Avoiding religious topics in med school interviews

[Renoir]

Ah, the old "god exists, and evolution is his way of creating life" cop out by the religious. They were brainwashed into believing in a fairy man in the sky when they were a kid, but the idea of creationism is so retarded that it can't be true, so they attempt to reconcile the fact by bringing evolution and god together. Weak.

 

Oh, late post for me. Boo.

 

Why is it a cop-out? Maybe they can focus on more important things... Like existentialism?

[Guest viscous]

Ah, the old "god exists, and evolution is his way of creating life" cop out by the religious. They were brainwashed into believing in a fairy man in the sky when they were a kid, but the idea of creationism is so retarded that it can't be true, so they attempt to reconcile the fact by bringing evolution and god together. Weak.

 

That's random BS. I dont give a damn whether its a cop out or not. I am not discussing the merits of this argument in this thread. I am discussing that their opinion, no matter how wrong one thinks it is, is not to be ignored as they are humans with whatever religion they decided to choose and the generalization made by OP ignores them.

[Zakaqel]

Muslims who accept theory of evolution have following arguments:

 

Quran accepts that some of its verses are allegorical. Hence the creation verses are allegorical. Secondly, one of Muslims' God's name is The Evolver (Al-Bari), hence evolution is not inconceivable for a Muslim. Thirdly, Quran says that Muslims' God creates in stages. This could include man as well.

 

Hence it is not far-fetched for these pro-evolution Muslims to make those claims.

 

And I never said Islam accepts theory of evolution, I am not eligible to speak on "Islam's" behalf. I said that many Muslims (who are humans) accept that Islam accepts theory of evolution. Is the OP allowed to speak for Islam that he/she had to say that "Islam firmly believes so and so?" Since I am a humanist, I will let humans of particular religion to speak about their religion.

 

I think everyone should have the right to believe whatever they want, but I don't think they should have the right to bend preexisting belief systems according to their needs. The verses in the Quran pertaining to the story of creation are not allegorical. There are sayings in the Prophetic Hadith that define the interpretation of these verses. The Hadiths relating to creation are clearly literal. You can look this up in the tafseer

 

Also, I have never heard of the Arabic word "Al-Bari" being translated as "The Evolver". The closest translation to Al-Bari I can think of is "The Rightful". The Arabic word for evolve is "Tatawor". "The Evolver" would equate to "Al-Mutawer" in Arabic.

 

Of course, everyone has their own interpretation. I respectfully disagree.

[Charon]

They know its a touchy subject and they won't bring it up. If it does come up, it'll be general questions about teaching. If you bring it up, do not focus on any religious aspect.

 

Its not a big deal.

 

In my opinion, best post & advice in this thread.

[Renoir]

I think everyone should have the right to believe whatever they want, but I don't think they should have the right to bend preexisting belief systems according to their needs. The verses in the Quran pertaining to the story of creation are not allegorical.

 

It sounds like you're almost dogmatic about this... And I would assume that you would consider that to be one of the bad qualities of the religious?

 

Not trying to be inflammatory, just want to know why this need to be interpreted so rigidly. I'm no scholor on it, way over my head.

[Zakaqel]

Ah, the old "god exists, and evolution is his way of creating life" cop out by the religious. They were brainwashed into believing in a fairy man in the sky when they were a kid, but the idea of creationism is so retarded that it can't be true, so they attempt to reconcile the fact by bringing evolution and god together. Weak.

 

Since the days of primary school you have been taught about the existence of the Atom, electron, proton, etc. Have you ever touched an atom? Have you ever seen an atom? Does the abstractness of the atom limit its chance of existence?

[Zakaqel]

It sounds like you're almost dogmatic about this... And I would assume that you would consider that to be one of the bad qualities of the religious?

 

Not trying to be inflammatory, just want to know why this need to be interpreted so rigidly. I'm no scholor on it, way over my head.

 

The thing about Muslims is that they are taught that some aspects of Islam are hard facts and others can be interpreted accordingly.

