<?xml version="1.0"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en">
	<id>https://www.conservapedia.com/api.php?action=feedcontributions&amp;feedformat=atom&amp;user=Paddyduffy</id>
	<title>Conservapedia - User contributions [en]</title>
	<link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/api.php?action=feedcontributions&amp;feedformat=atom&amp;user=Paddyduffy"/>
	<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/Special:Contributions/Paddyduffy"/>
	<updated>2026-10-10T15:58:46Z</updated>
	<subtitle>User contributions</subtitle>
	<generator>MediaWiki 1.35.14</generator>
	<entry>
		<id>https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Debate:_If_not_naturalism,_how_do_we_decide_which_supernatural_explanation_is_correct%3F&amp;diff=463190</id>
		<title>Debate: If not naturalism, how do we decide which supernatural explanation is correct?</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Debate:_If_not_naturalism,_how_do_we_decide_which_supernatural_explanation_is_correct%3F&amp;diff=463190"/>
		<updated>2008-05-30T13:28:21Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Paddyduffy: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;What makes one supernatural explanation of something more valid than another? I feel this is a central problem of religion- we tend to accept the beliefs that are prevalent in our own culture despite there being numerous non-natural explanations for the same things.  {{unsigned|Paddyduffy}}&lt;br /&gt;
: You're missing a question:  How do we first decide whether to go for a natural or supernatural explanation?&lt;br /&gt;
: Answer to both questions:  See which explanation is more consistent with the evidence.  The implicit assumption that this cannot be done with a supernatural explanation is false.&lt;br /&gt;
: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 10:50, 21 May 2008 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Ok, let's assume that we are choosing between two supernatural explanations, having decided to go that path. Are you saying that evidence can be used to prove a supernatural explanation, and therefore, to disprove others?&lt;br /&gt;
: [[User:Paddyduffy|Paddyduffy]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
One day, we will realize that these are really the same things. Imagine that science eventually becomes so advanced that we are able to conclusively show that an event has no natural cause, and that supernatural intervention must have occurred. If we assume that supernatural intervention comes from a sentient God, then this would be tantamount to proof of the existence of God, which would in turn invalidate the need for faith. Conclusion? Either God exists as an entity separate from nature, in which case His existence is provable, or God is part of nature in a way in which we do not yet comprehend. --[[User:IlTrovatore|IlTrovatore]] 15:59, 21 May 2008 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
That's all well and good, but it doesn't really answer my question. I have two possible supernatural explanations presented to me, and I think what Mr. Rayment is saying is that evidence can be used to show one is more favourable than the other. What I'm really getting at is how are supernatural explanations weighted? Is it equally valid to say something like 'Walking under ladders is bad luck' and 'God created the earth in seven days', and if not, why? If it is equally valid to say both, are all things equally true? : [[User:Paddyduffy|Paddyduffy]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The principle of Occam's Razor advises us to accept the simplest explanation of an event as true. The definition of &amp;quot;simplest,&amp;quot; however, must be determined on a case-to-case basis based on the circumstances involved. For example, someone could claim that creationism explains the origins of the Earth better than the Big Bang theory, as it involves an intelligent God creating all living beings and eliminates the need to explain how these life forms could have emerged otherwise. Obviously, on this site, that is the viewpoint that will be accepted with open arms. But is it really simpler? Because we do not know for sure what happened, creationists can claim that the scientific evidence is being interpreted incorrectly, or that scientists are making leaps of faith when they assume that carbon dating is a reliable method. But Occam's Razor cautions that assuming that carbon dating is unreliable because the rate of radioactive decay may have changed over time is unwise; it is a rejection of evidence without any sound reason. I don't wish for this to become a debate over the merits of YEC arguments, but I was simply using that as an example. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
All things are not equally true, but I also maintain that people often create false dichotomies. They assume that supernaturalism and naturalism are mutually exclusive, when it is highly possible that they are actually the same thing. --[[User:IlTrovatore|IlTrovatore]] 16:16, 22 May 2008 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Ok, but what makes one religion true and another false? They sure can't all be true, and in terms of evidence, it's pretty much all anecdotal. Why are you (let's say) a Christian and not a Scientologist? [[User:Paddyduffy|Paddyduffy]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
People have a natural impulse to &amp;quot;fill in the gaps,&amp;quot; and various religious systems do this in different ways. People simply choose to believe one over another because they are drawn to it for their own individual reason. You're right in saying that we really don't know. It becomes scary when people become so utterly convinced that they have a monopoly on the truth that they shut out all discussion on the nature of belief. That seems to happen a lot on this site. It gives me the worst feeling when I see somebody put something in their profile like &amp;quot;I am a Christian. All other religious systems are false.&amp;quot; This is about faith, people, and the whole point of faith is that you don't really know. --[[User:IlTrovatore|IlTrovatore]] 00:02, 25 May 2008 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;''Are you saying that evidence can be used to prove a supernatural explanation, and therefore, to disprove others?''&amp;quot;:  I guess that it depends on the particular explanation.  But Christianity, for example, makes specific claims about real events.  That God created the world &amp;quot;very good&amp;quot;, but that we rejected God and things got worse, and that there was a global flood, among others.  If a supernatural explanation says ''nothing'' about things in the real world, well.... well it's hardly an &amp;quot;explanation&amp;quot;, is it?  So we can look to see if the evidence fits the explanation.  For example, a global flood is going to (a) leave a lot of disturbance of the Earth's surface, including lots of sediments, and (b) kill and bury a lot of creatures.  So we look at the evidence, and find that something like 70% of the Earth's land surface is ''sedimentary'' rock, and a lot of that contains lots of buried creatures (fossils).  So, at first glance, the evidence fits the explanation.  Of course there is a lot more to it than that, but the point is that a ''supernatural'' explanation of the ''natural'' world is probably going to say things about the natural world that can be checked out.  If it just said &amp;quot;God created everything&amp;quot; and left it at that, then there isn't really anything to check, but the Bible says much more than that.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;''...which would in turn invalidate the need for faith.''&amp;quot;: Not at all.  See further discussion below.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;''But Occam's Razor cautions that assuming that carbon dating is unreliable because the rate of radioactive decay may have changed over time is unwise; it is a rejection of evidence without any sound reason.''&amp;quot;:  That assumes that there ''is no'' sound reason.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;''They assume that supernaturalism and naturalism are mutually exclusive, when it is highly possible that they are actually the same thing''&amp;quot;:  This is like saying that black and white are the same thing.  Supernatural, ''by definition'', is that which is beyond the natural.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;''...in terms of evidence, it's pretty much all anecdotal.''&amp;quot;:  It is?  So what about all the historical and scientific evidence?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;''It becomes scary when people become so utterly convinced that they have a monopoly on the truth that they shut out all discussion on the nature of belief. That seems to happen a lot on this site.''&amp;quot;:  What is scary is the evolutionists who are &amp;quot;so utterly convinced that they have a monopoly on the truth that they shut out all discussion&amp;quot; on the issue.  That [[suppression of alternatives to evolution|happens a lot in society]], including the media and the education system.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;''This is about faith, people, and the whole point of faith is that you don't really know.''&amp;quot;:  It is?  References please.  That is how atheists describe &amp;quot;faith&amp;quot;, but that is not the biblical view of faith, which is &amp;quot;trust based on evidence&amp;quot;[http://tektonics.org/whatis/whatfaith.html].  That is, we believe the Bible to be true and that God exists because of ''evidence'' (not necessarily scientific &amp;quot;proof&amp;quot;).  We don't have evidence of ''every'' claim, but we have evidence of plenty, and therefore have ''faith'' that the rest is true.  And &amp;quot;the rest&amp;quot; might refer to future events.  So when you have a friend tell you that he will call around tomorrow, there is no way to prove that he is stating the truth (it hasn't happened yet, so there is no possible way of obtaining evidence).  But you do have ''evidence'' that he's always kept his word in the past, so you therefore have ''faith'' that he will this time also.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 03:27, 25 May 2008 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The education system teaches the theory of evolution as precisely that: a theory. While YEC's might like to claim that their views are being discriminated against in science classes, this is not the case. Yes, it is true that nobody really knows how the Earth was created, and therefore, all viewpoints on the matter ought to be heard out. But creationism, even when cloaked with the phrase &amp;quot;creation science,&amp;quot; does not follow the scientific method. As much as YEC's would also like to further claim that evolutionists &amp;quot;fit the facts&amp;quot; to their assumptions, the theory of evolution was developed by analyzing the evidence and then coming to a possible conclusion. Creationism was held as a belief before people knew anything about modern science, and therefore is unscientific (although not necessarily untrue) in that it will perpetually claim that science only appears to indicate otherwise. Why would God deceive humanity by laying a false record of natural history? &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
As for naturalism and supernaturalism being the same, it is a matter of perspective. Before humans knew what caused the Aurora Borealis, they assumed it was some sort of supernatural phenomenon caused by spirits or gods. Eventually, however, it turned out that there was a natural explanation. As science advances, we find that more and more can be explained in this manner. If we were eventually able to prove that there are things that are unprovable, this would be tantamount to a proof of the existence of the supernatural. This proof would mean that God could be taken to exist on the basis of reason, not faith. --[[User:IlTrovatore|IlTrovatore]] 15:57, 25 May 2008 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:&amp;quot;''The education system teaches the theory of evolution as precisely that: a theory.''&amp;quot;:  Meaning ''what''?  In science, a &amp;quot;theory&amp;quot; is an explanation of something.  It does not mean that it is in any way tentative (except insofar as every scientific idea is).  So yes, they teach it as a ''scientific theory'', but they also teach it as ''fact'', partly by saying that it's true, and partly by not mentioning any alternative.&lt;br /&gt;
:&amp;quot;''While YEC's might like to claim that their views are being discriminated against in science classes, this is not the case.''&amp;quot;:  And yet you admit&amp;amp;mdash;and attempt to justify&amp;amp;mdash;that only one view (and not the creationary one) is being taught!&lt;br /&gt;
:&amp;quot;''But creationism, even when cloaked with the phrase &amp;quot;creation science,&amp;quot; does not follow the scientific method.''&amp;quot;:  A substance-free assertion, that, and wrong.&lt;br /&gt;
:&amp;quot;''...the theory of evolution was developed by analyzing the evidence and then coming to a possible conclusion''&amp;quot;:  According to evolutionists Gould and Ruse, it was done with the ''intention'' of removing God as an explanation.&lt;br /&gt;
:&amp;quot;''Creationism was held as a belief before people knew anything about modern science, and therefore is unscientific...''&amp;quot;: That's' a non-sequitur.  That it was held as a belief first does not mean that it can't be investigated in a scientific manner.&lt;br /&gt;
:&amp;quot;''...it will perpetually claim that science only appears to indicate otherwise''&amp;quot;:  Given that it ''doesn't'' claim that, that assertion is wrong.&lt;br /&gt;
:&amp;quot;''Why would God deceive humanity by laying a false record of natural history?''&amp;quot;:  That's a loaded question, because it (falsely) presumes that the record of natural history shows an evolutionary view.&lt;br /&gt;
: The fact (assuming it's true; I hadn't heard that one before) that some people incorrectly attributed an event to a supernatural cause does not mean that the natural and the supernatural are the same thing.&lt;br /&gt;
: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 23:57, 25 May 2008 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The example of the Aurora Borealis was intended to show that we ascribe supernatural descriptions to things without knowing for sure that there is no natural explanation. Granted, something cannot be simultaneously both natural and supernatural, but what I meant to argue was that, while we might believe at one time that something is supernatural because nothing natural could cause such a phenomenon, we might later find that there really is no logical gap, and that the explanation is natural after all. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Creationism was held as a belief before people knew anything about modern science, and therefore is unscientific...&amp;quot; That is pure quote-mining. You analyzed this statement without the qualifying clause that followed. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
I will reiterate that the THEORY of evolution is not taught as truth, but as a theory. I was never told in a classroom that evolution is the truth, only that it is the most widely-accepted theory to explain the origin of species. As for the personal beliefs of evolutionists, these may vary. Evolution does not necessarily negate God; such alternative views include theistic evolution. The existence of the “alternative” to which you refer is not taught because it is not testable. You may argue the same of evolution, but if this is the case, why practice science at all?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;But creationism, even when cloaked with the phrase &amp;quot;creation science,&amp;quot; does not follow the scientific method.&amp;quot; Why is this a substance-free assertion?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
“And yet you admit—and attempt to justify—that only one view (and not the creationary one) is being taught!” This does not amount to discrimination against creationists. Creationism is taught as a possible explanation in classes that deal with religion, but not in science classes. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;...it will perpetually claim that science only appears to indicate otherwise&amp;quot; Do you therefore argue that creationism is falsifiable? If so, what criteria would you see as necessary for this to occur? &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
“That's a loaded question, because it (falsely) presumes that the record of natural history shows an evolutionary view.” No, it presumes that the record of natural history indicates an Earth that is much older than 6,000 years. To claim otherwise requires a denial of fundamental scientific epistemology.  --[[User:IlTrovatore|IlTrovatore]] 16:58, 27 May 2008 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
I did not intend for this to turn into a debate about Creationism, I merely wanted to highlight what I see as tenuousness in the criteria of deciding between supernatural explanations of events, or if I may make an extension of this idea, religions themselves. Upon what grounds may a Christian say that Islam is false, yet Christianity is true? Or that a cult such as Scientology is explicitly false?&lt;br /&gt;
[[User:Paddyduffy|Paddyduffy]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
There are no grounds to make such claims. These are matters of personal belief, not objective knowledge. --[[User:IlTrovatore|IlTrovatore]] 16:45, 29 May 2008 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
I'd imagine the vast majority of users of this site would disagree with you there. A follower of a religion believes what he does because he thinks it true. I assert that he does this based on false premises.&lt;br /&gt;
: [[User:Paddyduffy|Paddyduffy]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Paddyduffy</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Debate:_If_not_naturalism,_how_do_we_decide_which_supernatural_explanation_is_correct%3F&amp;diff=462683</id>
		<title>Debate: If not naturalism, how do we decide which supernatural explanation is correct?</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Debate:_If_not_naturalism,_how_do_we_decide_which_supernatural_explanation_is_correct%3F&amp;diff=462683"/>
		<updated>2008-05-29T15:38:03Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Paddyduffy: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;What makes one supernatural explanation of something more valid than another? I feel this is a central problem of religion- we tend to accept the beliefs that are prevalent in our own culture despite there being numerous non-natural explanations for the same things.  {{unsigned|Paddyduffy}}&lt;br /&gt;
: You're missing a question:  How do we first decide whether to go for a natural or supernatural explanation?&lt;br /&gt;
: Answer to both questions:  See which explanation is more consistent with the evidence.  The implicit assumption that this cannot be done with a supernatural explanation is false.&lt;br /&gt;
: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 10:50, 21 May 2008 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Ok, let's assume that we are choosing between two supernatural explanations, having decided to go that path. Are you saying that evidence can be used to prove a supernatural explanation, and therefore, to disprove others?&lt;br /&gt;
: [[User:Paddyduffy|Paddyduffy]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
One day, we will realize that these are really the same things. Imagine that science eventually becomes so advanced that we are able to conclusively show that an event has no natural cause, and that supernatural intervention must have occurred. If we assume that supernatural intervention comes from a sentient God, then this would be tantamount to proof of the existence of God, which would in turn invalidate the need for faith. Conclusion? Either God exists as an entity separate from nature, in which case His existence is provable, or God is part of nature in a way in which we do not yet comprehend. --[[User:IlTrovatore|IlTrovatore]] 15:59, 21 May 2008 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
That's all well and good, but it doesn't really answer my question. I have two possible supernatural explanations presented to me, and I think what Mr. Rayment is saying is that evidence can be used to show one is more favourable than the other. What I'm really getting at is how are supernatural explanations weighted? Is it equally valid to say something like 'Walking under ladders is bad luck' and 'God created the earth in seven days', and if not, why? If it is equally valid to say both, are all things equally true? : [[User:Paddyduffy|Paddyduffy]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The principle of Occam's Razor advises us to accept the simplest explanation of an event as true. The definition of &amp;quot;simplest,&amp;quot; however, must be determined on a case-to-case basis based on the circumstances involved. For example, someone could claim that creationism explains the origins of the Earth better than the Big Bang theory, as it involves an intelligent God creating all living beings and eliminates the need to explain how these life forms could have emerged otherwise. Obviously, on this site, that is the viewpoint that will be accepted with open arms. But is it really simpler? Because we do not know for sure what happened, creationists can claim that the scientific evidence is being interpreted incorrectly, or that scientists are making leaps of faith when they assume that carbon dating is a reliable method. But Occam's Razor cautions that assuming that carbon dating is unreliable because the rate of radioactive decay may have changed over time is unwise; it is a rejection of evidence without any sound reason. I don't wish for this to become a debate over the merits of YEC arguments, but I was simply using that as an example. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
