Richard Nixon's speech writer makes a stupid movie...

[Lauri]

I saw Expelled tonight.

And it was not that bad. And it is NOT what you think.

Like Marc Antony, it neither comes to bury or praise the theory of Evolution, only to ask some questions of it. . .What happens between the bang and that first cell? How complicated is a cell, anyway, and how does it replicate all the information that may lie within it?

The film doesn't quite start there. It starts with shots of the Berlin Wall (I really wish he'd of stuck with that theme all the way through, because it was alot more logically effective than the later theme) and works down to an evolutionary biologist that got booted for merely mentioning Intelligent Design. He moves at a comfortable pace, from D.C, to Seattle/Redmond, to even as exotic a locales as Paris, Germany, and finally London.


He does speak to both sides, giving you a look at a world that discouraged me at first, but now leaves me pissed: Academia. Don't take that as a desire to remain ignorant, but a vocalization of an irritation of the entrenched politics within academia. Expelled, while it is about the theory of evolution is about a wider truth - - true, we can talk about the ignorance and the lack of curiosity that plagues todays students. But isn't it time we discuss and pull the curtain back on the lack of inquiry, debate and willful ignorance of their teachers?

He missteps on the Darwinism=Hitler Link, but it is as not as grand as you think. Others make those links for him, but cover themselves by placing Hitler against the preceding scientific thoughts about eugenics and natural selection. It's not a deal-breaker. . .and if he had explored eugenics more than Hitler, I think his case (Re:Abuse of the ToE) would have been that much stronger.

As a friend of mine said, it IS worth the 7 of 9 dollars I paid for it. Especially towards the end when he catches up with Richard Dawkins. I REALLY expected more of Mr. Dawkins. Not that I like the guy, but I expected more. I'd of loved to have seen the unedited video of that interview.

(This will be reposted)


*Red*

you have said what i have read from others... that it merely questions why academia is so against the mere discussion.

[RedTail]

Exactly. The film just makes you want to do your own leg work and find out what the fuss is about, without some professor looking over your shoulder.

*Red*

[Chris_]

you have said what i have read from others... that it merely questions why academia is so against the mere discussion.

I wish Stein had concentrated his arguments in areas that truly point out academia's Leftward spin.  Stories are legion of students who got failed for saying good things about Conservatives in Poly Sci classes and students are required to accept islam and Buddism and reject Christianity and the like.  Ones where opinion or interpretations are the discussion topic.  That would have been a good and meaningful (and profitable) movie.

There is a legal group (I can't remember the name) which is dedicated to protecting the rights of Conservative students in college.  I am sure they have hundreds, if not thousands, of stories that are truly outrageous and could have stirred the pot.

Hinging his thesis on rejection of ID and Creationism in science, however, was a non-starter since extra-naturalism doesn't fit and philosophical discussions about things like ID are irrelevant. And clearly the Conservative base agrees with me.

[Doc]

Hinging his thesis on rejection of ID and Creationism in science, however, was a nonstarter since extra-naturalism doesn't fit and philosophical discussions about things like ID are irrelevant. And clearly the Conservative base agrees with me.

I think that there should however, be a place reserved in the academic arena for discussion of ID, probably as an adjunct to history (since most high schools probably don't offer much in the realm of philosophy), that said, I further think that discussions of ToE should always be moderated with the caveat that "this is based on the best evidence that is available so far".  Science teachers should never use ToE as a club to denigrate those of faith who feel that a philosophical explanation is possible, by calling it "stupid", or "ridiculous", as I have heard teachers do.  They should also not present ToE as a "fact", any more so than they would the "Theory of Relativity".....

Expanding on this, I think that if a curricula is going to dwell at length on ToE as a required subject, the curricula should be also required to present alternative concepts albeit in a non-science environment.  Similarly, if a lesson plan discusses the great religions such as Islam, Buddism, etc. it cannot avoid the same depth devoted to Christianity, as schools are constantly attempting to do.

Education should expose the student to the widest range of ideas possible, arm the student with the ability to think critically, and then allow the student to challenge each idea and reach his/her own conclusions as to the validity of each......censorship of ideas is "indoctrination", not "education".......

doc

[The Night Owl]

I think that there should however, be a place reserved in the academic arena for discussion of ID, probably as an adjunct to history (since most high schools probably don't offer much in the realm of philosophy), that said, I further think that discussions of ToE should always be moderated with the caveat that "this is based on the best evidence that is available so far".  Science teachers should never use ToE as a club to denigrate those of faith who feel that a philosophical explanation is possible, by calling it "stupid", or "ridiculous", as I have heard teachers do.  They should also not present ToE as a "fact", any more so than they would the "Theory of Relativity".....

Expanding on this, I think that if a curricula is going to dwell at length on ToE as a required subject, the curricula should be also required to present alternative concepts albeit in a non-science environment.  Similarly, if a lesson plan discusses the great religions such as Islam, Buddism, etc. it cannot avoid the same depth devoted to Christianity, as schools are constantly attempting to do.

Education should expose the student to the widest range of ideas possible, arm the student with the ability to think critically, and then allow the student to challenge each idea and reach his/her own conclusions as to the validity of each......censorship of ideas is "indoctrination", not "education".......

doc

No one has a problem with ID being taught in a context of philosphy or religion. The controversy over ID stems from the fact that proponents of it want to insert it into the science classroom.