begins to exit and philosophy starts.
I know for a fact that all religions are bullshit and atheist arguments are recycled crap. That kid is actually in the right path for using his common sense to find God.
Ok, remedy, barrow the kid’s words. Science can prove that somebody has a brain. The kid’s post was deeply rooted on the argument that science can’t prove that one has a brain due to the fact that it can’t be sensed.
Asinine. Nobody is using science for not believing in god here so stop irrelevant arguments.
The kid obviously just took that article elsewhere.
Based on that article, the professor was indicating that there was no GOD based on the professor’s idea that GOD has not been perceived by the student and the professor with the use of those senses.
So the argument was put forth in the article that based on those same senses; the professor can’t prove that he had a brain.
Remedy though does have a good issue on experimentation.
BTW, regarding what you stated as “People with bad logic easily gain sympathy and support from other people… pretty much the same way kids in the Special Olympics do.”
What’s bad about the kids in the Special Olympics?
Hi justice league,
Yes yes, I know the statement is veering towards political correctness but it can be funny. 
I guess that affirms my theory.
It was a tongue-in-cheek reply not to be taken seriously. But to elaborate, just like the (unfortunately) mentally-incapacitated, people tend to gravitate to support people who can’t defend themselves logically and those who dig themselves a hole to bury themselves in.
Argumentation is achieved through substantiation. The kid offered no substance and yet people expounded on his non-existent points.
Thanks for visiting.
Greetings Benj,
But I believe the points where in the article.
I think the kid made a mistake in his comment here when he stated that “Science is “to see is to believeâ€,” and you promptly took him down for that. The kid should have stayed within the parameters of the article.
I believe the points were based on the senses and that was also the basis used in the end.
Hi justice league,
I think the post’s point is basically this: One has a brain, and since science cannot prove that it exists, we should have another philosophy to support its existence - that being faith or some other way of explaining it exists.
At best, that part of the post was meant to show the pitfalls of science as something to be used for analytical purposes. Science of other ways of assessing the existence of certain things, like for instance, our brains. The motor and sensory pathways have already been mapped and science can already suffice to describe the presence, absence or the brain (or even injuries done to it). It was poorly argued and poorly substantiated and clearly, what was presented wasn’t a limitation of science.
Um, in my school, Darwin’s Theory is taught as a Theory, as science puts it. I wonder who taught the kid that it’s a Law because sadly, he’s being misled.
I wonder which is worse - that someone taught the kid that the Darwin theory is a law, or that I was taught in school that the christian religion and its stories are real.
By the way, the DNA has been extracted from the Neanderthal man and his genes were really closer than ours to monkeys. It’s actually easier to swallow than “a god created you in a day”! Bwahahaha!
So, my opinion about the topic given, I would like to say that 14 year-olds reserve the right to say crazy things. Just like the way you wouldn’t want your journal or your artbook of your early teens be exposed to public. Your ideas are just not refined, crazy sometimes.
I have read one of Benj’s essays when he was about this age, and really, I found the essay to be ahead of the author’s years. But I think that calling people retarded is not the right way of showing ideas to others. It’s backwards. In my opinion, intelligence will go to waste if you don’t have heart.
Peace
As a side note, I know three people who have commented on this blog, one showed me the link. The internet really makes the world smaller.
Ok, I’ll take my chances of getting ridiculed again, but I just have to say this:
We have a choice which to believe in… would you rather risk your eternity for something based on scientifical experiments
which have evidences to disprove them, or on God, who doesn’t prove anything else but His great love for you..?Scientifical?
Some christians could handle considering Atheism as a philosophy. I’m assuming the credentials that Corsarius is true so I’m sure this short explanation should (and would) do.
Evidences?
Those aren’t even words.
Geo: I’ll just have to accept that you are unable to imagine what Atheism is like despite the countless attempts to explain it.
A belief in a god requires faith. If one has no ability to have faith then it will be impossible to believe in something abstract. Your “argument” is very similar to Pascal’s Wager - something that I think is logically and even theologically-flawed.
Is your god that shallow? Is your god one that tokenistically rewards those who has faith and casts to peril those who don’t? If that’s how you perceive your god to be, one who just arbitrarily assigns fates based on faith alone? Assuming that that’s true, the possibility of non-faith was also conceived through his creation of infinite possibilities! Is that fair? No.
Given the idea that you raised your god is either of two things:
1. a tokenistic deity who plays The Sims with real people
2. a sadistic and unjust god who waits on who picks the option with a trap door.