All things are not equally true, but I also maintain that people often create false dichotomies. They assume that supernaturalism and naturalism are mutually exclusive, when it is highly possible that they are actually the same thing. --[[User:IlTrovatore|IlTrovatore]] 16:16, 22 May 2008 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Ok, but what makes one religion true and another false? They sure can't all be true, and in terms of evidence, it's pretty much all anecdotal. Why are you (let's say) a Christian and not a Scientologist? [[User:Paddyduffy|Paddyduffy]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
People have a natural impulse to &amp;quot;fill in the gaps,&amp;quot; and various religious systems do this in different ways. People simply choose to believe one over another because they are drawn to it for their own individual reason. You're right in saying that we really don't know. It becomes scary when people become so utterly convinced that they have a monopoly on the truth that they shut out all discussion on the nature of belief. That seems to happen a lot on this site. It gives me the worst feeling when I see somebody put something in their profile like &amp;quot;I am a Christian. All other religious systems are false.&amp;quot; This is about faith, people, and the whole point of faith is that you don't really know. --[[User:IlTrovatore|IlTrovatore]] 00:02, 25 May 2008 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;''Are you saying that evidence can be used to prove a supernatural explanation, and therefore, to disprove others?''&amp;quot;:  I guess that it depends on the particular explanation.  But Christianity, for example, makes specific claims about real events.  That God created the world &amp;quot;very good&amp;quot;, but that we rejected God and things got worse, and that there was a global flood, among others.  If a supernatural explanation says ''nothing'' about things in the real world, well.... well it's hardly an &amp;quot;explanation&amp;quot;, is it?  So we can look to see if the evidence fits the explanation.  For example, a global flood is going to (a) leave a lot of disturbance of the Earth's surface, including lots of sediments, and (b) kill and bury a lot of creatures.  So we look at the evidence, and find that something like 70% of the Earth's land surface is ''sedimentary'' rock, and a lot of that contains lots of buried creatures (fossils).  So, at first glance, the evidence fits the explanation.  Of course there is a lot more to it than that, but the point is that a ''supernatural'' explanation of the ''natural'' world is probably going to say things about the natural world that can be checked out.  If it just said &amp;quot;God created everything&amp;quot; and left it at that, then there isn't really anything to check, but the Bible says much more than that.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;''...which would in turn invalidate the need for faith.''&amp;quot;: Not at all.  See further discussion below.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;''But Occam's Razor cautions that assuming that carbon dating is unreliable because the rate of radioactive decay may have changed over time is unwise; it is a rejection of evidence without any sound reason.''&amp;quot;:  That assumes that there ''is no'' sound reason.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;''They assume that supernaturalism and naturalism are mutually exclusive, when it is highly possible that they are actually the same thing''&amp;quot;:  This is like saying that black and white are the same thing.  Supernatural, ''by definition'', is that which is beyond the natural.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;''...in terms of evidence, it's pretty much all anecdotal.''&amp;quot;:  It is?  So what about all the historical and scientific evidence?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;''It becomes scary when people become so utterly convinced that they have a monopoly on the truth that they shut out all discussion on the nature of belief. That seems to happen a lot on this site.''&amp;quot;:  What is scary is the evolutionists who are &amp;quot;so utterly convinced that they have a monopoly on the truth that they shut out all discussion&amp;quot; on the issue.  That [[suppression of alternatives to evolution|happens a lot in society]], including the media and the education system.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;''This is about faith, people, and the whole point of faith is that you don't really know.''&amp;quot;:  It is?  References please.  That is how atheists describe &amp;quot;faith&amp;quot;, but that is not the biblical view of faith, which is &amp;quot;trust based on evidence&amp;quot;[http://tektonics.org/whatis/whatfaith.html].  That is, we believe the Bible to be true and that God exists because of ''evidence'' (not necessarily scientific &amp;quot;proof&amp;quot;).  We don't have evidence of ''every'' claim, but we have evidence of plenty, and therefore have ''faith'' that the rest is true.  And &amp;quot;the rest&amp;quot; might refer to future events.  So when you have a friend tell you that he will call around tomorrow, there is no way to prove that he is stating the truth (it hasn't happened yet, so there is no possible way of obtaining evidence).  But you do have ''evidence'' that he's always kept his word in the past, so you therefore have ''faith'' that he will this time also.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 03:27, 25 May 2008 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The education system teaches the theory of evolution as precisely that: a theory. While YEC's might like to claim that their views are being discriminated against in science classes, this is not the case. Yes, it is true that nobody really knows how the Earth was created, and therefore, all viewpoints on the matter ought to be heard out. But creationism, even when cloaked with the phrase &amp;quot;creation science,&amp;quot; does not follow the scientific method. As much as YEC's would also like to further claim that evolutionists &amp;quot;fit the facts&amp;quot; to their assumptions, the theory of evolution was developed by analyzing the evidence and then coming to a possible conclusion. Creationism was held as a belief before people knew anything about modern science, and therefore is unscientific (although not necessarily untrue) in that it will perpetually claim that science only appears to indicate otherwise. Why would God deceive humanity by laying a false record of natural history? &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
As for naturalism and supernaturalism being the same, it is a matter of perspective. Before humans knew what caused the Aurora Borealis, they assumed it was some sort of supernatural phenomenon caused by spirits or gods. Eventually, however, it turned out that there was a natural explanation. As science advances, we find that more and more can be explained in this manner. If we were eventually able to prove that there are things that are unprovable, this would be tantamount to a proof of the existence of the supernatural. This proof would mean that God could be taken to exist on the basis of reason, not faith. --[[User:IlTrovatore|IlTrovatore]] 15:57, 25 May 2008 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:&amp;quot;''The education system teaches the theory of evolution as precisely that: a theory.''&amp;quot;:  Meaning ''what''?  In science, a &amp;quot;theory&amp;quot; is an explanation of something.  It does not mean that it is in any way tentative (except insofar as every scientific idea is).  So yes, they teach it as a ''scientific theory'', but they also teach it as ''fact'', partly by saying that it's true, and partly by not mentioning any alternative.&lt;br /&gt;
:&amp;quot;''While YEC's might like to claim that their views are being discriminated against in science classes, this is not the case.''&amp;quot;:  And yet you admit&amp;amp;mdash;and attempt to justify&amp;amp;mdash;that only one view (and not the creationary one) is being taught!&lt;br /&gt;
:&amp;quot;''But creationism, even when cloaked with the phrase &amp;quot;creation science,&amp;quot; does not follow the scientific method.''&amp;quot;:  A substance-free assertion, that, and wrong.&lt;br /&gt;
:&amp;quot;''...the theory of evolution was developed by analyzing the evidence and then coming to a possible conclusion''&amp;quot;:  According to evolutionists Gould and Ruse, it was done with the ''intention'' of removing God as an explanation.&lt;br /&gt;
:&amp;quot;''Creationism was held as a belief before people knew anything about modern science, and therefore is unscientific...''&amp;quot;: That's' a non-sequitur.  That it was held as a belief first does not mean that it can't be investigated in a scientific manner.&lt;br /&gt;
:&amp;quot;''...it will perpetually claim that science only appears to indicate otherwise''&amp;quot;:  Given that it ''doesn't'' claim that, that assertion is wrong.&lt;br /&gt;
:&amp;quot;''Why would God deceive humanity by laying a false record of natural history?''&amp;quot;:  That's a loaded question, because it (falsely) presumes that the record of natural history shows an evolutionary view.&lt;br /&gt;
: The fact (assuming it's true; I hadn't heard that one before) that some people incorrectly attributed an event to a supernatural cause does not mean that the natural and the supernatural are the same thing.&lt;br /&gt;
: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 23:57, 25 May 2008 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The example of the Aurora Borealis was intended to show that we ascribe supernatural descriptions to things without knowing for sure that there is no natural explanation. Granted, something cannot be simultaneously both natural and supernatural, but what I meant to argue was that, while we might believe at one time that something is supernatural because nothing natural could cause such a phenomenon, we might later find that there really is no logical gap, and that the explanation is natural after all. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Creationism was held as a belief before people knew anything about modern science, and therefore is unscientific...&amp;quot; That is pure quote-mining. You analyzed this statement without the qualifying clause that followed. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
I will reiterate that the THEORY of evolution is not taught as truth, but as a theory. I was never told in a classroom that evolution is the truth, only that it is the most widely-accepted theory to explain the origin of species. As for the personal beliefs of evolutionists, these may vary. Evolution does not necessarily negate God; such alternative views include theistic evolution. The existence of the “alternative” to which you refer is not taught because it is not testable. You may argue the same of evolution, but if this is the case, why practice science at all?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;But creationism, even when cloaked with the phrase &amp;quot;creation science,&amp;quot; does not follow the scientific method.&amp;quot; Why is this a substance-free assertion?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
“And yet you admit—and attempt to justify—that only one view (and not the creationary one) is being taught!” This does not amount to discrimination against creationists. Creationism is taught as a possible explanation in classes that deal with religion, but not in science classes. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;...it will perpetually claim that science only appears to indicate otherwise&amp;quot; Do you therefore argue that creationism is falsifiable? If so, what criteria would you see as necessary for this to occur? &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
“That's a loaded question, because it (falsely) presumes that the record of natural history shows an evolutionary view.” No, it presumes that the record of natural history indicates an Earth that is much older than 6,000 years. To claim otherwise requires a denial of fundamental scientific epistemology.  --[[User:IlTrovatore|IlTrovatore]] 16:58, 27 May 2008 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
I did not intend for this to turn into a debate about Creationism, I merely wanted to highlight what I see as tenuousness in the criteria of deciding between supernatural explanations of events, or if I may make an extension of this idea, religions themselves. Upon what grounds may a Christian say that Islam is false, yet Christianity is true? Or that a cult such as Scientology is explicitly false?&lt;br /&gt;
[[User:Paddyduffy|Paddyduffy]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Paddyduffy</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Debate:_If_not_naturalism,_how_do_we_decide_which_supernatural_explanation_is_correct%3F&amp;diff=459775</id>
		<title>Debate: If not naturalism, how do we decide which supernatural explanation is correct?</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Debate:_If_not_naturalism,_how_do_we_decide_which_supernatural_explanation_is_correct%3F&amp;diff=459775"/>
		<updated>2008-05-24T21:13:07Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Paddyduffy: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;What makes one supernatural explanation of something more valid than another? I feel this is a central problem of religion- we tend to accept the beliefs that are prevalent in our own culture despite there being numerous non-natural explanations for the same things.  {{unsigned|Paddyduffy}}&lt;br /&gt;
: You're missing a question:  How do we first decide whether to go for a natural or supernatural explanation?&lt;br /&gt;
: Answer to both questions:  See which explanation is more consistent with the evidence.  The implicit assumption that this cannot be done with a supernatural explanation is false.&lt;br /&gt;
: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 10:50, 21 May 2008 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Ok, let's assume that we are choosing between two supernatural explanations, having decided to go that path. Are you saying that evidence can be used to prove a supernatural explanation, and therefore, to disprove others?&lt;br /&gt;
: [[User:Paddyduffy|Paddyduffy]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
One day, we will realize that these are really the same things. Imagine that science eventually becomes so advanced that we are able to conclusively show that an event has no natural cause, and that supernatural intervention must have occurred. If we assume that supernatural intervention comes from a sentient God, then this would be tantamount to proof of the existence of God, which would in turn invalidate the need for faith. Conclusion? Either God exists as an entity separate from nature, in which case His existence is provable, or God is part of nature in a way in which we do not yet comprehend. --[[User:IlTrovatore|IlTrovatore]] 15:59, 21 May 2008 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
That's all well and good, but it doesn't really answer my question. I have two possible supernatural explanations presented to me, and I think what Mr. Rayment is saying is that evidence can be used to show one is more favourable than the other. What I'm really getting at is how are supernatural explanations weighted? Is it equally valid to say something like 'Walking under ladders is bad luck' and 'God created the earth in seven days', and if not, why? If it is equally valid to say both, are all things equally true? : [[User:Paddyduffy|Paddyduffy]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The principle of Occam's Razor advises us to accept the simplest explanation of an event as true. The definition of &amp;quot;simplest,&amp;quot; however, must be determined on a case-to-case basis based on the circumstances involved. For example, someone could claim that creationism explains the origins of the Earth better than the Big Bang theory, as it involves an intelligent God creating all living beings and eliminates the need to explain how these life forms could have emerged otherwise. Obviously, on this site, that is the viewpoint that will be accepted with open arms. But is it really simpler? Because we do not know for sure what happened, creationists can claim that the scientific evidence is being interpreted incorrectly, or that scientists are making leaps of faith when they assume that carbon dating is a reliable method. But Occam's Razor cautions that assuming that carbon dating is unreliable because the rate of radioactive decay may have changed over time is unwise; it is a rejection of evidence without any sound reason. I don't wish for this to become a debate over the merits of YEC arguments, but I was simply using that as an example. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
All things are not equally true, but I also maintain that people often create false dichotomies. They assume that supernaturalism and naturalism are mutually exclusive, when it is highly possible that they are actually the same thing. --[[User:IlTrovatore|IlTrovatore]] 16:16, 22 May 2008 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Ok, but what makes one religion true and another false? They sure can't all be true, and in terms of evidence, it's pretty much all anecdotal. Why are you (let's say) a Christian and not a Scientologist? [[User:Paddyduffy|Paddyduffy]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Paddyduffy</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Debate:_If_not_naturalism,_how_do_we_decide_which_supernatural_explanation_is_correct%3F&amp;diff=458388</id>
		<title>Debate: If not naturalism, how do we decide which supernatural explanation is correct?</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Debate:_If_not_naturalism,_how_do_we_decide_which_supernatural_explanation_is_correct%3F&amp;diff=458388"/>
		<updated>2008-05-22T13:49:14Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Paddyduffy: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;What makes one supernatural explanation of something more valid than another? I feel this is a central problem of religion- we tend to accept the beliefs that are prevalent in our own culture despite there being numerous non-natural explanations for the same things.  {{unsigned|Paddyduffy}}&lt;br /&gt;
: You're missing a question:  How do we first decide whether to go for a natural or supernatural explanation?&lt;br /&gt;
: Answer to both questions:  See which explanation is more consistent with the evidence.  The implicit assumption that this cannot be done with a supernatural explanation is false.&lt;br /&gt;
: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 10:50, 21 May 2008 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Ok, let's assume that we are choosing between two supernatural explanations, having decided to go that path. Are you saying that evidence can be used to prove a supernatural explanation, and therefore, to disprove others?&lt;br /&gt;
: [[User:Paddyduffy|Paddyduffy]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
One day, we will realize that these are really the same things. Imagine that science eventually becomes so advanced that we are able to conclusively show that an event has no natural cause, and that supernatural intervention must have occurred. If we assume that supernatural intervention comes from a sentient God, then this would be tantamount to proof of the existence of God, which would in turn invalidate the need for faith. Conclusion? Either God exists as an entity separate from nature, in which case His existence is provable, or God is part of nature in a way in which we do not yet comprehend. --[[User:IlTrovatore|IlTrovatore]] 15:59, 21 May 2008 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
That's all well and good, but it doesn't really answer my question. I have two possible supernatural explanations presented to me, and I think what Mr. Rayment is saying is that evidence can be used to show one is more favourable than the other. What I'm really getting at is how are supernatural explanations weighted? Is it equally valid to say something like 'Walking under ladders is bad luck' and 'God created the earth in seven days', and if not, why? If it is equally valid to say both, are all things equally true? : [[User:Paddyduffy|Paddyduffy]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Paddyduffy</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Debate:_If_not_naturalism,_how_do_we_decide_which_supernatural_explanation_is_correct%3F&amp;diff=457782</id>