 

The rule is: If it's clearly stated in the Quran, you can't argue it. For example, you can not argue the prohibition of alcohol because it is clearly stated in the Quran.

 

Since the story of creation is clearly illustrated in the Quran, Muslims can not argue against it.

[Rext]

Since the days of primary school you have been taught about the existence of the Atom, electron, proton, etc. Have you ever touched an atom? Have you ever seen an atom? Does the abstractness of the atom limit its chance of existence?

 

No, I have never perceived a single atom but the parallel between the atomic theory and creationism/the existence of god is (in my opinion) a foolish comparison to draw due to several reasons which include:

1) The Atomic theory explains and lets us predict the future course of matters such as chemical reactions in a reliable and exact fashion.

2) The Atomic theory was developed based on quantitative evidence and careful observations.

3) The Atomic theory has thus far withstood the test of time with no major contradictions to challenge its integrity.

 

Now the existence of God fails to satisfy all three reasons above:

1) Yes, most religious doctrines do include prophecies of the future (e.g. the book of Revelations) yet all these predictions are extremely vague with no exact date and can't be used to infer any other tangible events related to the future.

2) Religions are founded upon faith which in itself is the antithesis of scientific inquiry (note: having faith in the atomic theory due to the quantitative evidence provided is not the same thing as having so called "blind faith" in religious doctrine). Also, please note that numerous religious "miracles" which are commonly used to reinforce faith have been shown to lose authenticity upon scrutiny (e.g. Moses parting of the "Red Sea" which was a translational error of "Reed Sea" [consult google for further details]).

3) The biggest contraction to religions such as Christianity which states something along the lines of "God made man in his image" is vastly contradicted by evolution (unless you believe God exists in the form of a microbe). Before scrutinizing the theory of evolution, I suggest that you (or anyone for that matter) learn what it actually entails first (please note: disregard Lamarck - the dude was a blathering idiot).

 

And might I ask all you religious people out there who disbelieve in the atomic theory/evolution a question:

Does the world still revolve around the Earth?

[Rext]

The thing about Muslims is that they are taught that some aspects of Islam are hard facts and others can be interpreted accordingly.

 

The rule is: If it's clearly stated in the Quran, you can't argue it. For example, you can not argue the prohibition of alcohol because it is clearly stated in the Quran.

 

Since the story of creation is clearly illustrated in the Quran, Muslims can not argue against it.

 

In the same regard, the Qur'an also promotes extreme sexism in which women have severely limited rights (not just the Qur'an but the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament as well). Prohibiting protest of the text of the Qur'an is, in my opinion, an archaic tradition. Sure, it might have been useful after the death of the prophet Muhammad and a central governing reference was needed to keep the tribes united, but times/culture/technology changes. Religious practices and interpretations should change to meet the needs of the current world. Imagine where we would be if we still believed that the Pineal Gland served as the connection between soul and body (courtesy of Descartes).

[Zakaqel]

No, I have never perceived a single atom but the parallel between the atomic theory and creationism/the existence of god is (in my opinion) a foolish comparison to draw due to several reasons which include:

1) The Atomic theory explains and lets us predict the future course of matters such as chemical reactions in a reliable and exact fashion.

2) The Atomic theory was developed based on quantitative evidence and observations made through careful observations.

3) The Atomic theory has thus far withstood the test of time with no major contradictions to challenge its integrity.

 

Now the existence of God fails to satisfy all three reasons above:

1) Yes, most religious doctrines do include prophecies of the future (e.g. the book of Revelations) yet all these predictions are extremely vague with no exact date and can't be used to infer any other tangible events related to the future.

2) Religions are founded upon faith which in itself is the antithesis of scientific inquiry (note: having faith in the atomic theory due to the quantitative evidence provided is not the same thing as having so called "blind faith" in religious doctrine). Also, please note that numerous religious "miracles" which are commonly used to reinforce faith have been shown to lose authenticity upon scrutiny (e.g. Moses parting of the "Red Sea" which was a translational error of "Reed Sea" [consult google for further details]).

