| Papers [1-15] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "CREATION": |
|
|
Carlos Fuentes: The Creation and Re-Creation of Social Reality, 2002.
This paper provides an analysis of the writings of Carlos Fuentes and explores the creation and re-creation of social reality in his works.
2,510 words (approx. 10.0 pages), 7 sources, MLA, $ 76.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper asserts that Fuentes used his writing as an opportunity to create and re-create the social reality of the lives of the people of Mexico as they shaped and continue to influence the development and history of their country. In order to establish this thesis more fully, the following works of Fuentes are examined: "Aura" (1965), "The Buried Mirror: Reflections on Spain and the New World" (1992), and "The Years with Laura Diaz" (2000). Initially, an overview is provided of Fuentes' thoughts on writing and his use of writing in documenting the lives of Mexicans and the history of Mexico, his homeland. This is followed by a discussion of Fuentes' works as each illustrates his efforts to construct and re-construction Mexico?s reality through the lives of her people.
From the Paper
"Through his writing, Fuentes has assumed a commitment for insuring that his readers as well as himself take responsibility for reconceptualizing the manner in which they perceive both the past and present of Mexico. His desire to accomplish this task is clearly documented by Fuentes himself when he provided the following description of the role of Latin America within history: "To restore some kind of tragic consciousness ...to make the United States understand that memory counts--that there is history, and that it does not renew itself every 24 hours when Dan Rather appears on the set" (as cited in Lippard, 1990, p. 6). As is evidenced within this statement, Fuentes presents a challenge to himself as a writer as well as to his readers to recognize that the social construction of reality that may be presented to us in the world around us may not be an accurate representation of reality and history as it truly exists."
| |
|
Creationism, 2006.
This paper discusses creationism, which rejects scientific theories that contradict the Biblical story of creation.
1,026 words (approx. 4.1 pages), 6 sources, APA, $ 36.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper relates that creationists reject the scientific theories regarding the origin of life, the origin of the human species, the geologic history of the earth, the formation of the solar system and the origin of the universe. The author points out that a second kind of creationism, "creational spirituality", holds that, rather than theory, awe is the appropriate response to the unfathomable wonder of creation. The paper also explains that Neo-Creationists want to allow the Bible to be one of the choices of theories that are given to school children in public schools as to how the earth was formed and mankind came into being.
From the Paper
"A wave of Revivalism swept the South to counteract Modernism and Intellectualism. There was conflict between the liberals and the conservatives in society, between the Evolutionists and the Fundamentalists. Things came to a head in the small town of Dayton, Tennessee, when John Scopes, a high school biology teacher, was tried for teaching the theory of evolution. The trial was widely covered by the most famous broadcasters in the nation. In the trial, also called the "Scopes Monkey Trial," it was decided that it would be legal to teach evolution in the public schools."
| |
|
Creationism plus Evolution?, 2005.
This paper discusses if creationism should be taught in the schools alongside evolution.
830 words (approx. 3.3 pages), 3 sources, APA, $ 29.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that the two basic theories about the origin of human life are evolution (or Darwinism) and creationism about which there are conflicting opinions as to which theory is correct and which theory should be taught in schools. Some people feel that creationism and evolution should both be discussed in the classroom and presented as equally valid theories. The author points out that many people feel that it is inappropriate to be teaching creationism in public school classrooms because it is religious doctrine, which is not appropriate under the Constitution of the United States that separates church and state. The paper concludes that both theories should be presented in the classroom as opposing but not necessarily mutually exclusive explanations for the origin of humanity.
From the Paper
"A large percentage of Americans, including many teachers, believe that creationism is a more valid theory than evolution. A study in 1996 found that most American completely reject the idea that evolution is the origin of humans. Another survey conducted in 2000 found that nearly 40 percent of Americans believe that creationism should be taught instead of evolution in the classroom, and many believe that evolution should be outright banned from the classroom. Further studies show that half of all Americans and Canadians do not consider evolution to be a valid scientific concept. Many have not been convinced by the scientific evidence with which they have been presented, and believe that evolution is scientifically unfounded."
| |
|
Creationism Analysis, 2006.
This paper serves as an analysis of the history and evidence of creationism.
