Re: slightly OT, but still connected

>>>>> "Brian" == Brian Tung <brian@xxxxxxx> writes:

Brian> Roland Roberts wrote:
>> I don't find the "fundamental premises of salvation from sin to be
>> unbelievable and offensive."

Brian> It is often presumed that all people, Christians and
Brian> non-Christians alike, are born sinners, and therefore must be
Brian> saved. Many Christians therefore take it upon themselves to
Brian> save, by means of conversion, many of us who don't want to be
Brian> saved (and in fact don't believe we need to be saved). It is
Brian> that expression of the notion of salvation that I find
Brian> offensive and patronizing. I *understand* it--but I
Brian> certainly don't condone it, and it does annoy me.

As I said, I don't have a problem with that. The question that gets
asked is "are we 'sinners' because we 'sin' or do we 'sin' because we
are 'sinners.'" I fall into the second camp. I have two boys ages 4
and 6 and am quite sure that they didn't need any coaching to learn
about being bad; disobedience, selfishness, and temper tantrums seem to
come quite naturally. Not remembering my own experiences at that age,
I'll take my mom's word that I was pretty much the same....

And to follow your lead back on topic....

Brian> To bring this somewhat back on topic, I find too much of high
Brian> school science education to consist of (a) a dry recitation
Brian> of scientific "laws of nature" and (b) straightforward
Brian> engineering. For instance, we learn that the Earth goes
Brian> around the Sun, and the axial tilt causes the seasons. How
Brian> in the world (!) do we know this? Considering that we often
Brian> hear that motion is relative, what does it really mean to say
Brian> that the Earth goes around the Sun, and not vice versa? If
Brian> we cannot answer these questions, I have my doubts about
Brian> whether we really understand those things we profess to.

This is an area where amateurs can have an impact. On my "to buy" list
is a video from the Astronomical Society of the Pacific called "A
Private Universe." I've been working with the kids of my 6-year old's
class to do some astronomy outreach events, but I'm also planning some
small science lessons that fit into the current "discovery-based
curriculum." Kids are very good at detecting patterns in things, so the
main issue is to present them with good data. The hard part is to teach
them how to *generate* good data and how to distinguish good data from
bad.

Matthew, my 6-year old, and I did a little "experiment" on water flow
rates through different orifices from our sink---with the aerator on,
with it off, through the counter-top water filter. I worked the faucet,
he worked the stopwatch. We did 5 data points, 3 times each. Through
practice, he learned to tell when we had a "good" measurement by whether
or not he and I managed to start and stop (more or less) at the same
time. In analyzing the data, he recognized the straight-line feature of
each data set---it takes twice as long to get twice as much water for
the same orifice. He recognized that faster meant a steeper line on the
graph and then predicted what the curve would look like if we measured
the flow coming out of the bath tub.

Astronomy has a number of opportunities for this sort of hands-on
approaches. I'm going to pick up some equipment for solar projection so
kids can draw pictures of the changing sunspots. Yeah, bad timing with
the minimum coming. For younger kids it opens up the idea that the sun
is not just a thing that brings light to the daytime, but that you can
ask questions about it and it *changes*. For older kids, there's
actually the possibility of measuring the sun's differential rotation
using sunspots. Another project that works even here in New York City
is to have the kids try to draw the phases of the moon each night they
can for a couple of months, then have them estimate the synodic month.
With older kids, you have an opportunity to discuss the differences
between the synodic and siderial month.

I'd love to see amateur astronmers come up with small projects like
these that work for kids---underneath each project the unspoken lesson
is how science actually works; i.e., the careful and systematic
collection of data that helps you understand the world. It's not all
about some corpus of facts, its about the systematic process that
organizes those facts into families that reveal structure in the
universe around us.

regards,

roland
--
PGP Key ID: 66 BC 3B CD
Roland B. Roberts, PhD RL Enterprises
roland@xxxxxxxxxxx 6818 Madeline Court
roland@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Brooklyn, NY 11220
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: SteveA takes over 1st Place in RGS Baseball Contest!
    ... married there would be a lot fewer kids and very few grandparents. ... I didn't say I wanted the divorce rate to go down, ... By the way, you said that Brian was the reason for your resurgence, can ... he gives me handicapping advice. ...
    (rec.gambling.sports)
  • Re: Do you believe Rader kids not abused?
    ... Kerri at least. ... >From what everyone has said about the kids, NO, I dont think so. ... Brian will have a hard time if he gets sent to Iraq and needs to KILL ... I hope Brian looks NOTHING like Dennis... ...
    (alt.true-crime)
  • Re: fantasy without magic?
    ... > Brian M. Scott wrote: ... >>> younger readers, either. ... >> And I haven't even mentioned books for very young kids, ... reading Alice, which is adult reading, and _Citizen of the ...
    (rec.arts.sf.composition)
  • Re: [LogoForum] Digest Number 1662
    ... and instead kids should use Unix commands ... Brian> algorithms, I'll take your argument seriously, because ... Brian> learn Unix. ... Brian> commands. ...
    (comp.lang.logo)
  • Re: coyotes, was Re: OT: Lions and Tigers and--Oh My!
    ... Why such a person bothers to own a gun at all is beyond me, ... Don't bother to deride MY advice, But why not listen to the NRAs ... I try to keep it safe, though my children are grown - grand kids do ... Brian Whatcott ...
    (rec.equestrian)