3) The biggest contraction to religions such as Christianity which states something along the lines of "God made man in his image" is vastly contradicted by evolution (unless you believe God exists in the form of a microbe). Before scrutinizing the theory of evolution, I suggest that you (or anyone for that matter) learn what it actually entails first (please note: disregard Lamarck - the dude was a blathering idiot).

 

And might I ask all you religious people out there who disbelieve in the atomic theory/evolution a question:

Does the world still revolve around the Earth?

 

This is a very well written post, but I think you missed the point of my previous post.

 

I was not trying to prove the existence of God; I was only trying to say that the existence of God can not be nullified by our inability to see Him.

 

The abstractness of a certain object does not make it inexistent. For example, the ancient Egyptians and Greeks were not aware of the existence of the atom because of their lack of technological resources. Similarly, evidence of the existence of God may exist without us knowing. Regardless of it's likeliness, future finding and technological advances may lead to evidence supporting the existence of God.

[Zakaqel]

In the same regard, the Qur'an also promotes extreme sexism in which women have severely limited rights (not just the Qur'an but the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament as well). Prohibiting protest of the text of the Qur'an is, in my opinion, an archaic tradition. Sure, it might have been useful after the death of the prophet Muhammad and a central governing reference was needed to keep the tribes united, but times/culture/technology changes. Religious practices and interpretations should change to meet the needs of the current world. Imagine where we would be if we still believed that the Pineal Gland served as the connection between soul and body (courtesy of Descartes).

 

This is only based on your limited knowledge and outlook. FYI, Muslim women have played very significant roles in Muslim society. In fact, there were times in early Muslim society in which women acted as religious scholars and generals.

 

Do not blame Islam for the backwardness of today's Muslim society. Women are treated poorly in Muslim countries because of outdated cultural customs that have nothing to do with Islam.

[Rext]

This is a very well written post, but I think you missed the point of my previous post.

 

I was not trying to prove the existence of God; I was only trying to say that the existence of God can not be nullified by our inability to see Him.

 

The abstractness of a certain object does not make it inexistent. For example, the ancient Egyptians and Greeks were not aware of the existence of the atom because of their lack of technological resources. Similarly, evidence of the existence of God may exist without us knowing. Regardless of it's likeliness, future finding and technological advances may lead to evidence supporting the existence of God.

Thank you for your compliment . I agree that the abstractness of a theory does not render it obsolete. Evidence for the existence of God does actually exist (check out the oh-my-god particle). However due to the numerous contradictions present within all current religious doctrines, I believe no current religion accurately describe the nature of God. Unless God enjoys lying to humanity and keeping us from reaching further enlightenment, He/She would not present falsehoods marketed as causal explanations.

[Rext]

This is only based on your limited knowledge and outlook. FYI, Muslim women have played very significant roles in Muslim society. In fact, there were times in early Muslim society in which women acted as religious scholars and generals.

 

Do not blame Islam for the backwardness of today's Muslim society. Women are treated poorly in Muslim countries because of outdated cultural customs that have nothing to do with Islam.

You are right, I did base my inference on my limited knowledge of the Qur'an. Might I point out that once a religion/country has accumulated c.1500 years of history, somewhere along that line a charismatic female is bound to come along and deviate from the societal norms (ie Muslim women with significant roles). Furthermore, although the mistreatment of women might be due to cultural customs, these customs are more often than not justified through the Qur'an.

If you could tell me about some specific Muslim female historic leaders or point me to a source where I can learn more about them, I would be highly appreciative

 

EDIT: Evidence for sexism in the Qur'an: http://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2009/04/23/koran-sexism-demonstrated/ (Please disregard the author's rather biased viewpoint but just observe the direct quotations listed near the end of the article).

[medicure]

If you can generalize "Islam" or ANY other religion like that, you do not deserve to get into med school. There are tons of Muslims who believe that Islam accepts theory of evolution.