1,575 words (approx. 6.3 pages), 5 sources, $ 62.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In this article, the writer firstly defines creationism as a system of belief that maintains that humans, the earth, and the universe were created by a supreme being or deity. The writer explains that creationists believe in a god who is absolute creator of heaven and earth, out of nothing, by an act of free will. The writer then examines the history of creationism.
From the Paper
"Creationism is generally defined as a belief system which holds that human beings, the earth, and the universe were created by a supreme being or deity, either ex nihilo or from preexisting chaos. Many Creationists consider their beliefs to be compatible with science, explain that certain scriptural accounts of creation should be interpreted as metaphors, or believe that scientific laws and mechanisms were created by supernatural intervention."
| |
|
"Scientific Creationism", 2007.
An analysis of the style of writing in Henry M. Morris' book, "Scientific Creationism".
1,486 words (approx. 5.9 pages), 0 sources, $ 49.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses Henry M. Morris' book, "Scientific Creationism". The paper suggests that the book poses interesting and thought-provoking questions which makes it more intriguing. The paper goes on to give examples of statements or concepts that Morris makes in the book and are written in a broad enough manner to cause controversy. The paper suggests that for those who believe that science is the only truth, or those who are adamant creationists, the book offers enough evidence for both sides.
From the Paper
"One of those beliefs found in the book is that creationism as compared to a model such as natural selection or survival of the fittest is (according to Morris) more likely than what has been given credit to. A survival of the fittest model can be described as containing tautologies, or circular thoughts. For example, since the survival of the fittest model says that the fittest individuals are those that procreate more often and bear more offspring, it is also defining those that procreate more often and bear more offspring as being the fittest. The definition fits because it is the definition. With this type of scientific definition being used, then Creationism has no chance whatsoever in being accepted by those who define such characteristics."
| |
|
Creationism vs. Evolution: Impact and Meaning., 2002.
A discussion of Creationism vs. Evolution, and the impact and meaning of the two theories in contemporary North American society.
2,400 words (approx. 9.6 pages), 5 sources, $ 89.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This ten-page undergraduate paper examines and analyzes the issue of Creationism vs. Evolution, and the impact and meaning of the two theories in contemporary North American society, culture and politics. The discussion includes the Scopes trial and America's continuing debate over science and religion and the impact of each on North American culture today.
| |
|
Creationism vs. Evolution, 2006.
A discussion about the controversy surrounding the debate over creationism vs. evolution.
690 words (approx. 2.8 pages), 3 sources, APA, $ 23.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper attempts to discuss, in a non-judging manner, creationism and evolutionary thought. The paper reviews the theory and scientific facts of evolution. Then the paper extrapolates on the creationists' theory of Intelligent Design.
From the Paper
"As humankind continues to move forward into the future, it also searches the past to reveal what the past can teach it in an effort to understand where life-kind as a whole is going. In some cases people..."
| |
|
Creationism, 2004.
This paper argues against the religious theories about the origins of the universe, earth, and man, which are called ?creationism?.
995 words (approx. 4.0 pages), 2 sources, APA, $ 35.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains Genesis 1:1 (?In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth?) and numerous writings from the other books of various religions led creationists to believe that man, the earth, and the rest of the universe were originally created by a divine force. The author points out that, there is a complete absence of such proof for creationism; instead, there is irrefutable scientific evidence that the creationist beliefs are in direct conflict with the current scientific theories about how the universe started, such as the ?Big Bang? hypothesis, and how life was first formed and evolved through the ?building blocks? of life, as in the theory of evolution. The paper relates that scientific evidence, such as geological records, inter-tidal, and terrestrial deposits indicate that, at no recorded time in the past, has the entire planet been under water, as suggested by the story of Noah?s flood, which supposedly happened just a few thousand years ago.
From the Paper
"There are several categories of people who advocate ?creation science? but can be broadly grouped into the ?young earth creationists? and the ?old earth creationists.? The former contend that the earth is no more than 6,000 to 10,000 years ago. The more rigid (or ?fundamentalist?) creationists go further. They believe that the heaven and the earth were created on 4004 BC. The more flexible, ?old creationists? concede that the universe could have come into existence a lot earlier but argue for an ?initial or first cause? arguing that ?Someone? (a divine power) initiated the cataclysmic events for creating the universe and then evolution was used as the process by this divine power to guide the subsequent events. The other major belief of the ?young earth creationists? is about a worldwide flood that occurred during the time of Noah, when waters rose for 150 days and went down for the next 150 days and that all existing species of life are the ones that were taken aboard the Noah?s Ark."
| |
|
Creationism vs. Evolution, 2005.