That is one depressing belief.
Benj, ’scientifical’ and ‘evidences’ are real words. I checked in dictionary.com to be sure. Haha I even triple-checked my grammar before posting as I witnessed your intolerance for the lack of it.
Anyway, I will not explain or argue here with your explanation up there, but feel free to check my latest post. I hope you’ll know my beliefs/answers to your brief explanation. Oh, I hope you also trust Corsarius that I don’t have any intentions of scraping readers off you.
And just to share, I used to consider myself as agnostic back in college. So believe me, I understand some of your arguments. But after knowing God, life has been much much better. And to be honest, I still am in the process of knowing more about Him.
I’ll forgive you on the hurtful words you said to God, but I hope you’ll never do it again as using the Lord’s name in vain is a big no-no for us. But it’s still your choice.
Geo: What ugly words then.
you have to take my word for it. You don’t get it. You were an agnostic not because you were an atheist - it had more to do with the “jealous” christian inside of you who wanted more from his god. It’s like, you were a christian all along but you were just in denial.
You are not getting the faith and absence of faith argument and that’s why this discussion is not progressing. Everything that you say is deeply-rooted in faith and for somebody who has no faith, it’s not even relevant. You had faith, because you chose to give credit to your god for all the improvements that happened in your life. If you think that that sort of argumentation will fly against an atheist, you are severely mistaken.
If you have nothing better to do than to evangelize and preach your life story in this blog, please do me a favor and refrain from posting. You’re always welcome if you’re going to post something that would enrich the discussion in the logical plane. Thank you.
Benj: Lol. Ok, I’ll try to use a better word next time. Thanks for the feedback.
Fine I’ll take your word for it. Jealous Christian? Lol. Nah, I was a practicing Catholic back in elementary, agnostic in highschool and college, and now a Christian.
Yeah you’re right, I will not comment any “faith” stuff on your blog from now on. Thanks for spending time on reading my comments. I’m happy for letting me do my part. I hope you choose to give Him a chance. I’ll be sad if you choose not to.. but what can I do?
Heard you’ll be working with Corsarius and Ia. Good luck with you guys
I do not appreciate your show of defiance at all. I don’t go into your blog spewing atheist rhetoric left and right so please, since I’ve already asked for the stoppage of your christian rhetoric, kindly comply.
Hi Geo,
You mentioned, “I’ll forgive you on the hurtful words you said to God”
Something is wrong about this line. It sounds like you were the one offended (hence the forgiveness comes from you) and still you’d like to redirect the feelings to this god of yours.
No offense meant.
Sorry to double post, but again in reply to Geo:
My story, for Geo: I was a christian back in grade school and life was terrible. I depended heavily on prayers to soothe problems, and if the answers seemingly coming from this so-called god did not solve the problem, you are taught to accept it. Now I’m no longer bound by this thinking, I am able to focus more on what is at hand and find realistic solutions to problems.
Point is, there are atheists who have learned how it is to be christian/theists and found it wrong in some aspect. If a person knows a habit or thinking is wrong, why should you convince them to go back doing it?
Two cents.
Mai: Give it up. He doesn’t get it.
Mai: Yes, I too was offended and I’ll explain to you on a separate note why I forgave him (since I promised I wouldn’t talk faith stuff here anymore).
I’d like to hear from you more and would like to help if you can give me a chance. But let’s not do it here. I’m just a sametime away.
Benj: There you go saying I don’t get it again. Let me borrow someone’s words: “Actually, for me benefit, I don’t think you respect anyone other than yourself”
Anyway, final say on this post: I also disagree with the kid’s logic, but I also disagree that he is a retard (as this is what Benj was favoring. Option b or 3 right?)
Jeimar: Although I disagree on some of your points, I still think you should learn from it. That’s why it is good that you published it. Gives you more readers to give feedback. With feedback, you’ll know your opportunity areas. And although we can’t be perfect, we can at least minimize our weak points, methinks. Net, you’re not a retard and your school is still great.
You quoted a grammatically incorrect statement?
Yes, you don’t get Atheism at all. You don’t respect the right and prerogative of people to have another paradigm other than your christian paradigm. Stop being hypocritical about it. Now, be a smart person and follow simple instructions, ok?
You are clearly a christian fundamentalist who thinks that the christian way is the only way. If you weren’t you would’ve easily considered Atheism as an acceptable philosophy and not as something that should be changed. I’ve already told you to leave if that’s the only thing you’re going to blab about. Now, if you’re going to whine the entire time, this is my blog. SCRAM. I don’t need zealots here.
