arkey

One needs to decide if an animal is a product or a pet. It's difficult to have them be both.

Having them as a product does not mean you don't care for them, on the contrary, but I would say it's a completely different type of bond.

> But then the question should be is it just the "bond" which is holding someone back from killing animals? Why can't we just not kill without relying on bonds?

I would argue it's about the purpose, not the bond. You don't kill a pet, but you do kill food. And you should never kill for the sole sake of killing.

That's some very good insight, often difficult to remember, but constantly having all of this in mind should definitely help a bit with managing the day to day of parenting.

I have a few memories that my parents have placed at around me being 2. I would say they have also remained through repetition, but in my case not active or voluntary. Those memories, although very vivid and specific (I can pinpoint them as specific events), are mostly attached to senses (something I saw, something I smelled). And because I continued to have those inputs during several years later, I guess the memories were thus persisted.

> Your father is a parent and didnt parent 6 years by your side.

I don't think you can imply this from parent. My wife is the parent who spends most of the time by my children's side. Meanwhile I am working to support and provide for the whole family. Still I am lucky and able to spend quite a lot of time with my children.

> Why didn't your mother step up to support that?

She was probably already busy being a mother. It's a full-time job.

> If a mother can replace a father in this role, why can't a teacher?

Nowhere it is implied that the mother is replacing the father. Both have a different role to fulfil.

> Why doesn't a child need some freedom and independence to discover their own internal motivations and creativity?

Again, all sorts of assumptions. There can be guided freedom, protected independence... etc. Even if you decide to throw your kid into the swimming pool to 'encourage' them to learn how to swim, you won't leave them there on their own, will you?

> As well as thousands who are normal hard-working people.

Do you have sources for that? Honestly trying to find out. Thanks!

It would be great if all technologies freed us and gave us more time to do useful or constructive stuff instead. But the truth is, and AI is a very good example of this, a lot of these technologies are just making people dumb.

I'm not saying they are essentially bad, or that they are not useful at all, far from that. But it's about the use they are given.

> You can use an LLM for everything, including curing cancer and fixing climate change.

Maybe, yes. But the danger is rather in all the things you no longer feel you have a need to do, like learning a language, or how to properly write, or read.

LLM for everything is like the fast-food of information. Cheap, unhealthy, and sometimes addicting.

> Bullying seems to be a phenomenon almost exclusive to children.

Plenty of teachers are bullies, including up until Uni.

I think it's you who doesn't understand how science works, making claims like the fact that Evolution needing something like nuclear fusion to explain longevity of stars, and nuclear fusion existing, must then mean Evolution is real.

According to the Scientific Method (which I obviously must not understand) an honest researcher would posit an hypothesis (which ideally should be falsifiable, unlike Evolution, or Creation for that matter) and then should rather try to prove that hypothesis false. That's what I do at my SE job. If you are unable to prove a falsifiable hypothesis as false, chances are you're right.

You see, because Evolution and Creation are not falsifiable, they need a certain amount of faith to be accepted. I acknowledge my faith in God, and I acknowledge that I cannot scientifically and undeniable prove the existence of God or Creation through purely empirical methods. That's actually a necessary aspect of it. I do, however, see a lot of evidence which points me to that way, and it points me to that way because of where (or rather, on who) my faith is placed.

You, like it or not, do have faith too, but it is placed in a different set of persons and scriptures. You have faith in Modern Science. It's a faith, a 'trust' if you will, you choose to risk having in a lot of data that, by the way, you cannot possibly have had the chance to validate personally.

I invite you to honestly reflect on that.

This will most likely be my last response because at this point I am not sure this conversation is constructive at all.

> Go spend some time in a classroom and get a clue how much more there is to teaching than what your layman's view entails.

How, by the lack of it?

A lot of people bet for home schooling because, not despite of, their perspective from inside a classroom.

> If they are, they likely aren't here reading this discussion.

Why not?

There has been a considerable increase in speech delays and disorders after 2020.

Some of that is related to lack of diverse socialisation (watching/hearing different people talk) but also caused to masking. Not being able to watch the mouths/lips critically affects a kid's speech development.

> think they know more than the experts.