		<title>Debate: If not naturalism, how do we decide which supernatural explanation is correct?</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Debate:_If_not_naturalism,_how_do_we_decide_which_supernatural_explanation_is_correct%3F&amp;diff=457782"/>
		<updated>2008-05-21T17:03:41Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Paddyduffy: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;What makes one supernatural explanation of something more valid than another? I feel this is a central problem of religion- we tend to accept the beliefs that are prevalent in our own culture despite there being numerous non-natural explanations for the same things.  {{unsigned|Paddyduffy}}&lt;br /&gt;
: You're missing a question:  How do we first decide whether to go for a natural or supernatural explanation?&lt;br /&gt;
: Answer to both questions:  See which explanation is more consistent with the evidence.  The implicit assumption that this cannot be done with a supernatural explanation is false.&lt;br /&gt;
: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 10:50, 21 May 2008 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Ok, let's assume that we are choosing between two supernatural explanations, having decided to go that path. Are you saying that evidence can be used to prove a supernatural explanation, and therefore, to disprove others?&lt;br /&gt;
: [[User:Paddyduffy|Paddyduffy]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Paddyduffy</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Conservapedia:Debate_Topics&amp;diff=457728</id>
		<title>Conservapedia:Debate Topics</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Conservapedia:Debate_Topics&amp;diff=457728"/>
		<updated>2008-05-21T14:51:02Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Paddyduffy: /* Religious debates */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;'''Debate topic suggestions, organized so that it's not necessary to delete them.'''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
(Note: If some topic is miscategorized, it can be cut and pasted without affecting the relevant links.)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Philosophical debates==&lt;br /&gt;
#  [[ Can conservapedia become the next wikipedia, is this good or bad]]&lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:If there is no objective truth, then is the claim &amp;quot;there is no objective truth&amp;quot; also not an objective truth?|If there is no objective truth, then is the claim &amp;quot;there is no objective truth&amp;quot; also not an objective truth?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Does History Matter?|Does History Matter?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is a first cause of a process necessary, always possible, or sometimes impossible?|Is a first cause of a process necessary, always possible, or sometimes impossible?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Can Objectivism develop beyond Ayn Rand's original formulation?|Can Objectivism develop beyond Ayn Rand's original formulation?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Can any man live without some code of morality?|Can any man live without some code of morality?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Does the universe include everything, or does something outside the universe exist?|Does the known physical universe exhaust all that can exist, or does something exist beyond known physical boundaries?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Why is there something rather than nothing?|Why is there something rather than nothing?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Stem Cells| Embryonic Stem Cells: Why or why not?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate:Why Reason?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate:Why does the conservative media often an ugly undertone?]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Religious debates==&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate: Should certain books be banned from libraries?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate: Is communism founded on Christian doctrine?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Should the first story of creation be read allegorically or literally?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate:Is Scientology a false religion]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Why do Moses, Ezra, Jesus, and Paul all disagree on divorce? Moses allowed divorce, Jesus disallowed it and also allowed it, Paul allowed it, and Ezra actually commanded it to appease God (Ezra 10)??? im confused!! whats a christian to do??]]&lt;br /&gt;
#[[Did Jesus ever claim to be God?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia: Grave errors/inconsistencies in the Bible make literal translation worthless.]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Was Jesus born in the right time and place?| Was Jesus born in the right time and place?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia : What does Christianity say about homosexuality?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:If God does not exist, can anything be morally wrong?|If God does not exist, can anything be morally wrong?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is it wrong to have a Christmas tree?|Is it wrong to have a Christmas tree?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Did God create evil?|Did God create evil?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Which Christian denomination is the most true to the central teachings of Christianity?|Which Christian denomination is the most true to the central teachings of Christianity?]] &lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate:If Jesus were alive to day, where on the political spectrum would he fall?|If Jesus were alive to day, where on the political spectrum would he fall?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Should Religion Play a Large Role in Modern Societies?|Is religion relevant in todays society? / Should Religion Play a Large Role in Modern Societies?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Does the Bible (Old and the New Testament) have the infallible words of God?|Bible (New and Old Testament) Words of God]] &lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia: AntiSemitism|AntiSemitism]] &lt;br /&gt;
# [[Does Intelligent Design deny the Existence of God?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Could God create a rock so heavy that he himself could not lift it?|Could God create a rock so heavy that he himself could not lift it?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:If there were no religion, would we find another reason to kill each other?|If there were no religion, would we find another reason to kill each other?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Natural Disaster versus Act of God|Natural Disaster versus Act of God]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:What is the Sabbath day?|What is the Sabbath day?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is it possible to be a conservative and not a religious person or even an atheist?|Is it possible to be a conservative and not a religious person or even an atheist?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate:Why do we still perform Baptisms?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Does_the_Resurrection_negate_Gods_Sacrifice_of_his_only_son%3F|Does the Resurrection negate Gods Sacrifice of his only son?|Does the Resurrection negate God's Sacrifice of his only son?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:If_most_Muslims_learned_their_religion_from_their_parents%2C_just_like_us_Christians%2C_they_will_probably_be_hard_to_convert._So_what_can_we_do_to_save_their_souls%3F|If most Muslims learned their religion from their parents, just like us Christians, they will probably be hard to convert. So what can we do to save their souls?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:If_most_Christians_learned_their_religion_from_their_parents%2C_just_like_us_Muslims%2C_they_will_probably_be_hard_to_convert._So_what_can_we_do_to_save_their_souls%3F|If most Christians learned their religion from their parents, just like us Muslims, they will probably be hard to convert. So what can we do to save their souls?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Does_mainstream_Islam_endorse_violence%3F|Does mainstream Islam endorse violence?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is religion morally wrong?|Is religion morally wrong?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Does the Bible display poor ethics and morals?|Does the Bible display poor ethics and morals?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Why the Bible|What makes the Bible a reliable source of knowledge besides tradition?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Why should we be afraid of God?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Do conservative Christians have an unquestioning faith which is comparable to that of the Party in the book 1984?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Antisemitism]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Are Christianity and the Bible superior to other religions and scriptures?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia: Is &amp;quot;Coercive Interrogation&amp;quot; consistent with Christian Values?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Should all access to Conservapedia be banned on Sundays?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Either God is indecisive or the world's major religions have ALL got it wrong]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Mary Magdalene - First Witness to the Resurrection - Significance?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate:Was Christ a fundamentalist?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Atheism vs. Deism]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Atheism vs. Pastafarianism]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Why is homosexuality so bad?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate:Are Young Earth Creationists detracting others from the Faith?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[If Noah only brought two of every animal on the ark, wouldn't subsequent generations of animals have become increasingly inbred?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate:Is there 1 God or are there many gods?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate: Can you be a true Christian and believe in evolution?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate:Should gay marriage be allowed?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate:Is atheism a religion]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Adoption and Abortion]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate: If we are not to be naturalissts, how do we decide which supernatural explanation is correct?]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Historical debates==&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Was Benjamin Franklin a deist?]]&lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Did racism play a role in the decision to drop atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki?|Did racism play a role in the decision to drop atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Was the European colonization of the Americas good for the native people?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Was President George H. W. Bush wrong to leave Saddam in power in 1991?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia: Which was worse? the Civil War and it's effects or slavery?]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Political debates==&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate: Is communism founded on Christian doctrine?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Why do we still have an embargo on Cuba?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Has Britain Declined?| Quoting Conservapedia's front page; &amp;quot;The British government just affirmed its ban on mentioning Intelligent Design to students.[3] No one there seems to notice how Britain's decline coincided with its promotion of evolution frauds like the Piltdown Man.&amp;quot; - Has Britain REALLY declined?]] &lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is illegal immigration control the answer to illegal immigration?|Is illegal immigration control the answer to illegal immigration?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Has Britain become the 51st State of the US?|Has Britain become the 51st State of the US?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:You think these Phd's are nuts?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Does the European Union pose a threat to the United States?| Does the European Union pose a threat to United States Security?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Which is true; progressive Liberal or regressive liberal]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Define torture]]&lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Should the United States have entered World War I?|Should the United States have entered World War I?]] &lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Should the United States have entered World War II?|Should the United States have entered World War II?]]  &lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Should the United States have eliminated communism in North Korea|Should the United States have eliminated communism in North Korea as General Douglas MacArthur wanted?]]&lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Was the United States right to drop atomic bombs so quickly on Hiroshima and Nagasaki?|Was the United States right to drop atomic bombs so quickly on Hiroshima and Nagasaki?]]&lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Was it wrong for him to allow the attack in order to wake up the American public and motivate Americans to fight and win the war?|If President Roosevelt had known about the Pearl Harbor attack in advance, would it have been wrong for him to allow the attack in order to wake up the American public and motivate Americans to fight and win the war?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is gun-control the answer to crimes involving guns?|Is gun-control the answer to crimes involving guns?]]&lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Was world war inevitable?|Was world war inevitable?]]&lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Does &amp;quot;free trade&amp;quot; increase wealth rather than simply redistribute it?|Does &amp;quot;free trade&amp;quot; increase wealth or simply redistribute it?]]  &lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Is it even possible to install democracy in a Muslim country?|Is it even possible to install democracy in a Muslim country?]] &lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Is democracy even possible in Iraq?|Is democracy even possible in Iraq?]]&lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Should we have given the Panama Canal back to Panama?|Should we have given the Panama Canal back to Panama?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Should the United States leave the United Nations?|Should the United States leave the United Nations?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Crusades... Good or Bad?|Crusades... Good or Bad?]]&lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Was American soldier Michael New right to refuse to fight wearing part of a United Nations uniform?|Was American soldier Michael New right to refuse to fight wearing part of a United Nations uniform?]]  See [[Michael New]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Which is a more powerful ideology, Islam or communism?|Which is a more powerful ideology, Islam or Communism?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Should the United States intervene in small countries to defeat communism there?|Should the United States intervene in small countries to defeat communism there?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Should public displays of the 10 Commandments be allowed under the constitution?|Should public displays of the 10 Commandments be allowed under the constitution?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Which has the best philosophy of education: the public school system, private schools, or the home school movement?|Which has the best philosophy of education: the public school system, private schools, or the home school movement?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Should people genetically engineer a cure for homosexuality?|Should people genetically engineer a cure for homosexuality?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Should Bush pardon Scooter Libby?|Should Bush pardon Scooter Libby?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Should We Support Democrats For Life.org?|Should We Support Democrats For Life.org?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[conservapedia:Women in the Military?|Women in the Military?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia: Should students learn a foreign language?|Should students learn a foreign language?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Why does the right side of the political spectrum tend to be more religous?|Why does the right side of the political spectrum tend to be more religious?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Should there be a consistent standard on human rights applied to left and right?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Should American companies be allowed to send their own troops into a war which America is participating in?|Should American companies be allowed to send their own troops into a war which America is participating in?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Giuliani's lack of social conservative viewpoints should not stop you from voting for him.|Giuliani's lack of social conservative viewpoints should not stop you from voting for him.]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is_President_Bush_good_for_America?|Is President Bush good for America?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is_the_Iraq_War_a_success%3F|Is the Iraq War a success?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Does_single_sex_schooling_promotes_homesexuality%3F|Does Single sex schooling promotes homosexuality?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is_the_murder_of_3%2C000_people_just_a_few_or_is_it_a_lot%3F_Does_it_make_a_difference_if_the_murdered_people_are_Americans%3F|Is the murder of 3,000 people just a few or is it a lot? Does it make a difference if the murdered people are Americans?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Does the media really have a liberal bias?|Does the media really have a liberal bias?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Who was the last Democrat to quit due to ethics and what year was it? Is it fair for Republicans to due the same?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[What kind of leader will Democrats make if they run from debates on Fox?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Are the Democrats capable of fighting terrorism?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Porn or guns?|Does porn actually cause (not merely correlate to) violence?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Can a rogue nation be thought of as a sovereign nation?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[ Has Russia reinstalled stealth communism?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Do we all know what Democrat Presidential candidates stand for yet?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Define Civil War]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Should gun sales to terror suspects be allowed?|Should gun sales to terror suspects be allowed?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Who would you support for President in 2008?|Who would you support for President in 2008?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is Darwinism liberal or is it conservative?|Is Darwinism liberal or is it conservative?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate:Why did God place most of the world's oil in politically unstable places?|Why did God place most of the world's oil in politically unstable places?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Restoring the USA image in the world, just a fancy phrase that means zilch?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Placing the blame on how America got polarized]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is most government criticism really patriotic?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is environmentalism mostly about preserving natural resources?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is the conservative stance on illegal immigration going to loose the Hispanic vote for the GOP in the 08' election?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Should President Bush Condemn Armenian Genocide? ]] ''New as of October 10, 2007''&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Third Party Debate]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate:Who kills more innocent people: religious believers or atheists?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Was congress right to override president Bush's veto on the water projects bill?