KFL%MX.LCS.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU (11/11/86)
From: ~joe testa~ <TESTA-J%OSU-20@ohio-state.ARPA> >From: "Keith F. Lynch" <KFL%MX.LCS.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU> > >... I agree that "creation science" is completely bogus, but I >feel that nobody should be compelled to pay for the teaching of >something they find repugnant. How much sense does is make to legislate bogusness? ... None at all. That was exactly my point. If people are going to be forced to pay for education they should have control over what is taught. If we, the scientists, find that what the public wants taught is bogus, we should perhaps try to find another way to finance the schools. We have no right to impose our opinions on others, even though we are right and they are wrong. If I find someone writing an incorrect computer program on his own computer on his own time, I have no right to force him to correct the program. Followups to Poli-Sci. ...Keith -------
ark@seismo.CSS.GOV@alice.UUCP (01/02/87)
KFL%MX.LCS.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU.UUCP writes: > > None at all. That was exactly my point. If people are going to > be forced to pay for education they should have control over what is > taught. If we, the scientists, find that what the public wants > taught is bogus, we should perhaps try to find another way to > finance the schools. We have no right to impose our opinions on > others, even though we are right and they are wrong. Are you really suggesting that school curricula should be decided purely by majority rule with out reference to truth? I'll put it another way. Suppose majority of taxpayers in an area have become convinced that 2+2=5. Should they actually be able to force schools to stop teaching that 2+2=4? -------