 

Viscous.....My claims that Islam does not accept the theory of evolution is merely based on what the Quran postulates. I was from a catholic religion and I converted to Islam many years ago. Therefore, I am a Muslim. I have done my research enough to say that Islam does not accept the theory of evolution. These "tons of Muslims" you say who say that "Islam accepts theory of evolution" cannot generalize what Islam says based on their interpretations. Their acceptance of evolution does not imply that Islam accepts it and based on what the Quran says, evolution does not coincide with the Islamic belief system. So before you assume that I am making generalizations about Islam, do your research and ask questions.

And who are you to decide whether or not I deserve to go to medical school?

[mizz.lee]

how did this thread turn into an argument about religion and the existence of god?!?!

 

I predict nobody will convince anyone else of anything! Carry on though, by all means

[Guest viscous]

Viscous.....My claims that Islam does not accept the theory of evolution is merely based on what the Quran postulates. I was from a catholic religion and I converted to Islam many years ago. Therefore, I am a Muslim. I have done my research enough to say that Islam does not accept the theory of evolution. These "tons of Muslims" you say who say that "Islam accepts theory of evolution" cannot generalize what Islam says based on their interpretations. Their acceptance of evolution does not imply that Islam accepts it and based on what the Quran says, evolution does not coincide with the Islamic belief system. So before you assume that I am making generalizations about Islam, do your research and ask questions.

And who are you to decide whether or not I deserve to go to medical school?

 

If you feel that your interpretation of Quran is the right one, then that of the pro-evolution Muslims is also the right one.

 

Well I said that you dont deserve to get into med school based on your gross generalization of a diverse group of Muslims with one stroke of a paint brush. Imagine what hell might this attitude release on the patients who will present with varieties of diseases with unique medical histories ..... and then you come from nowhere as a doctor and classify them under one group based on your biases.

[Guest viscous]

You are right, I did base my inference on my limited knowledge of the Qur'an. Might I point out that once a religion/country has accumulated c.1500 years of history, somewhere along that line a charismatic female is bound to come along and deviate from the societal norms (ie Muslim women with significant roles). Furthermore, although the mistreatment of women might be due to cultural customs, these customs are more often than not justified through the Qur'an.

If you could tell me about some specific Muslim female historic leaders or point me to a source where I can learn more about them, I would be highly appreciative

 

EDIT: Evidence for sexism in the Qur'an: http://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2009/04/23/koran-sexism-demonstrated/ (Please disregard the author's rather biased viewpoint but just observe the direct quotations listed near the end of the article).

 

there is no "a charismatic female" in Islam. There are too many to list here.

 

Prophet Muhammad's first wife Khadija herself was an affluent business-woman before marrying the Prophet and remained so AFTER marrying the Prophet. So your classification breaks down when applied to Islam. Your classification might be true for other religions though.

[trymeover]

Viscous.....My claims that Islam does not accept the theory of evolution is merely based on what the Quran postulates. I was from a catholic religion and I converted to Islam many years ago. Therefore, I am a Muslim. I have done my research enough to say that Islam does not accept the theory of evolution. These "tons of Muslims" you say who say that "Islam accepts theory of evolution" cannot generalize what Islam says based on their interpretations. Their acceptance of evolution does not imply that Islam accepts it and based on what the Quran says, evolution does not coincide with the Islamic belief system. So before you assume that I am making generalizations about Islam, do your research and ask questions.

And who are you to decide whether or not I deserve to go to medical school?

 

Well, it's alright if you converted from a Christian to a Muslim. But don't convert from Islam, or they'll kill ya in the name of Allah. lol, bad joke, but there's plenty of truth behind it..eek

 

Amusing discussion. Why do muslims get so worked up if somebody says the smallest thing about their religion? Chill out dudes.. (and don't answer the question in the preceding sentence)

I've never seen Christians, Hindus, Buddhists react so frequently in such a fashion.