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Is opening the borders the solution to the social security crisis?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate:Preferred Democrat for the White House?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Does Republican equal conservative?  Does Democrat equal liberal?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Obama's preacher.]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Is president Bush ignoring human rights violations in China?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate:Should the United States begin Colonizing Space?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate:Should the federal government have the power to define marriage?|Should the federal government have the power to define marriage?]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Scientific debates==&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Why haven't intelligent designists published a single scientific article?|If intelligent design is just as valid as evolution, where are all their scientific findings and publishings?]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Does Darwinian natural selection suggest that bigotry is a necessary self-defense mechanism?|Does Darwinian natural selection suggest that bigotry is a necessary self-defense mechanism?]]&lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Does Darwinian natural selection suggest that homosexuality is bad for the survival of a species?|Does Darwinian natural selection suggest that homosexuality is bad for the survival of a species?]]  &lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Is Darwinian natural selection compatible with Marxism?|Is Darwinian natural selection compatible with Marxism?]]&lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Is the theory of macroevolution true?|Is the theory of macroevolution true?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia: Is Giving Birth the Bible Way Better?| Is Giving Birth the Bible Way Better?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Should Creationism/Intelligent design be taught as a scientific alternative to evolution in public schools?|Should Creationism/Intelligent design be taught as a scientific alternative to evolution in public schools?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is global warming evident, and if so, is this the fault of man, and how must man stop it?|Is global warming evident, and if so, is this the fault of man, and how must man stop it?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:If the universe is young and it takes light millions of years to reach us from far off stars, how can we see them?|If the universe is young and it takes light millions of years to reach us from far off stars, how can we see them?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:God, Earth and Global Warming|God, Earth and Global Warming]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is the evidence in favor of evolution convincing?|Is the evidence in favor of evolution convincing?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:If the Bible didn't contain a creation story, would anyone even consider the idea of a young earth?|If the Bible didn't contain a creation story, would anyone even consider the idea of a young earth?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is Relativity in direct conflict with the Genesis account?|Is Relativity in direct conflict with the Genesis account?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Who feels that scientific related articles should only reference published research papers instead of websites when dealing with research instead of application?|Who feels that scientific related articles should only reference published research papers instead of websites when dealing with research instead of application?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia: If it could be unambiguously demonstrated that man is NOT the most evolved animal, then would this support or refute ther idea of Creation by God?| If it could be unambiguously demonstrated that man is NOT the most evolved animal]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Why are God's works always questioned?]]&lt;br /&gt;
#[[Conservapedia:Are there any elements of choice, when it comes to carrying out homosexual acts?|Are there any elements of choice]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Listing the Earth's most pressing needs in urgent order of fixing]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is homosexuality a mental illness?|Is homosexuality a mental illness?]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Debates about Conservapedia==&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is Conservapedia representing a conservative POV or a Young Earth Creationist POV?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is Conservapedia anti-British?|Is Conservapedia anti-British?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[The liberal quotient of Conservapedia; what is it? Does it matter?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Does bias impair Wikipedia's reliability?|Does bias impair Wikipedia's reliability?]]&lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Should the term list entries be included in Conservapedia's entry count?|Should the term list entries be included in Conservapedia's entry count?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:How should Conservapedia work to avoid having a conservative bias?|How should Conservapedia work to avoid having a conservative bias?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Can Conservapedia Succeed?|Can Conservapedia Succeed?]]&lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Is Conservapedia fair and balanced?|Is Conservapedia fair and balanced?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:How can we protect Conservapedia by distinguishing real conservative encyclopedia articles from satires written by liberals?|How can we protect Conservapedia by distinguishing real conservative encyclopedia articles from satires written by liberals?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:What exactly is Conservapedia?|What exactly is Conservapedia?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Was the media attention needed?|Was the media attention needed?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia Debate Topics full of far left liberal netroots]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Which is true; progressive Liberal or regressive liberal]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Where do you personally look for facts and information on topics &amp;quot;When did Brahms live&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;Why did Monet paint grainstacks?&amp;quot;]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is it okay for Conservapedia to have biased articles?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:On whether certain articles on human anatomy should be pre-emptively blanked and protected]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Who deletes entire discussion items from here?  And why?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Why do users, who contribute substantially, choose to leave this community?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Why do the creators of Conservapedia see Wikipedia as un-American?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Is the use of copyrighted photographs without permission stealing?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia: Are there too many debates on Conservapedia? | Are there too many debates on Conservapedia?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is it tasteless for Conservapedia to critique the Virginia Tech poem on the Main Page?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Has anyone ever been been banned for pointing out that many of the other entries on this site are in need of citation and evidence to back up statements?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Does an encyclopedia define complex subjects, or insert more bias into them?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia: Do sysops block editing on pages when it seems their opponents are making strong points?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia: Is Conservapedia a 'Trustworthy Encyclopedia'?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia: Does altering the record of debate in a wiki 'Encyclopedia' render the entire thing a farce?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Democrats next move, link more stories of heartache like those from Kansas to Gulf Coast.]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Do quotes used to support a theory just make an article look stupid?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is Conservapedia blinkered?|Is Conservapedia blinkered?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Does Conservapedia censor opponents the way Expelled says ID advocates are censored?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate:Is the Conservapedia Logo in violation of US Flag Code?]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Funny, maybe?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Are cats just useless Dogs|Are cats just useless dogs?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is the Platypus evidence that God has a sense of humour?|Is the Platypus evidence that God has a sense of humour?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia: Was the shooting at Virginia Tech somehow President Bush's fault?|Was the shooting at Virginia Tech somehow President Bush's fault? (kind of like he caused hurricane Katrina)]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Are video games getting better or worse as graphics, sound, and gameplay complexity improve?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate:Favorite old time radio show]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Other==&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Are alcohol, marijuana, and nicotine gateway drugs?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is Rap music torture?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Should weed be legalized?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate:What are the lessons that we should take away from the Milgram Experiment]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Does the Theory of Evolution promote atheism?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Discussion:Colorado Mall Shootings]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Discussion:Creationist]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate:Is the Theory of Evolution a conspiricy?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate:How should we view the fact leading scientists do not believe in god?]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Conservapedia]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Paddyduffy</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Debate:_If_not_naturalism,_how_do_we_decide_which_supernatural_explanation_is_correct%3F&amp;diff=457717</id>
		<title>Debate: If not naturalism, how do we decide which supernatural explanation is correct?</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Debate:_If_not_naturalism,_how_do_we_decide_which_supernatural_explanation_is_correct%3F&amp;diff=457717"/>
		<updated>2008-05-21T14:34:46Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Paddyduffy: New page: What makes one supernatural explanation of something more valid than another? I feel this is a central problem of religion- we tend to accept the beliefs that are prevalent in our own cult...&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;What makes one supernatural explanation of something more valid than another? I feel this is a central problem of religion- we tend to accept the beliefs that are prevalent in our own culture despite there being numerous non-natural explanations for the same things.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Paddyduffy</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Conservapedia:Debate_Topics&amp;diff=457716</id>
		<title>Conservapedia:Debate Topics</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Conservapedia:Debate_Topics&amp;diff=457716"/>
		<updated>2008-05-21T14:32:18Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Paddyduffy: /* Religious debates */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;'''Debate topic suggestions, organized so that it's not necessary to delete them.'''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
(Note: If some topic is miscategorized, it can be cut and pasted without affecting the relevant links.)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Philosophical debates==&lt;br /&gt;
#  [[ Can conservapedia become the next wikipedia, is this good or bad]]&lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:If there is no objective truth, then is the claim &amp;quot;there is no objective truth&amp;quot; also not an objective truth?|If there is no objective truth, then is the claim &amp;quot;there is no objective truth&amp;quot; also not an objective truth?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Does History Matter?|Does History Matter?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is a first cause of a process necessary, always possible, or sometimes impossible?|Is a first cause of a process necessary, always possible, or sometimes impossible?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Can Objectivism develop beyond Ayn Rand's original formulation?|Can Objectivism develop beyond Ayn Rand's original formulation?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Can any man live without some code of morality?|Can any man live without some code of morality?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Does the universe include everything, or does something outside the universe exist?|Does the known physical universe exhaust all that can exist, or does something exist beyond known physical boundaries?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Why is there something rather than nothing?|Why is there something rather than nothing?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Stem Cells| Embryonic Stem Cells: Why or why not?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate:Why Reason?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate:Why does the conservative media often an ugly undertone?]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Religious debates==&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate: Should certain books be banned from libraries?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate: Is communism founded on Christian doctrine?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Should the first story of creation be read allegorically or literally?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate:Is Scientology a false religion]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Why do Moses, Ezra, Jesus, and Paul all disagree on divorce? Moses allowed divorce, Jesus disallowed it and also allowed it, Paul allowed it, and Ezra actually commanded it to appease God (Ezra 10)??? im confused!! whats a christian to do??]]&lt;br /&gt;
#[[Did Jesus ever claim to be God?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia: Grave errors/inconsistencies in the Bible make literal translation worthless.]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Was Jesus born in the right time and place?| Was Jesus born in the right time and place?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia : What does Christianity say about homosexuality?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:If God does not exist, can anything be morally wrong?|If God does not exist, can anything be morally wrong?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is it wrong to have a Christmas tree?|Is it wrong to have a Christmas tree?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Did God create evil?|Did God create evil?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Which Christian denomination is the most true to the central teachings of Christianity?|Which Christian denomination is the most true to the central teachings of Christianity?]] &lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate:If Jesus were alive to day, where on the political spectrum would he fall?|If Jesus were alive to day, where on the political spectrum would he fall?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Should Religion Play a Large Role in Modern Societies?|Is religion relevant in todays society? / Should Religion Play a Large Role in Modern Societies?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Does the Bible (Old and the New Testament) have the infallible words of God?|Bible (New and Old Testament) Words of God]] &lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia: AntiSemitism|AntiSemitism]] &lt;br /&gt;
# [[Does Intelligent Design deny the Existence of God?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Could God create a rock so heavy that he himself could not lift it?|Could God create a rock so heavy that he himself could not lift it?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:If there were no religion, would we find another reason to kill each other?|If there were no religion, would we find another reason to kill each other?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Natural Disaster versus Act of God|Natural Disaster versus Act of God]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:What is the Sabbath day?|What is the Sabbath day?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is it possible to be a conservative and not a religious person or even an atheist?|Is it possible to be a conservative and not a religious person or even an atheist?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate:Why do we still perform Baptisms?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Does_the_Resurrection_negate_Gods_Sacrifice_of_his_only_son%3F|Does the Resurrection negate Gods Sacrifice of his only son?|Does the Resurrection negate God's Sacrifice of his only son?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:If_most_Muslims_learned_their_religion_from_their_parents%2C_just_like_us_Christians%2C_they_will_probably_be_hard_to_convert._So_what_can_we_do_to_save_their_souls%3F|If most Muslims learned their religion from their parents, just like us Christians, they will probably be hard to convert. So what can we do to save their souls?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:If_most_Christians_learned_their_religion_from_their_parents%2C_just_like_us_Muslims%2C_they_will_probably_be_hard_to_convert._So_what_can_we_do_to_save_their_souls%3F|If most Christians learned their religion from their parents, just like us Muslims, they will probably be hard to convert. So what can we do to save their souls?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Does_mainstream_Islam_endorse_violence%3F|Does mainstream Islam endorse violence?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is religion morally wrong?|Is religion morally wrong?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Does the Bible display poor ethics and morals?|Does the Bible display poor ethics and morals?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Why the Bible|What makes the Bible a reliable source of knowledge besides tradition?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Why should we be afraid of God?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Do conservative Christians have an unquestioning faith which is comparable to that of the Party in the book 1984?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Antisemitism]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Are Christianity and the Bible superior to other religions and scriptures?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia: Is &amp;quot;Coercive Interrogation&amp;quot; consistent with Christian Values?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Should all access to Conservapedia be banned on Sundays?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Either God is indecisive or the world's major religions have ALL got it wrong]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Mary Magdalene - First Witness to the Resurrection - Significance?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate:Was Christ a fundamentalist?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Atheism vs. Deism]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Atheism vs. Pastafarianism]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Why is homosexuality so bad?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate:Are Young Earth Creationists detracting others from the Faith?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[If Noah only brought two of every animal on the ark, wouldn't subsequent generations of animals have become increasingly inbred?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate:Is there 1 God or are there many gods?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate: Can you be a true Christian and believe in evolution?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate:Should gay marriage be allowed?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate:Is atheism a religion]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Adoption and Abortion]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[If we are not to be naturalists, what are our criterea for deciding which supernatural explanations are to be believed?]