Ah, the experts. I have no sort of education in education at all. Why was I better (and still am) at helping mates learn and solve CS exercises at Uni than some of the expert and qualified teachers? A friend of mine recently started a CS course to pivot his professional career. When he doesn't understand what the teacher is on about, he comes to me for help.

I have huge respect for the concept of teachers, but sadly a lot of people are teachers because they didn't know what else to be.

> from my limited experience the kids who are home schooled have huge holes in their education

I don't want this to sound snarky at all, but I'd honestly be happy to provide you with real life cases that would broaden your experience and hopefully tilt your viewpoint.

> only schooling forces you to confront other beliefs in a way preparing you for life in a pluralistic society and thus schooling as such is a cornerstone in education

That's absolute nonsense.

Public schooling grooms you to fit into a rigid, calculated mould for society. You learn which is the right way and things to think, and which ones are wrong and you're not allowed to think, according to the current government in place. Your comment exudes precisely that.

Isolation is not a requirement in home schooling. It can happen? Yes, it's a risk.

Can the opposite happen? Yes, I've seen it personally. My home schooled nephews know and are known by everyone in their village and surroundings. Sometimes I feel at 6 and 8 years old they have more diverse professional connections and acquaintances than I have right now.

Our times are like they are in part thanks to their work.

Yes, there is much more knowledge at least content-wise nowadays than then. Does that make their contributions ignorant, or invalid? Remove what they did in their day, what are we left with?

> It’s directly correlated with young earth creationism and climate change denial.

Is it though? Any sources to back that?

From what I know CC denialists come in all shapes and sizes, from Christians to Conspirationist Atheists to people who are hoping for the return of the Anunnaki. As well as firmly Creationist Christians that don't deny the climate change at all.

> Do you reject fusion in stars because there is no reason for them to last so long?

No. Why would I?

You see? You're jumping to absurd conclusions. The fact that I don't believe in Evolution does not mean I reject the Scientific Method, or technology, or reasoning, or logic.

I'm an engineer. I like and enjoy Science, building things, researching, learning, understanding, reasoning, creating. Don't try to make it incompatible or exclusive.

> Not any GOOD ones.

Maybe you should review a bit your history of Science.

I'm actually sorry to insist, but whatever.

> all of modern technology is a result of the exact same processes that led to the theory of evolution

Could you please elaborate? I'm not sure I understand. Are you referring to the scientific method?

If so, I really feel the need to insist that being Creationist or Christian is not exclusive or incompatible with that. Guess what, I am Christian, I believe in a Creator God and yet I am (surprise, surprise) an accomplished Software Engineer.

I can understand if you think I'm stupid because of my beliefs. That's your opinion and I'm totally fine with it.

What I'm trying to say is that holding these beliefs doesn't make you intellectually impaired, or unable to use reasoning. We're just working with different assumptions.

You have faith in Nothing, from which everything came, I have faith in Something (God) from which everything came. And it is faith indeed, because you don't and can't possibly have definite proven knowledge of the origin of things. You weren't there.

To you, nuclear fusion is evidence of evolution. Fine. To me, alongside the rest of Creation, it is evidence of God.

Therefore, you will reason a certain set of things, and I will reason a different set of things. Because we have different starting points, we will reach different conclusions.

My point was not clear. What I'm saying is that often it would be better for a certain profile of people to not be forced to attend what in my country is mandatory secondary education, and that it would be better to put them to work on stuff they might enjoy.

But of course that would mean the system needs to contemplate individuals, instead of collectives, and the system doesn't like that.

What about the tens of millions of people who have been killed because atheism?

But how about this: the first time that any relevant powers decided that slavery was wrong at a global level was due to Christian beliefs, fancy that. And luckily they went on to impose that moral belief to the rest of the world. (England, France vs. Slavery)

It's true that a lot of evil has been done in the name of Christianity, but that's not of Christianity. If I came to your home and punched you in the face in the name of your mother, would you blame your mother?

But Christianity and the Bible have been abused very wrongly by evil powers as tools for control, something possible through deceiving illiterate, uneducated people.

As some other comments mention, Protestant Evangelicals made a big push for literacy precisely so people could read and interpret the Bible themselves, without depending on interested third parties.

Anyone taking a little time to read the Bible will see and understand that the Crusades were wrong, racism is wrong, oppressing women is wrong, and so on.

Thanks to ubertaco for the neat response point by point, but I don't think any of your points are relevant, even if they are true.