Yes I quoted a grammatically incorrect statement. It does sound cute and you still can understand what it’s trying to say. It doesn’t have to perfect all the time you know.
Benj,
Since the kid has brought down that article; I can only rely on memory on how the article supposedly ended.
Your recent discussion with Geo concerned faith or the absence of faith.
I think the said article’s final issue was faith.
Jeimar actually believes that there is a link in science and faith.
There was also something Remedy tried to touch on.
Given your story on the Roco candidacy; I think you are a physician by now. You undoubtedly performed several experiments.
But the thing is and if I may be so bold as to ask; do you believe in the outcome of scientific experiments or discoveries that you yourself did not perform?
Do you believe in nuclear energy? Do you believe in fission and fusion of atomic nuclei?
I was a freshman during the Roco candidacy - and that was only 3 years ago!
If you consider trusting the experts who did the experiments before as “faith”, I think that brand of faith is much better than the conventional faith correlated with the belief in a god or what not. At least that level of “faith” in the scientific method offers a semblance of substantiation.
Yes, because that was tested through the scientific method and it required a lot more than just mere faith to confirm it.
Have a nice day!
Benj,
Then you are a graduate by now.
Your reply depended on me on what I believed in trusting those experts.
So what do you consider as trusting those experts?
And when you stated “semblance of substantiation”, do you substantiate it by performing your own experiments?
Ummm, no. Med school takes longer than three years!
As they say in the shoe commercial, IT TAKES FIVE! Hehe. Corny
If you’re going to call it faith, then it would be unfair to automatically consider it as something congruent to the author’s concept of what faith is. There is reason and logic behind the “faith” that scientists put on other people’s well-put-together studies, but in the other types of faith, there is hardly any.
I hope I’m making myself clear.
Yes, substantiation can be in that form provided that the study design was sound.
Let’s put it this way. Faith in a scientific law or theorem is earned through rigorous testing and cross-testing with other institutions. The other version of faith is mandated and is hardly questioned despite the fact that it can hardly be proven. The “proofs” it offers are part and parcel of the “faith” itself and cannot be taken outside the context of a believer.
Benj,
Oh sorry about that. I assumed that since Roco was campaigning during your freshman year (which places the campaign before the 2nd half of May 2001), you’d have finished 4 years.
Some Med schools have their students graduate after 4 years and just have a 5th year internship. U.P. probably has a different way.
But given that you’re not even a graduate yet, I doubt that you are a part of the institutions (Of course, you didn’t claim to be) that conducted the testings and cross testings so a scientific law or theorem can earn that kind of faith.
So the next issue would be your trust in those concerned institutions and then so forth.
Though I do understand you differentiating “faith” in a scientific law or theorem from other types of faith.
Good night and good luck on voting.
Roco ran during the 2004 Presidential elections.
Roco didn’t run in the 2001 elections because he was tapped by Gloria as a a Department of Education Secretary.
Benj,
Ah Yes.
I was actually thinking of May 2004 as you’d be a sophomore by June of 2004. On your 3rd year by June 2005 and a 4th year by June of 2006.
Hi Benj,
I actually know Geo in person, that’s why I talk to him
Hi Geo,
You could help me by finding a Buddhist monk to teach me their beliefs (mostly philosophical stuff and it’s really great!). It’s hard to learn it here in the Philippines, but I’m trying
Why Buddhism? Because they don’t convert people. Meaning, they don’t impose their beliefs on others. You won’t see them knocking on your doorsteps. And yet, the religion is being sought out by people who want to get away from the pretenses of other organized religions.
I feel depressed that we had a subject called “Religion” in high school and grade school, but it only taught the christian one. If not, I might have changed religions or something way before
See, we have all been conditioned to think that christianity is the only real belief…
…but is that true?
Mai: I have a Buddhist friend
I can set up a lunch meeting with the three of us if you like. 
Lol. I hope you’re not saying that Christians impose their beliefs and we knock on people’s doorsteps. Benj will kill me if I try to explain further
Mai,
What Grade school and High School did you attend?
Well actually, when Christians threaten other people that you will burn in hell or something if you don’t convert, it’s akin to imposing beliefs. And religious people too who ostracize you for being different. Not that threats work on everyone though
About your friend, you could tell me where his community is, and I might visit… the temples I have researched are quite a travel from my place.