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Historical debates==&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Was Benjamin Franklin a deist?]]&lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Did racism play a role in the decision to drop atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki?|Did racism play a role in the decision to drop atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Was the European colonization of the Americas good for the native people?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Was President George H. W. Bush wrong to leave Saddam in power in 1991?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia: Which was worse? the Civil War and it's effects or slavery?]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Political debates==&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate: Is communism founded on Christian doctrine?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Why do we still have an embargo on Cuba?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Has Britain Declined?| Quoting Conservapedia's front page; &amp;quot;The British government just affirmed its ban on mentioning Intelligent Design to students.[3] No one there seems to notice how Britain's decline coincided with its promotion of evolution frauds like the Piltdown Man.&amp;quot; - Has Britain REALLY declined?]] &lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is illegal immigration control the answer to illegal immigration?|Is illegal immigration control the answer to illegal immigration?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Has Britain become the 51st State of the US?|Has Britain become the 51st State of the US?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:You think these Phd's are nuts?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Does the European Union pose a threat to the United States?| Does the European Union pose a threat to United States Security?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Which is true; progressive Liberal or regressive liberal]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Define torture]]&lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Should the United States have entered World War I?|Should the United States have entered World War I?]] &lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Should the United States have entered World War II?|Should the United States have entered World War II?]]  &lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Should the United States have eliminated communism in North Korea|Should the United States have eliminated communism in North Korea as General Douglas MacArthur wanted?]]&lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Was the United States right to drop atomic bombs so quickly on Hiroshima and Nagasaki?|Was the United States right to drop atomic bombs so quickly on Hiroshima and Nagasaki?]]&lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Was it wrong for him to allow the attack in order to wake up the American public and motivate Americans to fight and win the war?|If President Roosevelt had known about the Pearl Harbor attack in advance, would it have been wrong for him to allow the attack in order to wake up the American public and motivate Americans to fight and win the war?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is gun-control the answer to crimes involving guns?|Is gun-control the answer to crimes involving guns?]]&lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Was world war inevitable?|Was world war inevitable?]]&lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Does &amp;quot;free trade&amp;quot; increase wealth rather than simply redistribute it?|Does &amp;quot;free trade&amp;quot; increase wealth or simply redistribute it?]]  &lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Is it even possible to install democracy in a Muslim country?|Is it even possible to install democracy in a Muslim country?]] &lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Is democracy even possible in Iraq?|Is democracy even possible in Iraq?]]&lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Should we have given the Panama Canal back to Panama?|Should we have given the Panama Canal back to Panama?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Should the United States leave the United Nations?|Should the United States leave the United Nations?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Crusades... Good or Bad?|Crusades... Good or Bad?]]&lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Was American soldier Michael New right to refuse to fight wearing part of a United Nations uniform?|Was American soldier Michael New right to refuse to fight wearing part of a United Nations uniform?]]  See [[Michael New]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Which is a more powerful ideology, Islam or communism?|Which is a more powerful ideology, Islam or Communism?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Should the United States intervene in small countries to defeat communism there?|Should the United States intervene in small countries to defeat communism there?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Should public displays of the 10 Commandments be allowed under the constitution?|Should public displays of the 10 Commandments be allowed under the constitution?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Which has the best philosophy of education: the public school system, private schools, or the home school movement?|Which has the best philosophy of education: the public school system, private schools, or the home school movement?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Should people genetically engineer a cure for homosexuality?|Should people genetically engineer a cure for homosexuality?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Should Bush pardon Scooter Libby?|Should Bush pardon Scooter Libby?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Should We Support Democrats For Life.org?|Should We Support Democrats For Life.org?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[conservapedia:Women in the Military?|Women in the Military?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia: Should students learn a foreign language?|Should students learn a foreign language?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Why does the right side of the political spectrum tend to be more religous?|Why does the right side of the political spectrum tend to be more religious?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Should there be a consistent standard on human rights applied to left and right?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Should American companies be allowed to send their own troops into a war which America is participating in?|Should American companies be allowed to send their own troops into a war which America is participating in?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Giuliani's lack of social conservative viewpoints should not stop you from voting for him.|Giuliani's lack of social conservative viewpoints should not stop you from voting for him.]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is_President_Bush_good_for_America?|Is President Bush good for America?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is_the_Iraq_War_a_success%3F|Is the Iraq War a success?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Does_single_sex_schooling_promotes_homesexuality%3F|Does Single sex schooling promotes homosexuality?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is_the_murder_of_3%2C000_people_just_a_few_or_is_it_a_lot%3F_Does_it_make_a_difference_if_the_murdered_people_are_Americans%3F|Is the murder of 3,000 people just a few or is it a lot? Does it make a difference if the murdered people are Americans?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Does the media really have a liberal bias?|Does the media really have a liberal bias?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Who was the last Democrat to quit due to ethics and what year was it? Is it fair for Republicans to due the same?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[What kind of leader will Democrats make if they run from debates on Fox?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Are the Democrats capable of fighting terrorism?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Porn or guns?|Does porn actually cause (not merely correlate to) violence?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Can a rogue nation be thought of as a sovereign nation?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[ Has Russia reinstalled stealth communism?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Do we all know what Democrat Presidential candidates stand for yet?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Define Civil War]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Should gun sales to terror suspects be allowed?|Should gun sales to terror suspects be allowed?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Who would you support for President in 2008?|Who would you support for President in 2008?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is Darwinism liberal or is it conservative?|Is Darwinism liberal or is it conservative?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate:Why did God place most of the world's oil in politically unstable places?|Why did God place most of the world's oil in politically unstable places?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Restoring the USA image in the world, just a fancy phrase that means zilch?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Placing the blame on how America got polarized]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is most government criticism really patriotic?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is environmentalism mostly about preserving natural resources?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is the conservative stance on illegal immigration going to loose the Hispanic vote for the GOP in the 08' election?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Should President Bush Condemn Armenian Genocide? ]] ''New as of October 10, 2007''&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Third Party Debate]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate:Who kills more innocent people: religious believers or atheists?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Was congress right to override president Bush's veto on the water projects bill?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Is opening the borders the solution to the social security crisis?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate:Preferred Democrat for the White House?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Does Republican equal conservative?  Does Democrat equal liberal?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Obama's preacher.]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Is president Bush ignoring human rights violations in China?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate:Should the United States begin Colonizing Space?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate:Should the federal government have the power to define marriage?|Should the federal government have the power to define marriage?]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Scientific debates==&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Why haven't intelligent designists published a single scientific article?|If intelligent design is just as valid as evolution, where are all their scientific findings and publishings?]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Does Darwinian natural selection suggest that bigotry is a necessary self-defense mechanism?|Does Darwinian natural selection suggest that bigotry is a necessary self-defense mechanism?]]&lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Does Darwinian natural selection suggest that homosexuality is bad for the survival of a species?|Does Darwinian natural selection suggest that homosexuality is bad for the survival of a species?]]  &lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Is Darwinian natural selection compatible with Marxism?|Is Darwinian natural selection compatible with Marxism?]]&lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Is the theory of macroevolution true?|Is the theory of macroevolution true?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia: Is Giving Birth the Bible Way Better?| Is Giving Birth the Bible Way Better?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Should Creationism/Intelligent design be taught as a scientific alternative to evolution in public schools?|Should Creationism/Intelligent design be taught as a scientific alternative to evolution in public schools?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is global warming evident, and if so, is this the fault of man, and how must man stop it?|Is global warming evident, and if so, is this the fault of man, and how must man stop it?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:If the universe is young and it takes light millions of years to reach us from far off stars, how can we see them?|If the universe is young and it takes light millions of years to reach us from far off stars, how can we see them?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:God, Earth and Global Warming|God, Earth and Global Warming]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is the evidence in favor of evolution convincing?|Is the evidence in favor of evolution convincing?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:If the Bible didn't contain a creation story, would anyone even consider the idea of a young earth?|If the Bible didn't contain a creation story, would anyone even consider the idea of a young earth?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is Relativity in direct conflict with the Genesis account?|Is Relativity in direct conflict with the Genesis account?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Who feels that scientific related articles should only reference published research papers instead of websites when dealing with research instead of application?|Who feels that scientific related articles should only reference published research papers instead of websites when dealing with research instead of application?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia: If it could be unambiguously demonstrated that man is NOT the most evolved animal, then would this support or refute ther idea of Creation by God?| If it could be unambiguously demonstrated that man is NOT the most evolved animal]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Why are God's works always questioned?]]&lt;br /&gt;
#[[Conservapedia:Are there any elements of choice, when it comes to carrying out homosexual acts?|Are there any elements of choice]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Listing the Earth's most pressing needs in urgent order of fixing]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is homosexuality a mental illness?|Is homosexuality a mental illness?]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Debates about Conservapedia==&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is Conservapedia representing a conservative POV or a Young Earth Creationist POV?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is Conservapedia anti-British?|Is Conservapedia anti-British?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[The liberal quotient of Conservapedia; what is it? Does it matter?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Does bias impair Wikipedia's reliability?|Does bias impair Wikipedia's reliability?]]&lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Should the term list entries be included in Conservapedia's entry count?|Should the term list entries be included in Conservapedia's entry count?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:How should Conservapedia work to avoid having a conservative bias?|How should Conservapedia work to avoid having a conservative bias?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Can Conservapedia Succeed?|Can Conservapedia Succeed?]]&lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Is Conservapedia fair and balanced?|Is Conservapedia fair and balanced?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:How can we protect Conservapedia by distinguishing real conservative encyclopedia articles from satires written by liberals?|How can we protect Conservapedia by distinguishing real conservative encyclopedia articles from satires written by liberals?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:What exactly is Conservapedia?|What exactly is Conservapedia?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Was the media attention needed?|Was the media attention needed?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia Debate Topics full of far left liberal netroots]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Which is true; progressive Liberal or regressive liberal]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Where do you personally look for facts and information on topics &amp;quot;When did Brahms live&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;Why did Monet paint grainstacks?&amp;quot;]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is it okay for Conservapedia to have biased articles?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:On whether certain articles on human anatomy should be pre-emptively blanked and protected]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Who deletes entire discussion items from here?  And why?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Why do users, who contribute substantially, choose to leave this community?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Why do the creators of Conservapedia see Wikipedia as un-American?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Is the use of copyrighted photographs without permission stealing?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia: Are there too many debates on Conservapedia? | Are there too many debates on Conservapedia?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is it tasteless for Conservapedia to critique the Virginia Tech poem on the Main Page?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Has anyone ever been been banned for pointing out that many of the other entries on this site are in need of citation and evidence to back up statements?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Does an encyclopedia define complex subjects, or insert more bias into them?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia: Do sysops block editing on pages when it seems their opponents are making strong points?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia: Is Conservapedia a 'Trustworthy Encyclopedia'?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia: Does altering the record of debate in a wiki 'Encyclopedia' render the entire thing a farce?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Democrats next move, link more stories of heartache like those from Kansas to Gulf Coast.]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Do quotes used to support a theory just make an article look stupid?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is Conservapedia blinkered?|Is Conservapedia blinkered?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Does Conservapedia censor opponents the way Expelled says ID advocates are censored?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate:Is the Conservapedia Logo in violation of US Flag Code?]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Funny, maybe?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Are cats just useless Dogs|Are cats just useless dogs?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is the Platypus evidence that God has a sense of humour?|Is the Platypus evidence that God has a sense of humour?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia: Was the shooting at Virginia Tech somehow President Bush's fault?|Was the shooting at Virginia Tech somehow President Bush's fault? (kind of like he caused hurricane Katrina)]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Are video games getting better or worse as graphics, sound, and gameplay complexity improve?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate:Favorite old time radio show]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Other==&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Are alcohol, marijuana, and nicotine gateway drugs?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is Rap music torture?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Should weed be legalized?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate:What are the lessons that we should take away from the Milgram Experiment]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Does the Theory of Evolution promote atheism?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Discussion:Colorado Mall Shootings]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Discussion:Creationist]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate:Is the Theory of Evolution a conspiricy?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate:How should we view the fact leading scientists do not believe in god?]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Conservapedia]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Paddyduffy</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Conservapedia:Debate_Topics&amp;diff=356878</id>
