BookTalk.org

Neil deGrasse Tyson says "Get out of their way."

Watch this video.
www.wimp.com/scientificallyliterate/

You won't regret it.

That was right on target, Cattleman. Exploiting the cool factor or the wow factor will go a long ways towards getting kids excited about science. There doesn't need to be any other message delivered. To the extent that Richard Dawkins might insert another message in his science book for children, I think that's a mistake.

However, the old fogie in me is also warning about the effect on children of more immediate means of gratification, namely electronic media and entertainment. Why grab a pair of binoculars and look at the moon when you're so focused on the challenge of getting to the next level in some game, or when you need to be sure you don't miss something a "friend" said on facebook? It might go back to the value of being bored at times and needing to create your own things of interest.

I thought I could see the end when some years ago we went on a camping trip with another family, and the kids all needed to spend time sitting around the restrooms to recharge their phones. Or when we went on long car trips and the children in back were oblivious to any pearl of information or witty remark that I might have to throw back at them. It would always be (removing earphones and asking with annoyance), "What, Dad?"

To the extent that Richard Dawkins might insert another message in his science book for children, I think that's a mistake.

Not saying my comment applies to you, DWill.

This is something I've been harping on here on BT for a while now regarding Richard Dawkins as it relates to most ALL of his books, however impolite my tone.

I think it's comical that a couple of people here on BT are acting as if they've uncovered something profound by "noticing" Dawkins engages in this type of behavior regularly.

I saw it all along. It's a no-brainer for someone that attempts to leave their bias aside.

I think it's deplorable that Dawkins is attempting to indoctrinate children to his worldview.
Science is cool, and our children need more of it, but NOT to convince them of ANY ideological position.

An atheist who claims Atheism simply means lack of belief in god, but pushes/encourages others to NOT believe is a dishonest cretin, particularly when children are involved.

ant wrote:Science is cool, and our children need more of it, but NOT to convince them of ANY ideological position.

Right. And I believe that religion is cool. Like science, I believe our children need more of it, but NOT to convince them of ANY particular position.
I'm waiting for the day when parents and teachers teach the children the creeds, customs and history of all religions - the role of the church during the civil rights movement, the role of Black Muslims and their positive work with prisoners, as well as the negatives such as the Inquisition and anti-semitism over the centuries.

ant wrote:An atheist who claims Atheism simply means lack of belief in god, but pushes/encourages others to NOT believe is a dishonest cretin, particularly when children are involved.

contrast that with

"A believer who claims believing in Jesus can save him from eternal damnation, and pushes/encourages belief on others is a dishonest cretin, particularly when children are involved."

youkrst wrote:

ant wrote:An atheist who claims Atheism simply means lack of belief in god, but pushes/encourages others to NOT believe is a dishonest cretin, particularly when children are involved.

contrast that with

"A believer who claims believing in Jesus can save him from eternal damnation, and pushes/encourages belief on others is a dishonest cretin, particularly when children are involved."

Though Dawkins may occasionally reveal an anti-religion bias, he never attempts to indoctrinate, not in the usual sense of the word. Dawkins invites his readers to look at the facts themselves, to come to their own conclusions and to question many longstanding assumptions. That's not indoctrination, a word defined as teaching a set of beliefs uncritically. That's why indoctrination is most often associated with teaching faith-based belief systems.

DWill wrote:That was right on target, Cattleman. Exploiting the cool factor or the wow factor will go a long ways towards getting kids excited about science. There doesn't need to be any other message delivered. To the extent that Richard Dawkins might insert another message in his science book for children, I think that's a mistake.

However, the old fogie in me is also warning about the effect on children of more immediate means of gratification, namely electronic media and entertainment. Why grab a pair of binoculars and look at the moon when you're so focused on the challenge of getting to the next level in some game, or when you need to be sure you don't miss something a "friend" said on facebook? It might go back to the value of being bored at times and needing to create your own things of interest.

I thought I could see the end when some years ago we went on a camping trip with another family, and the kids all needed to spend time sitting around the restrooms to recharge their phones. Or when we went on long car trips and the children in back were oblivious to any pearl of information or witty remark that I might have to throw back at them. It would always be (removing earphones and asking with annoyance), "What, Dad?"

Ha ha, watch the beginning of this . . .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e5ml8RGEwCk

"Doggone kids, don't appreciate nothing!"

ant wrote:

To the extent that Richard Dawkins might insert another message in his science book for children, I think that's a mistake.

Not saying my comment applies to you, DWill.

This is something I've been harping on here on BT for a while now regarding Richard Dawkins as it relates to most ALL of his books, however impolite my tone.

I think it's comical that a couple of people here on BT are acting as if they've uncovered something profound by "noticing" Dawkins engages in this type of behavior regularly.

I saw it all along. It's a no-brainer for someone that attempts to leave their bias aside.

I think it's deplorable that Dawkins is attempting to indoctrinate children to his worldview.
Science is cool, and our children need more of it, but NOT to convince them of ANY ideological position.

An atheist who claims Atheism simply means lack of belief in god, but pushes/encourages others to NOT believe is a dishonest cretin, particularly when children are involved.

I don't see this issue as being as serious as you're making it, ant. It's a matter of appeal to readers for me, and I think that nothing said directly in an effort to dispel "magical" thinking would be best. I don't know, for one, how much of this sort of thing is in the book. Is it only as much as geo mentioned? Then it's not a major purpose of the book. For another, imagine that an ID guy or creationist had written a science book (as they have) and suffused the whole thing with marks of the Creator (as they probably have). In that case, would such a fuss be made about indoctrinating to a world-view? I think not. It might be the old story that Dawkins and others have justifiably complained of: religion is privileged and gets a pass, while if disbelief in God is uttered once, the howling begins.

Ha ha, watch the beginning of this . . .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e5ml8RGEwCk

"Doggone kids, don't appreciate nothing!"[/quote]

Where do you find this this stuff?? Boy does it bring me back, though, and illustrate the old fogie point perfectly. Kids were always finding a way to ignore the wise old man, even before I-pods. I spent a lot hours with comic books myself.

I always wondered how poor uncle Donald got saddled with these three obstreperous duck youths.

Huey, Dewey, and Louie Duck are a trio of fictional, anthropomorphic ducks who appear in animated cartoons and comic books published by the Walt Disney Company. Identical triplets, the three are Donald Duck's nephews. Huey, Dewey, and Louie were created by Ted Osborne and Al Taliaferro, and first appeared in a newspaper comic strip on October 17, 1937. Their first animated appearance was in the theatrical short Donald's Nephews, released April 15, 1938.

Huey, Dewey, and Louie unca Donald is a sitting duck