I know a couple of big-scale farmers in the US. They are Christian, and believe in Creation. That doesn't stop them from using the necessary pesticides, or choosing the adequate strain of corn seeds, etc.

Believing in Creation doesn't turn you into an illiterate moron. Believing God created everything according to a design and purpose is not incompatible with acknowledging the presence of similarities and design patterns throughout all of Creation, and believing that doesn't suddenly poof take away your rational capabilities to think and understand things.

Either way, I was asking for is a real situation in which someone will be negatively impacted because they hold a Creationist belief.

Will a Creationist live a sad life without fully embracing the misteries of goose-bumps? Will a farmer not use pesticides, or choose the wrong one because Creationism? Will Advil won't work on a Christian because they don't understand that rats and rabbits are our cousins? Will their knees hurt more (or maybe less?) because they think humans were standing up from the beginning?

Young-earth creationist, as in "God created everything from scratch in 7 days".

There are many scientists out there that believe in that. They are not scientifically ignorant, they just believe different stuff from you, which, mind you, unless you've seen all proof and understand everything about it to the very last detail, you just hold a faith-based belief of what you're told about by a specific bunch of people/books.

People forget that we often know a lot about stuff, but then we discover more stuff which totally changes the stuff we knew and so on.

Not intending to start a flamewar here or anything, but the fact is that even if there's a lot of evidence for many claims about it, the THEORY of Evolution is not failsafe let alone definitely proven.

You can choose to go with it until we have something better, that's your choice.

Allow that same choice for the rest of the people out there.

My apologies for not being from (or exclusively referring to) the US of A.

From where I'm from I'd say yes, both sides at equal levels more or less, fairly favoured toward the left, but now changing a wee bit because the left went waaaaay too left.

Europe would now seem to be shifting towards the right at some levels, but from historically (recently at least) being fairly leftist.

Anyway, aren't CNN, MSNBC, The Guardian... overtly left-leaning?

On the other hand, my sister is a firm Creationist Christian, has a PhD and had a brilliant career in research (albeit nothing directly related to 'The Beginning of All Things').

Chances are she is less "scientifically ignorant" than many people around here, myself included.

Just like my sister's, yours is a specific case. It's sad that they didn't teach you Creation in a way that wouldn't cancel out Science, as Science itself is something profoundly Christian as well.

"O, Almighty God, I am thinking Thy thoughts after Thee!..." - Johannes Kepler

Those groups do overlap.

Such as? I'm honestly and genuinely curious.

To be clear, I am not about to justify any sort of violence anywhere. That said...

Many violent and disruptive students were just kids with special needs. And I don't mean mental conditions or anything like that.

I mean a kid that would do WAY better if he was in a trade class doing something that motivates them, rather than being frustrated and forced to endure a rubbish secondary education, several hours crammed into a small room with other people and getting nowhere.

But of course that's more difficult to implement than a generic standardising/equalising pipeline of norm-conforming average citizen production.

Lucky you. I've seen quite a bunch of the opposite. But then you do whatever you can to move on and find another job with a better atmosphere.

Sadly, it wasn't so easy as that with school.

So... you're either predator or prey?

In a way you're right, I worked in a consulting firm that seemed to have that mentality, and I did find bullies, and it seemed the only way to go forward was to become a bullying, lying cheat yourself.

Then I went on to work for a more civilised company that believed in people being decent and such, and discovered that you can actually coexist with people and foster growth without stepping on other people on your way.

If you think one can just "fight with bullies, find inmates, find friends" and everything will be alright, you're quite clueless to some experiences many people have gone through.

And that actually makes sense from a strictly logical point of view. The extremes are the ones who precisely don't want to conform to the status quo imposed by the alleged controlling higher powers.

As purely anecdotical data, where I'm from it's actually the opposite, majority hippies, vegan, alternative/free education advocates, etc, and a minority of mostly morally-concerned non-left-leaning (mainly religious) people, as well as specific cases of children with special needs that simply can't adapt to public education because of external reasons (bullies).

As a matter of fact, the hardcore religious right in my country have their own private education institutions, which are quite powerful themselves.

So even the (non-catholic) Christians who homeschool because of religious and moral convictions end up being moderate/center people trying to move away from both extremes.