		<title>Conservapedia:Debate Topics</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Conservapedia:Debate_Topics&amp;diff=356878"/>
		<updated>2007-12-22T21:34:44Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Paddyduffy: /* Religious debates */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;'''Debate topic suggestions, organized so that it's not necessary to delete them.'''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
(Note: If some topic is miscategorized, it can be cut and pasted without affecting the relevant links.)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Philosophical debates==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:If there is no objective truth, then is the claim &amp;quot;there is no objective truth&amp;quot; also not an objective truth?|If there is no objective truth, then is the claim &amp;quot;there is no objective truth&amp;quot; also not an objective truth?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Does History Matter?|Does History Matter?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is a first cause of a process necessary, always possible, or sometimes impossible?|Is a first cause of a process necessary, always possible, or sometimes impossible?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Can Objectivism develop beyond Ayn Rand's original formulation?|Can Objectivism develop beyond Ayn Rand's original formulation?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Can any man live without some code of morality?|Can any man live without some code of morality?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Does the universe include everything, or does something outside the universe exist?|Does the known physical universe exhaust all that can exist, or does something exist beyond known physical boundaries?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Why is there something rather than nothing?|Why is there something rather than nothing?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Stem Cells| Embryonic Stem Cells: Why or why not?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate:Why Reason?]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Religious debates==&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Should the first story of creation be read allegorically or literally?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate:Is Scientology a false religion]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Why do Moses, Ezra, Jesus, and Paul all disagree on divorce? Moses allowed divorce, Jesus disallowed it and also allowed it, Paul allowed it, and Ezra actually commanded it to appease God (Ezra 10)??? im confused!! whats a christian to do??]]&lt;br /&gt;
#[[Did Jesus ever claim to be God?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia: Grave errors/inconsistencies in the Bible make literal translation worthless.]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Was Jesus born in the right time and place?| Was Jesus born in the right time and place?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia : What does Christianity say about homosexuality?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:If God does not exist, can anything be morally wrong?|If God does not exist, can anything be morally wrong?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is it wrong to have a Christmas tree?|Is it wrong to have a Christmas tree?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Did God create evil?|Did God create evil?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Which Christian denomination is the most true to the central teachings of Christianity?|Which Christian denomination is the most true to the central teachings of Christianity?]] &lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate:If Jesus were alive to day, where on the political spectrum would he fall?|If Jesus were alive to day, where on the political spectrum would he fall?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Should Religion Play a Large Role in Modern Societies?|Is religion relevant in todays society? / Should Religion Play a Large Role in Modern Societies?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Does the Bible (Old and the New Testament) have the infallible words of God?|Bible (New and Old Testament) Words of God]] &lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia: AntiSemitism|AntiSemitism]] &lt;br /&gt;
# [[Does Intelligent Design deny the Existence of God?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Could God create a rock so heavy that he himself could not lift it?|Could God create a rock so heavy that he himself could not lift it?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:If there were no religion, would we find another reason to kill each other?|If there were no religion, would we find another reason to kill each other?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Natural Disaster versus Act of God|Natural Disaster versus Act of God]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:What is the Sabbath day?|What is the Sabbath day?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is it possible to be a conservative and not a religious person or even an atheist?|Is it possible to be a conservative and not a religious person or even an atheist?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate:Why do we still perform Baptisms?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Does_the_Resurrection_negate_Gods_Sacrifice_of_his_only_son%3F|Does the Resurrection negate Gods Sacrifice of his only son?|Does the Resurrection negate God's Sacrifice of his only son?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:If_most_Muslims_learned_their_religion_from_their_parents%2C_just_like_us_Christians%2C_they_will_probably_be_hard_to_convert._So_what_can_we_do_to_save_their_souls%3F|If most Muslims learned their religion from their parents, just like us Christians, they will probably be hard to convert. So what can we do to save their souls?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:If_most_Christians_learned_their_religion_from_their_parents%2C_just_like_us_Muslims%2C_they_will_probably_be_hard_to_convert._So_what_can_we_do_to_save_their_souls%3F|If most Christians learned their religion from their parents, just like us Muslims, they will probably be hard to convert. So what can we do to save their souls?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Does_mainstream_Islam_endorse_violence%3F|Does mainstream Islam endorse violence?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is religion morally wrong?|Is religion morally wrong?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Does the Bible display poor ethics and morals?|Does the Bible display poor ethics and morals?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Why the Bible|What makes the Bible a reliable source of knowledge besides tradition?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Why should we be afraid of God?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Do conservative Christians have an unquestioning faith which is comparable to that of the Party in the book 1984?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Antisemitism]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Are Christianity and the Bible superior to other religions and scriptures?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia: Is &amp;quot;Coercive Interrogation&amp;quot; consistent with Christian Values?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Should all access to Conservapedia be banned on Sundays?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Either God is indecisive or the world's major religions have ALL got it wrong]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Mary Magdalene - First Witness to the Resurrection - Significance?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate:Was Christ a fundamentalist?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Atheism vs. Deism]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Atheism vs. Pastafarianism]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Why is homosexuality so bad?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate:Are Young Earth Creationists detracting others from the Faith?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[If Noah only brought two of every animal on the ark, wouldn't subsequent generations of animals have become increasingly inbred?]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Historical debates==&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Was Benjamin Franklin a deist?]]&lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Did racism play a role in the decision to drop atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki?|Did racism play a role in the decision to drop atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Was the European colonization of the Americas good for the native people?]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Political debates==&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Has Britain Declined?| Quoting Conservapedia's front page; &amp;quot;The British government just affirmed its ban on mentioning Intelligent Design to students.[3] No one there seems to notice how Britain's decline coincided with its promotion of evolution frauds like the Piltdown Man.&amp;quot; - Has Britain REALLY declined?]] &lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is illegal immigration control the answer to illegal immigration?|Is illegal immigration control the answer to illegal immigration?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Has Britain become the 51st State of the US?|Has Britain become the 51st State of the US?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:You think these Phd's are nuts?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Does the European Union pose a threat to the United States?| Does the European Union pose a threat to United States Security?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Which is true; progressive Liberal or regressive liberal]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Define torture]]&lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Should the United States have entered World War I?|Should the United States have entered World War I?]] &lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Should the United States have entered World War II?|Should the United States have entered World War II?]]  &lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Should the United States have eliminated communism in North Korea|Should the United States have eliminated communism in North Korea as General Douglas MacArthur wanted?]]&lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Was the United States right to drop atomic bombs so quickly on Hiroshima and Nagasaki?|Was the United States right to drop atomic bombs so quickly on Hiroshima and Nagasaki?]]&lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Was it wrong for him to allow the attack in order to wake up the American public and motivate Americans to fight and win the war?|If President Roosevelt had known about the Pearl Harbor attack in advance, would it have been wrong for him to allow the attack in order to wake up the American public and motivate Americans to fight and win the war?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is gun-control the answer to crimes involving guns?|Is gun-control the answer to crimes involving guns?]]&lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Was world war inevitable?|Was world war inevitable?]]&lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Does &amp;quot;free trade&amp;quot; increase wealth rather than simply redistribute it?|Does &amp;quot;free trade&amp;quot; increase wealth or simply redistribute it?]]  &lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Is it even possible to install democracy in a Muslim country?|Is it even possible to install democracy in a Muslim country?]] &lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Is democracy even possible in Iraq?|Is democracy even possible in Iraq?]]&lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Should we have given the Panama Canal back to Panama?|Should we have given the Panama Canal back to Panama?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Should the United States leave the United Nations?|Should the United States leave the United Nations?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Crusades... Good or Bad?|Crusades... Good or Bad?]]&lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Was American soldier Michael New right to refuse to fight wearing part of a United Nations uniform?|Was American soldier Michael New right to refuse to fight wearing part of a United Nations uniform?]]  See [[Michael New]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Which is a more powerful ideology, Islam or communism?|Which is a more powerful ideology, Islam or Communism?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Should the United States intervene in small countries to defeat communism there?|Should the United States intervene in small countries to defeat communism there?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Should public displays of the 10 Commandments be allowed under the constitution?|Should public displays of the 10 Commandments be allowed under the constitution?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Which has the best philosophy of education: the public school system, private schools, or the home school movement?|Which has the best philosophy of education: the public school system, private schools, or the home school movement?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Should people genetically engineer a cure for homosexuality?|Should people genetically engineer a cure for homosexuality?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Should Bush pardon Scooter Libby?|Should Bush pardon Scooter Libby?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Should We Support Democrats For Life.org?|Should We Support Democrats For Life.org?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[conservapedia:Women in the Military?|Women in the Military?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia: Should students learn a foreign language?|Should students learn a foreign language?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Why does the right side of the political spectrum tend to be more religous?|Why does the right side of the political spectrum tend to be more religious?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Should there be a consistent standard on human rights applied to left and right?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Should American companies be allowed to send their own troops into a war which America is participating in?|Should American companies be allowed to send their own troops into a war which America is participating in?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Giuliani's lack of social conservative viewpoints should not stop you from voting for him.|Giuliani's lack of social conservative viewpoints should not stop you from voting for him.]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is_President_Bush_good_for_America?|Is President Bush good for America?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is_the_Iraq_War_a_success%3F|Is the Iraq War a success?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Does_single_sex_schooling_promotes_homesexuality%3F|Does Single sex schooling promotes homesexuality?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is_the_murder_of_3%2C000_people_just_a_few_or_is_it_a_lot%3F_Does_it_make_a_difference_if_the_murdered_people_are_Americans%3F|Is the murder of 3,000 people just a few or is it a lot? Does it make a difference if the murdered people are Americans?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Does the media really have a liberal bias?|Does the media really have a liberal bias?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Who was the last Democrat to quit due to ethics and what year was it? Is it fair for Republicans to due the same?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[What kind of leader will Democrats make if they run from debates on Fox?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Are the Democrats capable of fighting terrorism?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Porn or guns?|Does porn actually cause (not merely correlate to) violence?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Can a rogue nation be thought of as a sovereign nation?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[ Has Russia reinstalled stealth communism?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Do we all know what Democrat Presidential candidates stand for yet?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Define Civil War]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Should gun sales to terror suspects be allowed?|Should gun sales to terror suspects be allowed?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Who would you support for President in 2008?|Who would you support for President in 2008?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is Darwinism liberal or is it conservative?|Is Darwinism liberal or is it conservative?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate:Why did God place most of the world's oil in politically unstable places?|Why did God place most of the world's oil in politically unstable places?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Restoring the USA image in the world, just a fancy phrase that means zilch?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Placing the blame on how America got polarized]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is most government criticism really patriotic?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is environmentalism mostly about preserving natural resources?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is the conservative stance on illegal immigration going to loose the Hispanic vote for the GOP in the 08' election?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Should President Bush Condemn Armenian Genocide? ]] ''New as of October 10, 2007''&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Third Party Debate]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate:Who kills more innocent people: religious believers or atheists?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Was congress right to override president Bush's veto on the water projects bill?]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Scientific debates==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Does Darwinian natural selection suggest that bigotry is a necessary self-defense mechanism?|Does Darwinian natural selection suggest that bigotry is a necessary self-defense mechanism?]]&lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Does Darwinian natural selection suggest that homosexuality is bad for the survival of a species?|Does Darwinian natural selection suggest that homosexuality is bad for the survival of a species?]]  &lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Is Darwinian natural selection compatible with Marxism?|Is Darwinian natural selection compatible with Marxism?]]&lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Is the theory of macroevolution true?|Is the theory of macroevolution true?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia: Is Giving Birth the Bible Way Better?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Should Creationism/Intelligent design be taught as a scientific alternative to evolution in public schools?|Should Creationism/Intelligent design be taught as a scientific alternative to evolution in public schools?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is global warming evident, and if so, is this the fault of man, and how must man stop it?|Is global warming evident, and if so, is this the fault of man, and how must man stop it?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:If the universe is young and it takes light millions of years to reach us from far off stars, how can we see them?|If the universe is young and it takes light millions of years to reach us from far off stars, how can we see them?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:God, Earth and Global Warming|God, Earth and Global Warming]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Why is the evidence in favor of evolution so darn convincing?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:If the Bible didn't contain a creation story, would anyone even consider the idea of a young earth?|If the Bible didn't contain a creation story, would anyone even consider the idea of a young earth?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is Relativity in direct conflict with the Genesis account?|Is Relativity in direct conflict with the Genesis account?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Who feels that scientific related articles should only reference published research papers instead of websites when dealing with research instead of application?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia: If it could be unambiguously demonstrated that man is NOT the most evolved animal, then would this support or refute ther idea of Creation by God?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Why are God's works always questioned?]]&lt;br /&gt;
#[[Conservapedia:Are there any elements of choice, when it comes to carrying out homosexual acts?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Listing the Earth's most pressing needs in urgent order of fixing]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is homosexuality a mental illness?]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Debates about Conservapedia==&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is Conservapedia representing a conservative POV or a Young Earth Creationist POV?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is Conservapedia anti-British?|Is Conservapedia anti-British?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[The liberal quotient of Conservapedia; what is it? Does it matter?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Does bias impair Wikipedia's reliability?|Does bias impair Wikipedia's reliability?]]&lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Should the term list entries be included in Conservapedia's entry count?|Should the term list entries be included in Conservapedia's entry count?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:How should Conservapedia work to avoid having a conservative bias?|How should Conservapedia work to avoid having a conservative bias?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Can Conservapedia Succeed?|Can Conservapedia Succeed?]]&lt;br /&gt;