@justice league - um, let’s keep it anonymous, but it’s a Catholic Christian high school, exclusive for girls. Just a piece of history - they gave me a low grade for conduct because when it’s time to pray, I only bowed my head and clasped my hands instead of doing the sign of the cross. They choose students who have Christian parents and are baptized, so they dealt out some grades based on how well you perform as a Christian.
Now, when they were lacking funds to build the preschool building (note: preschool buildings attract many parents to enroll), they started to allow students of all religions. I’ve never seen a Muslim in our campus before.
What does that say about them? Money moves the world, doesn’t it?
To quote one of our nuns regarding parents who haven’t paid the school fees, “Please tell your parents to fulfill their obligations, just like their financial obligations to this school.”
As a side note, the Christian religion has many beautiful teachings in it, “don’t kill,” “don’t steal,” “don’t cheat,” and I am grateful for being taught those. But I couldn’t accept the stories like the “creation story”, also having traditional roles like the fact that priests should be male, and many, many others I learned from being in a Catholic school.
I wanted to be released from the binds of organized religions (Buddhism is much much different), but does that make me a bad person?
Mai,
Did they say that you got a low grade in conduct because of that?
The private Education business just like the private Hospital business is still a business and that requires monetary consideration.
But to “force” students to take up a subject of religion other than their own would not be right. But you were still a Christian back then weren’t you?
And of course seeking release doesn’t make you a bad person but how are you bound by organized religion anyway?
@justice league:
Actually, yes, they called my mother and told me in front of her.
As for the business thing, our motto includes the word “charity” in it, and is pronounced everyday in school. And given that they really do target the higher classes, how come they don’t have scholarships for the less fortunate? I guess they were charitable on a case-to-case basis.
By the way, the preschool building, when finished… looked like a mall with detailed stained-glass windows. Complete with underground parking. It was definitely unnecessary, extravagant, excessive. None of my classmates liked what they saw.
I don’t know if I was really Christian at that time. More like someone who knows that she will get low deportment grades when she doesn’t practice the Christian religion. More like someone who doesn’t like what she sees and doesn’t know what to do.
I decided to do away with pretending late in high school, so everytime they prayed, I “meditated”. Took a pause to be thankful of what I have and think of how to make life better, be a better person.
So it was indeed, forcedly bound onto me (and many many other people). But now that I am no longer taking the religion imposed to me as a kid at home and in school, I am no longer forced to believe something that has truths and odd stories (creation story anyone?) meshed together and preached as real.
I guess that’s enough about personal stuff, which is crazy cause we’re practically spamming this blog.
Here’s something that I hold dear which is taught to Christians too - “Don’t do unto others…” Likewise, please don’t call people evil as much as you don’t want to be called fanatics. It’s the same banana.
I’m just of how people see this is a game to convert everyone into something else. people need to accept the fact that people’s minds are wired in totally different ways. The explanation that is good enough for one, may seem baloney to another. Being pretentiously knowledgeable and intuitive is useless if you don’t show your tolerance on your sleeve.
Mai,
I think your school officials made a lot of mistakes in judgement.
But for the Scholarship issue; just in case your school does offer some sort of scholarship for elementary and High school level, I would guess that there is a “Catch 22″ problem.
When I took my elementary classes, I remember there were more of us in 1 year level than the freshmen of our High school. When I reached High School, there were practically no new faces though some old faces were gone.
Practically only those who took elementary in our school were accepted in our High School and not even all at that.
With a Catch 22 problem, only those already from the school are going to be eligible for scholarship. The problem is that the less fortunate are not going to be able to fund themselves to get in the “system” in the first place so practically no scholarship are going to be given to the less fortunate because there are no less unfortunate students in the school to begin with.
But that is if your school granted scholarships in the first place.
If none are given, then chalk that up to another mistake in judgement.
Anyway, are you sure Buddhism won’t bind you to certain tenets itself?
Benj,
Your post #70 is well and good, though I hope you consider how much tolerance you yourself have shown specially with the kid.
Ooopps
I meant less fortunate intead of less unfortunate.
Justice league
It wasn’t even about him being christian and me being atheist.
I have low tolerance when it comes to bad logic. Im sorry.
Benj,
I’m sorry too that you have such a criteria in order to show your tolerance in the light of what you can do when that criteria is breached.
Nevertheless, very well.
Justice league, message #70 was meant for the person who keeps coming back just keep preaching about his faith. I can’t stand his pretentious claims that he understands what atheism is.