 

Anyhow, I think there is a new generation of muslims born in Canada or USA who are much more liberal and different than the classical muslims. I think they're the ones who try to synthesize evolution and similar scientific beliefs with their religion as it's in their upbringing in the western worlds.

Religion evolves just as people do. The name may stay the same, but the interpretation and receptivity will change.

[Tango Charlie]

Well, it's alright if you converted from a Christian to a Muslim. But don't convert from Islam, or they'll kill ya in the name of Allah. lol, bad joke, but there's plenty of truth behind it..eek

 

Well, that's like saying Christians burn people they think are witches, or stone disobedient kids or those who work on the Sabbath. There's Biblical justification for it, but in practice you'd need to be in some backwards and superstitious part of the world where the rule of law doesn't apply or has been corrupted for it to actually occur.

 

Firstly, not believing in the theory of evolution is not the equivalent of rejecting the heliocentric model of the universe. Secondly, not believing in the theory of evolution does not imply that the Earth is only 6000 years old.

 

I find it funny when people attack people for not believing in the theory of evolution. When you attack someone for not accepting a scientific theory you make the theory your religion. Your statement makes it seem as if the theory of evolution is definitely 100% correct. You eliminate the possibility of it being partially wrong or wrong altogether. This limits the scope of scientific innovation. A couple of centuries ago, scientists would have laughed at you for saying that "spontaneous generation" was an obsolete theory. You are doing the same thing right now...

 

Evolution is as scientific and as substantiated as gravity or the age of the Earth. There is zero need for faith, for believing something in spite of a lack of evidence, because there is an absolute mountain of evidence supporting evolution. It's an old trick to suggest that "science is my religion" or whatever, but that's totally inappropriate, as religions refuse to change or change at a glacial rate despite new evidence, whereas science gladly laps up new discoveries and changes as the body of knowledge expands.

 

The only way someone could actually say "I deny evolution occurred" and keep a straight face is through willful ignorance and a total disrespect for the scientific process. It is exactly the same thing as insisting the Earth is only 6000 years old, and exactly the same thing as insisting the Earth is the centre of the universe, because both of those claims rely upon ignorance of the speaker, and the balls to flat-out claim that science just isn't worth a damn, and that you know more than all the experts on the subject put together. It's preposterous, and insane, and requires a mind subjugated by magical religious thinking to pull off. As someone who wasn't raised religious and who has a deep appreciation for the inquisitiveness of humanity and its triumph over superstition, it is appalling to me that a profession as tethered to science as medicine might actually attract such people who would reject evolution.

 

Oh, and if somehow the enormous evidence supporting evolution were proven wrong, I'd be the first to run down the streets shouting it to the world. All I am interested in is the truth, and in this case any thinking person can see that the truth as best we can tell is evolution. If evolution were disproved (or the atomic theory, or the heliocentric theory, or etc) I would merely be excited to see what new findings had been made.

[trymeover]

Well, that's like saying Christians burn people they think are witches, or stone disobedient kids or those who work on the Sabbath. There's Biblical justification for it, but in practice you'd need to be in some backwards and superstitious part of the world where the rule of law doesn't apply or has been corrupted for it to actually occur.

 

Like any muslim country.

 

I like your posts by the way. Good sh*t tango.

[trex]

[Guest viscous]

^^ was I supposed to laugh?

[trex]

^^ was I supposed to laugh?

 

No, you're supposed to realize how much of a joke religion is and how it should have no place in science and medicine.

[Charon]

I personaly have to agree with the picture above. Life, and our whole universe, are so complex that I don't think we can deduce anything during one human life (from any form of philosophy, and neither from science).

 

If there would really be a last judgement, I guess god would care more about what I have done here instead of my views on religion.

 

 

@Tango Charlie: Seems obvious to me.

[Tango Charlie]

I personaly have to agree with the picture above. Life, and our whole universe, are so complex that I don't think we can deduce anything during a human life (from any form of philosophy, and neither from science (or I'll be dead way before we find the truth)).

 

What on Earth does any of that even mean?