#  [[Conservapedia:Is Conservapedia fair and balanced?|Is Conservapedia fair and balanced?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:How can we protect Conservapedia by distinguishing real conservative encyclopedia articles from satires written by liberals?|How can we protect Conservapedia by distinguishing real conservative encyclopedia articles from satires written by liberals?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:What exactly is Conservapedia?|What exactly is Conservapedia?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Was the media attention needed?|Was the media attention needed?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia Debate Topics full of far left liberal netroots]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Which is true; progressive Liberal or regressive liberal]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Where do you personally look for facts and information on topics &amp;quot;When did Brahms live&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;Why did Monet paint grainstacks?&amp;quot;]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is it okay for Conservapedia to have biased articles?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:On whether certain articles on human anatomy should be pre-emptively blanked and protected]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Who deletes entire discussion items from here?  And why?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Why do users, who contribute substantially, choose to leave this community?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Why do the creators of conservapeida see wikipedia as un-American?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Is the use of copyrighted photographs without permission stealing?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia: Are there too many debates on Conservapedia? | Are there too many debates on Conservapedia?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is it tasteless for Conservapedia to critique the Virginia Tech poem on the Main Page?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Has anyone ever been been banned for pointing out that many of the other entries on this site are in need of citation and evidence to back up statements?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Does an encyclopedia define complex subjects, or insert more bias into them?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia: Do sysops block editing on pages when it seems their opponents are making strong points?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia: Is Conservapedia a 'Trustworthy Encyclopedia'?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia: Does altering the record of debate in a wiki 'Encyclopedia' render the entire thing a farce?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Democrats next move, link more stories of heartache like those from Kansas to Gulf Coast.]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Do quotes used to support a theory just make an article look stupid?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Does Conservapedia qualify as a hate group?]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Funny, maybe?==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Are cats just useless Dogs|Are cats just useless dogs?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is the Platypus evidence that God has a sense of humour?|Is the Platypus evidence that God has a sense of humour?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia: Was the shooting at Virginia Tech somehow President Bush's fault?|Was the shooting at Virginia Tech somehow President Bush's fault? (kind of like he caused hurricane Katrina)]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Are video games getting better or worse as graphics, sound, and gameplay complexity improve?]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Other==&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Are alcohol, marijuana, and nicotine gateway drugs?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Is Rap music torture?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Should weed be legalized?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Debate:What are the lessons that we should take away from the Milgram Experiment]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Conservapedia:Does the Theory of Evolution promote atheism?]]&lt;br /&gt;
# [[Discussion:Colorado Mall Shootings]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Conservapedia]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Paddyduffy</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Music&amp;diff=354052</id>
		<title>Music</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Music&amp;diff=354052"/>
		<updated>2007-12-18T12:36:05Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Paddyduffy: /* Controversies surrounding music today */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;[[Image:Musicalnotes.jpg|right]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Music]] (Middle English ''musik'', from Anglo-French ''musike'', from [[Latin]] ''musica'', from [[Greek]] μουσικη ''mousike'') is an [[art]] form consisting entirely of organized [[sound]] interspersed with periods of silence.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?sourceid=Mozilla-search&amp;amp;va=Music Music] defined in the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; It takes its name from three [[Greek mythology|Greek]] goddesses known as the ''[[Muses]]'', who specialized in stimulation of an artist's or poet's mind.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Music is the highest of all the arts, and the one best able to stir human emotion. Depending on what sort of work of music one composes, interprets, or hears, it can build a person up in spirit, or break it; make a person happy, or sad; inspire a person to greatness, or lead him into very challenging temptation. It is the art form to which the [[Bible]] gives its strongest endorsement, and to which the Bible pays the greatest attention. At the same time, it is arguably the most dangerous of all the arts, when misused.&amp;lt;ref name=Brown&amp;gt;Brown, Alan B.: telephone interview conducted on 1 March 2007 with user [[User:TerryH|TerryH]]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
== What is music? ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Strictly speaking, ''music'' means sound having any organization at all, while ''noise'' is purely random sound. But the roots of these two words suggest that ''music'' ought to mean that which makes one think and feel something new and significantly different, while ''noise'' (from the same root from which we get the verb ''I annoy'') is merely a distracting, disturbing, or often physically damaging sound. Some modern composers have attempted to stretch the definition of music by using noises in a manner that they insist is organized. Whether such a work product properly falls under the heading of &amp;quot;music&amp;quot; is debatable. However, what appears as music to one person may be interpreted as noise to another, and vice versa, as interpretation of sounds, whether organised or disorganised, dissonant or harmonious, may arouse different sorts of feelings in a listener.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Note that music is ''not'' limited to such sounds that a human being might produce by fashioning an instrument for the making of a simplified or otherwise organized sound and then &amp;quot;playing&amp;quot; said instrument. The chirping of birds and certain insects may properly be called music, especially if the sound produced is particularly pleasant to the listener. Furthermore, some of the most sophisticated music attempts to imitate the sounds made by birds, insects, and other animals.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The intriguing work of [[Oliver Sachs]] attempts to address the question, &amp;quot;What is it about music that so moves our spirit and mind that it remains long after our other memories fade?&amp;quot; [http://www.kidsnet.org/sfkc/sfkc20051230-1.html]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Basic music theory ==&lt;br /&gt;
: ''Main Article: [[Music theory]]''&lt;br /&gt;
Classically, music consists of ''tones'', ''melodies'', ''counterpoint'', and ''rhythm''. A ''tone'' is the purest form of sound, having a single [[frequency]]. However, pure tones in music are rare. Most tones present themselves to the human ear together with ''overtones'', which typically are small-[[integer]] multiples of the basic frequency (the ''fundamental tone'').&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Notes, intervals, and scales ===&lt;br /&gt;
Two tones played together form an ''interval''. The simplest of all intervals is the ''octave'', formed by two tones, one of whose frequencies is the exact double of the other. The full collection of tones that one can play between the two notes of an octave is called a ''scale.'' In Western music, most scales are ''semi-tonal'', with twelve tones between the octave notes. (The high end of the octave is considered a repetition of the low end, but at twice the frequency.) [[Oriental]] music commonly has ''quarter-tonal'' scales, with twenty-four separate tones within an octave. Quarter tones are often difficult to distinguish for a Western listener, and such music, as a result, tends to suggest the sinuous movement of a snake.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The [[Greece|Greeks]] recognized early that fundamental tones in music have a simple and strict [[mathematics|mathematical]] relationship. As mentioned, the octave consists of two notes, one at double the frequency of the other. At ''triple'' the frequency, one hears a low fundamental tone, and a higher tone that is past the octave but roughly midway toward the second octave. If one then divides the high-tone frequency by two, one creates the interval called the ''perfect fifth'' or ''dominant'' interval, one of the most common intervals used in Western music. One can test this relationship by striking a note on a [[piano]] while holding down another key that is one octave higher than the perfect fifth. The second note will sound in sympathy with the first--because it is resonating with the overtone from the first note.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Melody and counterpoint ===&lt;br /&gt;
''Melody'' is the series of notes that most closely captures the attention of the listener: the 'tune' one hums along with.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
''Counterpoint'' is a specific technique for creating secondary melodies that intertwine with and compliment the main melody. When two or more notes sound at the same time, it is called a ''chord,'' and the distance between the notes is the ''interval.''  In the western 12-note scale common usage, an interval is often  expressed in relative terms, using the eight notes that make up an octave and prefixing 'major' or 'minor' to account for the interstitial notes.  For instance, the interval between 'C' and 'E' is a ''3rd'' because 'E' is the 3rd note in the major scale of C.  One-half step below that is a ''minor 3rd,'' although this exact same note could also be called a ''major 2nd''.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Many of the feelings and emotions that music can evoke are a result of the tension between the ''harmonic'' sound of some intervals, and the ''dissonant'' sound of others.  During the development of western music, certain rules were established for proper melodic counterpoint, and these rules specified how intervals (chords) could change over time in the music.  For example, in the chants of Gregorian Monks, chords containing certain intervals, like 7ths, were required to 'resolve' to their harmonious natural key, while other intervals, like minor 5ths, were deemed ugly and even considered evil, and banned from use in liturgic music.  Johann Sebastian Bach (1685-1750) represents the pinnacle of this style of strict rule-based composition, as many of his keyboard compositions and all of his sacred work adhere to the rules of counterpoint.  From the height of the Baroque era (1700's) to the present, the history of western music has unfolded as each generation of composers has pushed the boundaries of these these rules right up to, and then in the 20th century, way beyond, all limits.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In modern popular music, the bass line is often seen as an example of counterpoint.  Another, more accurate example would be dueling guitar leads.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Rhythm ===&lt;br /&gt;
''Rhythm'' consists of all aspects of music that suggest ''forward movement.'' Most music contains a regularly repeating sequence of ''beats'', or strong elements, that typically lead with a ''down beat'' followed by any of a small number of slightly weaker beats. A down beat and its weaker beats form a ''measure.'' Usually, all measures in a piece of music have the same number of beats.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
A note in music is described not only by pitch, or frequency, but also by duration. Notes in Western music have names that typically describe how long they would sound in a typical measure. ''Whole notes'' are so called because normally they would sound for the full measure. ''Half notes'' would sound for half the measure, ''quarter notes'' for a fourth of the measure, and so on. A note may also carry a ''dot'' to the right of it, that indicates that the note is to sound for one and one-half times its usual duration.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Any one of these notes may carry a beat, and a measure may have any number of beats. Thus every piece of music commonly carries at least one ''time signature'' describing how many beats a measure has, and which type of note carries one beat. The most common time is &amp;quot;four-quarter time&amp;quot; (four beats per measure, with the beat given to the quarter note), which is therefore called &amp;quot;common time.&amp;quot; Other commonly used time signature include three-quarter, six-eighth, nine-eighth, or rarely, two-half (called ''Alla breve'' or &amp;quot;cut time&amp;quot;). Even rarer are the time signatures with prime numbers of beats (other than three-quarter), including five-quarter or even eleven-eighth.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
''Tempo'' (Italian for &amp;quot;time&amp;quot;) describes how frequently the beats occur. The typical tempo signature is a drawing of the note that has the beat, followed by the number of beats per minute.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Notes may be ''accented'' at any time. In fact, often the accent will fall on the weak beat and make the beats seem to sound out-of-sequence. The result is ''syncopated'' rhythm.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The genre of music called [[rock and roll]] features a unique rhythm convention: the ''backbeat.''&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2003/12/07/RockRules Normative Backbeat] at Tbray.org&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; This is a third beat, in four-quarter time, that is stressed even more strongly than the down beat. This produces a profound sense of restlessness in the listener.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Types of instruments ==&lt;br /&gt;
: ''Main Article: [[Musical instruments]]''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== History ==&lt;br /&gt;
[[Image:Musica Cassell.jpg|right]]&lt;br /&gt;
The [[Bible]] suggests that music actually began in [[heaven]], and that the first musician was [[Satan|Lucifer]], then the chief of [[God]]'s messengers, or [[angels]].&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Human music goes back to [[antediluvian civilization]]. The Bible specifically credits [[Jubal]], son of [[Lamech the Murderer]] by his wife [[Adah]], with introducing music to mankind.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;{{Bible ref|book=Genesis|chap=5|verses=19-21|version=KJV}}&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The earliest ''post''-diluvian records of music have been found in [[Iraq]] and [[India]], and date at least from the time of [[Abraham]]. They probably were made shortly after the construction of the [[Tower of Babel]].&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Almost every culture and religious movement has its own particular form of music. Some forms are richer and more sophisticated than others. The [[Hebrew]] people, and especially the children of [[Jacob|Israel]], have some of the grandest of all musical traditions. Mentions of &amp;quot;singing to the Lord&amp;quot; abound in the Old Testament. The most specific testimony to the power of music over human emotions is surely contained in the story of King [[Saul]] and how he came to recruit the young [[David]] as his armorbearer and personal musician.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;{{Bible ref|book=I_Samuel|chap=16|verses=14-23|version=KJV}}&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
King [[David]], at the height of his reign, once had a ''four-thousand-voice choir'' to assist in the worship of [[God]]. The Book of [[Psalms]] is in fact a collection of lyrics for some of the first worship songs in Israelite tradition. (Most of these came from David, but at least one comes from [[Moses]].) The [[Song of Solomon]] is a grand ballad of love that most scholars regard as a type of the love of [[Jesus Christ]] for His elect.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The Greeks, when [[Alexander the Great]] accepted the surrender of [[Jerusalem]] in his wars of conquest, introduced their own brand of music to the region--which the Jews largely resisted. But music was highly prominent throughout the Greek world--and later in the [[Rome|Roman]] world following Rome's conquest of Greece. The Greeks' contributions to music theory influenced artists for centuries to come, and still have a strong influence today, especially on composers who prefer to adhere to the classical traditions of music.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The earliest Greek music was associated with Greek [[theater]]. Beginning with the fall of Rome, however, music became largely liturgical. The primary influence remained the [[Roman Catholic Church]] until the twin movements of the Renaissance and the Reformation, each of which introduced a countervailing tradition.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
From that time forward, most scholars divide music into &amp;quot;classical&amp;quot; music (composed primarily to achieve a high art) and &amp;quot;popular&amp;quot; music (composed for the masses and tending to achieve wide, but ephemeral, appeal).&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.thefreedictionary.com/popular%20music Popular music] defined at the Free Dictionary&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Classical music&amp;quot; tends to rely more on written notation, as a piece of classical music is generally held to transcend any particular interpretation of it.  In current practice, such music is performed in concerts where the audience is expected to remain respectfully silent and the performers dress formally; however, in the past such music was often performed at salons and other informal private gatherings.  In addition, the increasing importance of the written transmission of such music has reduced the role of improvisation, which was extremely important through the beginning of the &amp;quot;Romantic&amp;quot; era.  Classical music also displays great musical complexity through the use of varied rhythms, chord progressions, counterpoint, and other compositional techniques, while maintaining a deep emotional content.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Popular music&amp;quot; on the other hand, tends to be more accessible to the general public through the use of simpler forms and relatively simple compositional techniques.  Much popular music is the product of modern business enterprise, as opposed to folk music (created by ordinary people for their own enjoyment) or classical music (which was originally written for religious practice or for the entertainment of the nobility).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