This paper discusses the general arguments of creationism and evolution and the way they relate throughout history from the Scopes trial to the present day.
2,725 words (approx. 10.9 pages), 9 sources, MLA, $ 81.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that creationism vs. evolution is a debate about how human beings got to where we are today, whether they were created by an all-powerful deity in the image of itself fairly recently (a few thousand years ago), or whether they evolved as a species from simians through Neanderthals to the present status of homo sapiens over millions and millions of years of natural selection. The author examines that the Scopes trial of the 1920s, which brought up the debate in the U.S. in the context of which explanation of the origin of humans would be taught in public schools. The paper objectively reviews each side of the issue by studying arguments from Darwin and others and then extends the context of the Scopes trial to the present day debate.
From the Paper
"Unlike some Christian faiths which look to Genesis as a scientific text, the Catholic religion is amenable to treating the work as a metaphorical and idiomatic text that does not necessarily exclude evolutionary explanations provided by science, which explanations the religion encourages its members to consider as viable and acceptable without compromising their faith. In this religion, creation is thought of more in terms of the soul than the body, although this does not mean that religious practitioners do not refute the theological ramifications of evolution espoused by some, who tend to think of it as diametrically opposed to both the idea of original sin and the idea of Adam. The Catholic church does not endorse philosophical evolutionism. Thus, one could say that the Catholic religion views evolution as an interesting scientific principle that is something more than a hypothesis but less than a fact, and that accepting evolutionism is not necessarily the same thing as denying creation, which can be seen in religious rather than scientific terms as the formation of the soul rather than the body."
| |
|
Creationism and Nietzsche, 2008.
An examination of Friedrich Nietzsche's arguments in "The Will to Power" and his views on creationism.
4,294 words (approx. 17.2 pages), 7 sources, MLA, $ 113.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses the concept of creationism and Friedrich Nietzsche's views on the topic. It looks at Nietzsche's arguments that are presented in his work, "The Will to Power," concerning man's ongoing process of creating and being created. It also discusses man's will to survive through the will to create and how that affects his existence.
From the Paper
"Nietzsche's statement that the power to order, simplify, falsify and artificially distinguish is housed within man returns to the concept of the unconscious drive toward creativity and why it is vital to the human psyche. Man mentally labors based on assumption and seeks inspiration from within his perception and perspective. "Being," "self" and "place" must be assumed, however falsely, in order to posit even the most basic of creative ideas. Logic, then, is revealed as flawed and is inapplicable to discover truth or create the world as it ought to be. It is only a tool wrought from an external of assumptions and perceptions that man attempts to manipulate in order to more fully understand and cannibalize what he perceives to be the improvable "real" world. Nietzsche states the problem of logic as follows: "In short, the question remains open: are the axioms of logic adequate to reality or are they a means and measure for us to create reality, the concept 'reality,' for ourselves?--To affirm the former one would, as already said, have to have a previous knowledge of being--which is certainly not the case" (Nietzsche 268). In order for man to have had a previous knowledge of being it would require him to live in truth and to inhabit the world as it ought to be within the knowledge of differentiation between the material, "real" world and the external. Stepping outside the walls of the faith prison presents a perceptional impossibility. Man may even acknowledge that this contrived external does not encompass the boundaries of the potential of true being and a true knowledge of the material, but can travel no further upon such a path of enlightenment. The only enlightenment attainable to man is the knowledge that he can never fully know (and therefore never dominate, for to truly dominate would require a perfect understanding of the thing in itself), and to live in peace with that fact, paving the way for a new future. Therefore, logic is a set of axioms made useful only for the purpose of deciphering an innumerable set of perceptions, one derived from another."
| |
|
Creationism vs. Evolution in Schools, 1993.
An argument that creationism is not scientific and should not be taught, including an examination of legal, philosophical and factual issues.