Benj,
I hope you realize that you’ve already implied how much tolerance you are going to show when it comes to bad logic whether or not it be about someone being a Christian and you being an atheist so that appears to be a general stand.
And you’ve already shown what you can say about people you perceive to be exhibiting bad logic.
But like I’ve implied, if that is your stand; then very well.
Well justice league,
http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/5minbud.htm
“Buddhist teachings can be understood and tested by anyone. Buddhism teaches that the solutions to our problems are within ourselves not outside. The Buddha asked all his followers not to take his word as true, but rather to test the teachings for themselves. ln this way, each person decides for themselves and takes responsibility for their own actions and understanding. This makes Buddhism less of a fixed package of beliefs which is to be accepted in its entirety, and more of a teaching which each person learns and uses in their own way.”
Mai,
Thank you for your indulgence.
In the explanation of the 2nd Noble Truth; it stated “A lifetime of wanting and craving and especially the craving to continue to exist, creates a powerful energy which causes the individual to be born. So craving leads to physical suffering because it causes us to be reborn.”
Not being a Buddhist, I don’t know what that really means but no doubt you will be testing that.
So I bid you good luck and safe journey.
Cheers.
The student’s simplistic statement is simply a response to the equally simplistic argument that there is no God because He can’t be seen.
I would have if I were Buddhist, however, I’m agnostic. I guess my post about wanting to learn about it was misleading. I’m not converting.
I was wondering why Christians don’t judge Buddhists but they judge atheists/agnostics? Is it because people like Benj are harsh talkers
Mai: Pardon me, my friend is a Buddhist but not a Buddhist monk. And she is not a resident of China or Japan.
But just let me know if you want to talk to her.
Also, I completely understand what went through during your Christian life back then. But Christianity is not about rituals, it is about your relationship with Him. I also don’t do the sign of the cross before praying, I just bow down and talk to Him just like what you did before. If you read the Bible, God hates hypocrites teaching the word of God but not practicing it. I will pray for your school back then that they’ll stop what they are doing.
Stop the preaching you idiot. How many times will I have to say that?
Mai,
OK then.
However for your question; I would have to say that judging other people has little to do with being a Christian.
And besides, you might not have realized it but the question seems loaded by the way your next statement attempts to modify it.
For one, you admitted to be agnostic but you certainly don’t appear to be a harsh talker. So one doesn’t follow the other.
Didn’t post the first time that I tried.
Mai,
OK then.
However for your question; I would have to say that judging other people has little to do with being a Christian.
And besides, you might not have realized it but the question seems loaded by the way your next statement attempts to modify it.
For one, you admitted to be agnostic but you certainly don’t appear to be a harsh talker. So one doesn’t follow the other.
The last phrase was a joke thrown in for the blog owner, hence the
I don’t know why you took that one seriously! Besides, it was phrased as a question, I guess you answered “no”.
Okay, I won’t joke around anymore.
So is atheism and those who practice it already acceptable to Christians? Is this kind of tolerance part of their teachings? Or is it, “those who don’t believe will be punished/are evil”? I know the latter to be true.
Judging has a lot to do with all beliefs. It’s what you judge plus how you react that matters, at least to me (:
Mai,
Then I guess I fell backwards on your joke then.
I felt the question had the tone that Christians were alleged to be judgmental. Sorry that I didn’t get the joke.
But since you won’t joke around anymore, I guess your new questions are serious then. Well I can only truly answer for myself and only truly guess for others but then I don’t know the extent of what is acceptable to you either. And my formal learning on religion has been over a long time ago so I can’t answer your other questions.
Cheers.
My, that was a good laugh. xD But it still didn’t cure my head from migraine. I think that seeing your brain thing is a joke. Well, I hope so. We used to tell that joke to a lot of people back in high school.
That boy reminds me of my sophomore year in high school. xD
oh gawd, these comments kill me.
Vigorous discussion among people of opposing views is always entertaining. That’s why I’m a lurker in Peyups’ World View forum. I love playing the part of a spectator.
The Zealot vs The Atheist
Geo actually reminded me of this classmate back in HS. He’s always singing: “Kum Ba Yah My Lord Kumbayaaaa…” and “praying over” me.
annoying f*ck.
Anyway, cheers.
I guess if he said it requires faith to believe he’s got a brain, then you have to take his word for it. Nothing here, moving on.
… in other news… looks like rain t