Hull's ham fisted attempt to deal with things he doesn't like about religious schools doesn't gel with the liberties he offers most other organisations.
Why Brumby would allow Hulls the liberty of forcing schools to defend their employment policy is a mystery. Isn't the whole theme of the new exemptions a recognition that legitimate organisations/ employers have the right to choose their own staff .Schools must be the same!
Non fanatics would find another way, but the ham fisted Hulls blasts away . why? Hulls has had to be reigned in before .Why not again:? after all , by trying to overturn the burden of proof he needs to be told he's completely ignoring our legal heritage- he's mad !
Hulls has a few friends though that think " To be a good scientist you have to be a complete materialist ".
But the evidence on thats score is against him ( "Bios, Logos Theos" for eg) .
These monists think subject categories should be checked and double checked for absolute truth , heresy and doctrinal purity when no complete categorization is acceptable to any reasonable scientist .
For example , As I have said elsewhere I think kids at secondary school are smart. ,They need exposure to all sorts of ideas and subject declassification and good schools ( a more acceptable focus?) accept that . I don't like the noise and confusion and deafness created by dull witted censorship and fixed subject classifications . I don't want my daughter's biology teacher ( at any school) or even expect her to constantly go beyond the subject of DNA and adaption by natural selection, to saying its the theory of everything - but it may happen .What polys can do to stop abuse I don't know . Its not there job anyway - its the schools job . I don't want my daughter (IDWMD) to fail to make the distinction between science and the philosophy of science. IDWMD to only hear that meterology is the only way we learn about climate, history, cosmological history , physics and predictive earth science . IDWMD to constantly hear from her english teacher that "Lady's Chatterley's Lover is the best guide to sexual relationships ever .Dicsuss it yes- thats the point Choice . Deal with the wolf Maybe my daughter can cope with knowing thats what he really thinks anyway? Its the noise and deafness controls that need some attention --not the subjects ( Its not what goes into a man that ruins him mate - the prophet said)
The very love of categorization, as AN Whitehead pointed out in the 1920's is a disease .
Must be something really serious that worries them both ?
Maybe they worry too much.
Neither Brumby nor Hulls seems to realise that the popular teaching of the philosophy of evolutionary determinism (ED)in the media is rightly the subject of a controversy (a category error ) in the public mind and in religious schools in particular . In a free country a category error ( inherently relevant or not relevant) is not a crime, but a point from which to openly and rationally centre debate . Hulls clearly wants to close the debate down .What a dummy .
THE SOLUTION :
Teach ED in a philosophy class , and adaption by natural selection in biology class, at both secular and religious schools ......and BOTH will be happy - no need to panic; no need to get fanatical and spend weeks in court playing letigious logomachy. Not that hard to be reasonable and respectful with what parents (rather than what polys want)............. is it.
Is Brumby up to saying no to the reactionaries in his midst?
ACT
Pull off the inherent requirements tests and burden of proof rubbish ( as if a job is the mere sum of the words ) ! Do polys really know what goes wrong where ? Does Labor not realize more Christians (and agnostics too) will leave the State system if the secularists insist in monoculture doctrine review in schools\? The secular/ religious divide in Vic schools is a asset and under good (by teachers and parents)review already ( not polys and legal boffins ---heaven forbid ) ? Sets the scene for category error discussions in a place where it can rightly be discussed ( in front of both parents and teachers)
Getting fanatical is an admission you have lost sight of the problem.
Better not to vote at all than act when you are such a mood !
What do polys know about what works- they maybe out rubbing sticks together next year?
The dumbness of it is obvious to those outside the cage - lets hope not all Laborites are in their together responding in kneejerk fashion to what is not their choice , but a parents choice .
As if Brumby's lot haven't got enough big issues without trying to turn our legal system upside down - a bit of freedom would go down well in the nanny state.
To risk the ruin of the great jewel in Victorias crown of the appeals system as well . The chairman of VCAT has stated the problem - but B government is still creating it. How about a job test for them? !
Who do they think they are anyway ?
The redoubling of effort-- a piece of desperation by those in power? Read the wind without reaping the whirlwind - redirect the reactionaries . Read Santayana's definition at the start of this blog.
Monday, March 29, 2010
Monday, March 15, 2010
Evidence of Atheists" having lost sight of their aim"
Richard Dawkins and his mates in the AFA need to ask the question whether they are shooting straight.It's all very well being against something - but what are you fighting for. And where indeed is this enemy ?Amongst the rebels or amongst the moderates ?
In shooting directly at religious people the old greeks are ignoring the psychological reality that they are shooting at themselves. Shooting yourselves in the foot? Takes one to know one ?Maybe there are people in the religious congregations who might agree with them on "the dangers of religion" - and don't appreciate being blasted on mass.
