- Joined
- Aug 21, 2025
- Messages
- 444
- Reaction score
- 32
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
I can see some beneficial reasons in doing this:
1. Public education policies are only meant to provide a bare minimum level of education - not much more than is required to be able to read or fill out a job application. If a person wants to learn about science in-depth, they will have to read science books on their own. Therefore, it would be more beneficial to introduce curriculum on practical skills, such as financial management.
2. Since people will graduate high school with only a high school level of science knowledge and understanding, they may interpret it in bad ways or form false conclusions about what it means. (e.x. People who are taught science or evolution in schools might believe that "science or evolution disprove the existence of a God", when, in reality, they don't, and, if anything, may do more to prove the existence of a God, such as how human DNA is comparable to thousands of books, something which we would presume has an author). They might also think these things are true just because they learned them in a textbook or learned to repeat them by rote as facts in school, when, in reality, that's not what makes something true, epistemologically speaking.
3. Humanities are arguably more valuable than science or math is. The bare minimum level of math a person will learn in public schools, for example, is only enough to be able to perform simple calculations which can be easily automated with modern-day calculators or calculating software on a computer. (As is the case with science, if a person wants to learn mathematics at a more advanced level, they will have to read mathematics books on their own).
If, on the other hand, we taught Jesus' parables in public schools, we might be able to instill moral values and lessons into children, instead of teaching them to perform rote calculations which can be better off automated with calculators.
1. Public education policies are only meant to provide a bare minimum level of education - not much more than is required to be able to read or fill out a job application. If a person wants to learn about science in-depth, they will have to read science books on their own. Therefore, it would be more beneficial to introduce curriculum on practical skills, such as financial management.
2. Since people will graduate high school with only a high school level of science knowledge and understanding, they may interpret it in bad ways or form false conclusions about what it means. (e.x. People who are taught science or evolution in schools might believe that "science or evolution disprove the existence of a God", when, in reality, they don't, and, if anything, may do more to prove the existence of a God, such as how human DNA is comparable to thousands of books, something which we would presume has an author). They might also think these things are true just because they learned them in a textbook or learned to repeat them by rote as facts in school, when, in reality, that's not what makes something true, epistemologically speaking.
3. Humanities are arguably more valuable than science or math is. The bare minimum level of math a person will learn in public schools, for example, is only enough to be able to perform simple calculations which can be easily automated with modern-day calculators or calculating software on a computer. (As is the case with science, if a person wants to learn mathematics at a more advanced level, they will have to read mathematics books on their own).
If, on the other hand, we taught Jesus' parables in public schools, we might be able to instill moral values and lessons into children, instead of teaching them to perform rote calculations which can be better off automated with calculators.