1,350 words (approx. 5.4 pages), 8 sources, $ 47.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"To require balanced treatment of creation.science and evolution.science in public schools is to violate the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. That amendment provides for a separation of church and state (Ruse 24). Creation.science is not science; it is religion. In fact, the documentation which delineates the field of Creation.science is identical to the corresponding chapters of the Bible's Genesis (Ruse 24). Creation.science is essentially a desperate attempt by southern fundamentalists to try to circumvent the First Amendment and have the nation's public schools indoctrinate young people in the Book of Genesis (Raloff 404).
The law passed in Arkansas (Act 590 of 1981, General Acts, 73rd General Assembly, State of Arkansas) requires balanced treatment of both creation.science and evolutionary.science (Ruse..."
| |
|
The Creation Myth "Popol Vuh": Maya Book of Creation, 2000.
A look at the Maya creation story which can be found in the "Popol Vuh", and acts as a window into the religious, secular, psychological, and environmental life of the Maya people.
1,690 words (approx. 6.8 pages), 4 sources, $ 54.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"Universal to virtually every human culture is the "Creation Myth or Story." A myth or story created by humans in an attempt to explain the creation, purpose, and existence of life. For the Maya, this creation story can be found in the Popol Vuh. Not only does the Popol Vuh recount the Maya creation story, but it also is a window into the religious, secular, psychological, and environmental life of the Maya people. This view can be applied to both the individual and the society and it also encompasses the cosmic world, the earth, and the underworld..... "
| |
|
Creationism in Public Schools, 2001.
Discussing the controversial question about what theory of creation should be taught in public schools.
2,607 words (approx. 10.4 pages), 7 sources, MLA, $ 78.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This research paper explores the widely disputed concept of which forms of evolution, if any, should be taught in public schools. Did God create the universe, or did it stem from the Big Bang. What educators and school boards think. Current schools? policies are examined, and many experts? opinions are analyzed.
From the Paper
"Since Charles Darwin published his Origin of Species, a constant battle between creation and evolution has arisen. Darwin offered a new explanation of where man came from. He believed that humans, and all other living things for that matter, evolved from less complex forms of life, allowing only the fittest species to survive and adapt. Furthermore, evolutionists, the supporters of Darwin?s theory, believe the universe was created in a massive explosion billions of years ago called the big bang. Creationists, on the other hand, believe that some higher power, usually God, created the universe as described in the Genesis chapter of the Bible. The debate over how the universe was created eventually spilled over into America?s public education system, leading to a major controversy. Because of laws mandating a separation of religious beliefs and public institutions, like public schools, a decision on which theory of the universe?s creation should be taught could not be reached. This poses a new question. To what degree, if any, should creationism and evolution be taught in the public schools? Based on current scientific evidence, waning public opinion, and the violation of the separation of church and state, it is negligent for creationism to have a place in America?s classrooms."
| |
|
The Place of Creationism Within a Contemporary Science Curriculum, 2002.
Argues that the theory of creationsim should be taught in school along with the theory of evolution.
900 words (approx. 3.6 pages), 3 sources, $ 35.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
Should creationism be taught in schools as anything more than a rather quaint and outdated belief? This essay will argue that it is important to incorporate creationism into the general debate and approach it as a view that is perhaps not mutually exclusive with a more empirical, scientific approach.
| |
|
Evolution vs. Creationism, 2002.
A look at when Darwin and his ideas of evolution were challenged in court.
2,280 words (approx. 9.1 pages), 10 sources, MLA, $ 70.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The landmark cases associated with Evolution and Creationism are discussed in this paper, as well as the stance taken by highly recognized scientific bodies of educators. The paper presents a summary of several state and national curriculum standards concerning this topic.
From the Paper
"Controversy concerning Evolution began several centuries before the well known theories of Natural Selection and Survival of the Fittest was published. These theories were presented in 1859, by Charles Darwin, through his book The Origin of Species. Darwin did not propose the concept of evolution, he merely presented his theories of Natural Selection and Survival of the Fittest to gain support as evidences for evolution. Darwin is often thought of in many scientific communities as the father of evolution. This may be because his book, The Origin of Species, was the first published book that was used to support the theory of evolution through Natural Selection. However, Darwin was not the first evolutionary theorist. But his publication did lead to many misconceptions among the uneducated and religious organizations."
|
|
|
