Douglas J. Futuyma on the limits of science: [[S]cience seeks to explain only objective knowledge], [knowledge that can be acquired independently by different investigators if they follow a prescribed course of observation or experiment]. [Many human experiences and concerns are not objective] and (so) [do not fall within the realm of science]. (As a result), **[science has nothing to say about aesthetics or morality]**…. [The functioning of human society, then, clearly requires principles that stem from some source other than science.]
1. Science seeks to explain only objective knowledge 2. knowledge that can be acquired independently by different investigators if they follow a prescribed course of observation or experiment 3. many human experiences and concerns are not objective 4. do not fall within the realm of science 5. science has nothing to say about aesthetics or morality 6. the functioning of human society then clearly requires principles that sem from some source other than science Exercise 7. 4 #6.
From a newspaper call-in column: [My opinion regarding the amount of homework a child receives is basically threefold]. **[I don’t believe the children should receive any homework whatsoever]**. One, (because) [the teacher has seven or eight hours during the course of the school day to instruct children and do work assignments with them, to review material for tests. [They do not need to be sending work home]. To me, [homework is an excuse for the teacher’s lack of ability to do their job properly].
Two, [there are too many children that come home with either no adult there] or [no adult with the ability to help them with their homework]. [That places too many children at a disadvantage compared to other children who have their parents there to help them with their homework]. Three, [an adult spends eight hours at work], [comes home], and [has the rest of the day to enjoy themselves]. [That is a luxury that a child should definitely be afforded]. [They don’t need to spend time after school]. [Teacher, it is time to wake up]. Exercise 7. 4 #9
From a newspaper editorial: The recent use of mail ballots in Oregon’s election of a U. S. senator has led some people to hail this (as) the wave of the future in our democratic republic. We do not share that enthusiasm. The primary advantage of the mail ballot is that it requires little time and effort on the part of the voter. We think that also is a primary shortcoming of this process. It is worth a little of both our time and our energy to exercise the right to vote, and that personal investment should serve to make us a bit more conscious of the value of that opportunity.
Another negative aspect for the electorate is that a mail election necessarily must take place over a relatively long time frame, rather than a single day that is the culmination of an election campaign process. That means voters who cast their ballots near the end of the designated voting period might have a larger volume of information, and perhaps more accurate information, than those who vote early in the process. We also seriously concerned about the potential for voter fraud in elections conducted by mail.
A state with Louisiana’s political history would be fertile ground for that. Finally, we take note of one of the more ironic potential shortcomings of this procedure, and that is the very fact that this process involves using the mail, rather than a voting machine. Many of us, at one time or another, have sent or received mail that through no fault of our own, did not arrive on time or was lost altogether. We would prefer not to risk having that happen to our ballots in any local, federal, or state election.