Even if you have a good aim and you HIT the temple directly all you get is SPLINTERS.
To be effective in dealing with the enormous power of religious paradigms, you have to recognise that the rebels and the moderates share the same temple .
Blowing up the temple achieves nothing . The devil is in the detail- and if you want to get the devil , you have deal with him in the detail.
Followers of Christ in particular know all about the dangers of organised religion ( going back into prehistory even ) . They are rebels by nature . Rebellion and isolation is at the heart of the growth of the Christian faith - not the external stuff ; the reactionary stuff.
Maybe spying is a better way to move forward in their ancient battle to rid the world of symbols .Reading Jeremiah might also give them some clues as to who is on what side, when - a key issue in an effecetive strategy and making your arrows work. Better and deeper than that superficial old macheavelli .
In shooting directly at religious people the old greeks are ignoring the psychological reality that they are shooting at themselves. Shooting yourselves in the foot? Takes one to know one ?Maybe there are people in the religious congregations who might agree with them on "the dangers of religion" - and don't appreciate being blasted on mass.
Even if you have a good aim and you HIT the temple directly all you get is SPLINTERS.
To be effective in dealing with the enormous power of religious paradigms, you have to recognise that the rebels and the moderates share the same temple .
Blowing up the temple achieves nothing . The devil is in the detail- and if you want to get the devil , you have deal with him in the detail.
Followers of Christ in particular know all about the dangers of organised religion ( going back into prehistory even ) . They are rebels by nature . Rebellion and isolation is at the heart of the growth of the Christian faith - not the external stuff ; the reactionary stuff.
Maybe spying is a better way to move forward in their ancient battle to rid the world of symbols .Reading Jeremiah might also give them some clues as to who is on what side, when - a key issue in an effecetive strategy and making your arrows work. Better and deeper than that superficial old macheavelli .
Cummon Richard - Stop shooting yourself in the foot
Richard Dawkins is less convincing than he thinks because he's not aware of what he's doing . Sure you can make money like Dan Brown questioning everything and "having a go" . We rebels ALL agree that words are powerful , but never let us stop using them, carefully .
Most of us observing rebels to the dangers of instutional religion are asking " are you in denial about being religious yourself" .( science of the mind rather suggests we all are" religous") ABCnews of the grand conference of Atheists in Melbourne this week focused on what looked like denial ( I'm not vehement am i?" )
Sound sustainability scientists accept the role of aggression, and are not in denial about it .
And what seems worse on the convincing stakes is having Peter Singer as second fiddle .; Surely the man has spent more time chasing reactionary trams than any old greeks we know .
Finally they talk a lot of hot air about evidence.
- few scientists amongst them . They say 'what scientist say" which could mean they just say what they wanna say . They use the word evolution to preach the doctrine of evolutionary and secular determinism . ( a fine but important distinction )
- Celebrating the rise ? All growth is not good. Especially if it arises out of redoubling of effort and there is plenty of evidence for fanaticism and denial amongst them .
-Evidence from History ; need to be more careful who sits in the back row of congregations of people who think they should be allowed to do their own thing . The history of such conferences is that they achieve little ( Ask Emperor Julian - he had lots of money to throw at the problem ) and harbour more tyrants than our own traditions of faith .
- The evidence is that some of these 2nd century Greeks ( via Plato's cave )would have gone further with identifying the merry go round of mere rhetoric than the 21st century ones have in the 2000 years of wild largely unproductive reactionary rhetoric since.
Most of us observing rebels to the dangers of instutional religion are asking " are you in denial about being religious yourself" .( science of the mind rather suggests we all are" religous") ABCnews of the grand conference of Atheists in Melbourne this week focused on what looked like denial ( I'm not vehement am i?" )
Sound sustainability scientists accept the role of aggression, and are not in denial about it .
And what seems worse on the convincing stakes is having Peter Singer as second fiddle .; Surely the man has spent more time chasing reactionary trams than any old greeks we know .
Finally they talk a lot of hot air about evidence.
- few scientists amongst them . They say 'what scientist say" which could mean they just say what they wanna say . They use the word evolution to preach the doctrine of evolutionary and secular determinism . ( a fine but important distinction )
- Celebrating the rise ? All growth is not good. Especially if it arises out of redoubling of effort and there is plenty of evidence for fanaticism and denial amongst them .
-Evidence from History ; need to be more careful who sits in the back row of congregations of people who think they should be allowed to do their own thing . The history of such conferences is that they achieve little ( Ask Emperor Julian - he had lots of money to throw at the problem ) and harbour more tyrants than our own traditions of faith .
- The evidence is that some of these 2nd century Greeks ( via Plato's cave )would have gone further with identifying the merry go round of mere rhetoric than the 21st century ones have in the 2000 years of wild largely unproductive reactionary rhetoric since.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)