These two genres; however, are not necessarily distinct, as composers such as [[Johann Sebastian Bach|Bach]] and [[Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart|Mozart]] would often incorporate themes from &amp;quot;popular music&amp;quot; of their time into their works.  Other classical composers like [[Maurice Ravel|Ravel]] and [[George Gershwin|Gershwin]] were well-known for their use of jazz idiom in works like the Concerto in F for Piano and Orchestra and [[Rhapsody in Blue]].  On the other hand, popular music has borrowed many themes from classical works (one notable example is &amp;quot;A Whiter Shade of Pale&amp;quot; by [[Procol Harum]]).  In addition, &amp;quot;popular music&amp;quot; is not necessarily simpler than classical, as forms like jazz and progressive rock make use of complex time signatures that do not often occur in classical works, and some popular musicians like [[Frank Zappa]] are considered serious composers in their own right.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Different uses of classical and popular music ===&lt;br /&gt;
Classical music has typically found these uses:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
# As an aid to worship, by placing the listener into a proper frame of mind for worship or instill in the listener a proper appreciation of the grandeur and glory of [[God]] and of the listener's own place in relation to Him.&lt;br /&gt;
# For the entertainment of the nobility; or, in more recent times, by commission from a particular group of people (often an orchestra or a university).&lt;br /&gt;
# To rally troops, either during training, on the march, or in battle.&lt;br /&gt;
# To celebrate military victory or the reign of a king, usually the one presently on the throne.&lt;br /&gt;
# Occasionally as a supplement to various forms of [[theater]]. Originally (especially in the Greek era) this meant the open-air live theater of classical fame. Today such music might accompany a live stage performance or several scenes in a [[motion picture]].&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Popular music, on the other hand, is typically used:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
# For entertainment, and more particularly for financial remuneration.&lt;br /&gt;
# Very frequently as a supplement to modern [[theater]] in all its forms, including stage, [[motion picture|motion pictures]], and especially [[television]].&lt;br /&gt;
# As a powerful aid of [[propaganda]], and the closely related use in [[advertisement]].&lt;br /&gt;
# Rarely, to rally troops. One popular artist who achieved great distinction by winning acceptance of his music by military bands was [[Glenn Miller]].&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Both forms of music can be used as propaganda, as in some of the works of [[Dmitri Shostakovich]] (although this is debated; see the article on Shostakovich for a more complete discussion).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
All types of music are often used as an accompaniment to dancing. This was as true in the past as it is today, all over the world, whether in the discos of American nightclubs or the salsa bars of Latin America. Today, people may dance to Maddonna )the female recording artist), while a generation ago people were dancing to the works of Duke Ellington and Sammy Nestico. Before that, the waltzes of Strauss were popular, while in the Baroque era (1650-1750), the dance suite was a popular compositional form. Dancing to music, whether melodic or rhythmic in nature, often plays a ritualistic role in societies across the world.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== The power of music over human emotion ==&lt;br /&gt;
Music has a very powerful effect on the emotions of the listener. Music relies on [[sound]], and if &amp;quot;faith comes through hearing,&amp;quot; then so does emotion. Music can instantly bring joy or sorrow, ecstasy or despair, and far more quickly than can any other form of art. Many musical composers insist that their music merely expresses emotions. This does not do music justice. Music does more than express emotions; it induces them.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.musica.uci.edu/mrn/V3I1S96.html MuSICA Notes III(1), Spring 1996]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The amateur botanist Dorothy L. Retallack, in [[1973]], claimed to have found that music can have an effect on plants. &amp;quot;Positive&amp;quot; music (that produces joy or contentment) supposedly made plants flourish and even &amp;quot;reach&amp;quot; for, or grow toward, such music. Negative music (that produces frustration, restlessness, or especially anger and rage) supposedly caused plants to &amp;quot;recoil&amp;quot; (grow away) from the music, and prolonged or repeated exposure debilitates and eventually killed plants, or so she said.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Retallack, Dorothy L. ''The Sound of Music and Plants''. Devorss and Company, June 1973, 96 pp., paperback. ISBN 0875161707&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.dovesong.com/positive_music/ About Positive and Negative Music] from the Dovesong Foundation&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
No botanist has ever reproduced Retallack's claimed results. But the effects on animals and humans are far better documented and much more profound than any effect on plants that Retallack ever claimed. That animals, and especially [[dog]]s and [[cat]]s, recoil in horror from the sound of a poorly trained voice, is proverbial (and in fact the animals might be reacting to a sound that is not merely grating but acutely and physically painful to their ears). The Dovesong Foundation has found evidence for musical preferences by cattle&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.dovesong.com/positive_music/archives/basement/Cows%20and%20Classical%20Music.asp Cows Prefer Classical Music]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; and cetaceans.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.dovesong.com/positive_music/archives/basement/Steinhart_Dolphins.asp Dolphins Don't Like Rock] (The article refers to the classic [[dolphin]] (family [[Cetacea]]), aka &amp;quot;porpoise,&amp;quot; not the fish of that name.)&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Music has also had a profound and well-documented effect in human history.  The history of warfare includes a rich history of martial music. More recently, music has now found a use in the healing of negative emotional states and even as an aid to the healing of physical disabilities.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.musictherapy.org/ The American Music Therapy Association]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Commercial enterprises always attempt, at great expense of time, money, and effort, to find and deploy forms of music that will enhance worker productivity or cause prospective customers to behave in a manner calculated to make them purchase their goods and/or services. The pop selections played in supermarkets are a prime example.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Music has always been an adjunct to [[theater]]. This is especially true of the performing arts called ''opera'' and ''ballet'', but applies also to the use of music as an adjunct to a theatrical production, whether on the stage, as a [[motion picture]], or as a [[television]] show.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Music also has an obvious use in [[propaganda]], in which the propagandist seeks to manipulate people's emotions and stir them typically to rage and hostility against certain groups.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Finally, music can strengthen in the listener a curiosity about, or even a desire for, an act of sexual or other [[sin]].&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://cranach.worldmagblog.com/cranach/archives/2006/08/draft_linking_s.html Linking Sexual Music and Teen Behavior] by Gene Edward Veith at the [http://www.worldmagblog.com World Magazine Blog]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=51496 Face the music, parents] at [http://www.worldnetdaily.com/ WorldNetDaily] 12 August 2006&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; Sadly, this use of music is probably as old as &amp;quot;the oldest profession.&amp;quot; Cultural critics observe, pointedly, that permissive cultures have permissive music, and non-permissive cultures avoid such music.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Yet for all this, music is still important in worship. If it were not, then it would not have received the favorable attention that the [[Bible]] clearly gives to it. As powerful a force for evil as it might be, music can be an equally powerful force to encourage the listener to worship, appreciate, and above all obey God and keep His laws--at least, as best as any human being is able.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Traditions and principles for liturgical music ==&lt;br /&gt;
[[Saint Paul]] specifically exhorts his readers to employ music, and specifically &amp;quot;psalms, hymns, and spiritual odes,&amp;quot; to bring them closer to God.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;{{Bible ref|book=Ephesians|chap=5|verses=19|version=KJV}}&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;{{Bible ref|book=Colossians|chap=3|verses=16|version=KJV}}&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; In this context, a ''psalm'' is not necessarily a chapter out of the Book of [[Psalms]]; it can be any song that primarily quotes any part of Scripture. ''Hymns'' are songs primarily of praise and magnification of [[God]]; they do not, however, directly quote Scripture in most of their lyrics, as &amp;quot;psalms&amp;quot; do. ''Spiritual odes'' are primarily personal testimonies, either of salvation or of one's own perception of God. ''Amazing Grace'', by John Newton, is a prime example. ''It Is Well With My Soul'', by Horatio Spafford, is one song that has features of a hymn ''and'' a spiritual ode.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The Rev. Alan B. Brown, MDiv, ThM, has studied liturgical music extensively. In his view&amp;lt;ref name=Brown/&amp;gt;, liturgical music ought to satisfy three prime tests:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
# Are the lyrics ''accurate'', either when they quote Scripture or reflect [[Christian]] principles?&lt;br /&gt;
# Can you properly ''associate'' the lyrics and/or the notes with Godly things, as opposed to worldly things?&lt;br /&gt;
# Are the lyrics and/or the notes ''appropriate'' for worship in general, and in the setting of a particular celebration?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The actual notes to the tunes that, say, King David's choir might have sung, or his royal orchestra might have produced, are lost to us today. But the titles of many of the Psalms contain specific instructions, originally to the music director at King David's court, as to the type of tune and the types of instruments required. Hymnists of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries often set the Psalms and other portions of Scripture to music, often with very good effect. The best-known example is the ''Doxology'' (literally, &amp;quot;study in glory&amp;quot;) that is a paraphrase of Psalm 100; the tune is called &amp;quot;Old Hundredth&amp;quot; and remains popular today.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Controversies surrounding music today ==&lt;br /&gt;
Music perhaps has always been controversial, but the controversies surrounding music today rage with particular vehemence. The question of what is, and what is not, music is relatively tame. Different composers have always experimented with different music conventions, and always will. (And perhaps they must.) Many such experiments fail, in that the works produced draw only small audiences, and ultimately no one will play them, because no one will pay to listen to them or to have them played for other people. However, whether or not the 'success' of a musical venture can be ascertained based on the size of the audience it draws is somewhat tenuous, as music subject to much critical acclaim can often be shunned by the wider public in favour of more heavily promoted music.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Rather, the most raging controversy concerns certain genres of popular music that have provoked adverse political comment precisely because of the emotions they incite and the themes they sound, both in lyrics and in notes. Parents of adolescent and pre-adolescent children object to music that explicitly (mainly through its lyrics) exhorts its listeners to sexual sin. Members of various political interest groups object to music that they believe provokes its listeners to show ''disrespect'' for members of those groups.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Some listeners and music critics attempt to defend music as &amp;quot;amoral,&amp;quot; that is, morally neutral. They maintain that music exists only for people to enjoy, not to make a political point. For some, indeed, music is an escape. To them, one who tries to infer a serious purpose in a given piece of music ought to abandon the attempt and simply enjoy it for what it is. This attitude recalls [[Mark Twain]]'s famous introduction to [[The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn]]:&amp;lt;blockquote&amp;gt;PERSONS attempting to find a motive in this narrative will be prosecuted; persons attempting to find a moral in it will be banished; persons attempting to find a plot in it will be shot.&amp;lt;br&amp;gt;&amp;lt;br&amp;gt;BY ORDER OF THE AUTHOR,&amp;lt;br&amp;gt;Per G.G., Chief of Ordnance.&amp;lt;/blockquote&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The reaction of so many interested parties to various types of popular music today would seem to militate against that stance. Indeed, history is replete with examples of various pieces of music from earlier eras inciting their listeners to violence; [[Maurice Ravel]]'s signature work ''Bolero'', for example, was known to incite riots&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.kalvos.org/bazzr086.html Essay 86: Bolero v. Gliere, Round 1] by David Gunn, at Kalvos &amp;amp; Damian's New Music Bazaar&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;, as was [[Igor Stravinsky]]'s work ''The Rite of Spring''.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.nottinghamphilharmonic.co.uk/notes/SRS.html The Rite of Spring] by the Nottingham Philharmonic Orchestra&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Riots have also broken out at many rock-and-roll concerts, and often the responding law-enforcement authorities have been at a loss to determine the ultimate causes of those riots. The ''proximate'' cause typically is a one-on-one fight in which other concert attendees joined in--but what put the original combatants into a fighting mood, or causes others to join a fight that was, strictly speaking, not theirs, is far more difficult to explain. Perhaps too many of the listeners are worshiping the performers as if they were [[pagan]] [[idol]]s--a problem that, some say, composers like [[Franz Liszt]] and [[Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart|Mozart]] had to contend with. Perhaps the causes have as much to do with the subculture of which rock-and-roll music is a part, as with the music itself. Then, too, no [[physician]] has ever investigated the chronic, or long-standing, effects of a steady aural diet of different genres of music--beyond expressing concern that many listeners are listening to their music too loud and damaging their hearing with the sheer physical stress of the loud sounds. The only signs that anyone can study, if thry are signs of anything at all, are the statistics concerning psychological stress affecting, and substance abuse by, performers of various types of music. (Riots do not routinely break out at classical performances--at least, not since the ''Rite of Spring'' riot mentioned above. This might simply be due to wild behavior not being normative on the part of those who routinely patronize such music.)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== References ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;references/&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Culture]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Sociology]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Music]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Paddyduffy</name></author>
	</entry>
	<entry>
		<id>https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Music&amp;diff=354051</id>
		<title>Music</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Music&amp;diff=354051"/>
		<updated>2007-12-18T12:26:33Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Paddyduffy: /* What is music? */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;[[Image:Musicalnotes.jpg|right]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Music]] (Middle English ''musik'', from Anglo-French ''musike'', from [[Latin]] ''musica'', from [[Greek]] μουσικη ''mousike'') is an [[art]] form consisting entirely of organized [[sound]] interspersed with periods of silence.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?sourceid=Mozilla-search&amp;amp;va=Music Music] defined in the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary.&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; It takes its name from three [[Greek mythology|Greek]] goddesses known as the ''[[Muses]]'', who specialized in stimulation of an artist's or poet's mind.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Music is the highest of all the arts, and the one best able to stir human emotion. Depending on what sort of work of music one composes, interprets, or hears, it can build a person up in spirit, or break it; make a person happy, or sad; inspire a person to greatness, or lead him into very challenging temptation. It is the art form to which the [[Bible]] gives its strongest endorsement, and to which the Bible pays the greatest attention. At the same time, it is arguably the most dangerous of all the arts, when misused.&amp;lt;ref name=Brown&amp;gt;Brown, Alan B.: telephone interview conducted on 1 March 2007 with user [[User:TerryH|TerryH]]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
== What is music? ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Strictly speaking, ''music'' means sound having any organization at all, while ''noise'' is purely random sound. But the roots of these two words suggest that ''music'' ought to mean that which makes one think and feel something new and significantly different, while ''noise'' (from the same root from which we get the verb ''I annoy'') is merely a distracting, disturbing, or often physically damaging sound. Some modern composers have attempted to stretch the definition of music by using noises in a manner that they insist is organized. Whether such a work product properly falls under the heading of &amp;quot;music&amp;quot; is debatable. However, what appears as music to one person may be interpreted as noise to another, and vice versa, as interpretation of sounds, whether organised or disorganised, dissonant or harmonious, may arouse different sorts of feelings in a listener.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Note that music is ''not'' limited to such sounds that a human being might produce by fashioning an instrument for the making of a simplified or otherwise organized sound and then &amp;quot;playing&amp;quot; said instrument. The chirping of birds and certain insects may properly be called music, especially if the sound produced is particularly pleasant to the listener. Furthermore, some of the most sophisticated music attempts to imitate the sounds made by birds, insects, and other animals.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The intriguing work of [[Oliver Sachs]] attempts to address the question, &amp;quot;What is it about music that so moves our spirit and mind that it remains long after our other memories fade?&amp;quot; [http://www.kidsnet.org/sfkc/sfkc20051230-1.html]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Basic music theory ==&lt;br /&gt;
: ''Main Article: [[Music theory]]''&lt;br /&gt;
Classically, music consists of ''tones'', ''melodies'', ''counterpoint'', and ''rhythm''. A ''tone'' is the purest form of sound, having a single [[frequency]]. However, pure tones in music are rare. Most tones present themselves to the human ear together with ''overtones'', which typically are small-[[integer]] multiples of the basic frequency (the ''fundamental tone'').&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Notes, intervals, and scales ===&lt;br /&gt;
Two tones played together form an ''interval''. The simplest of all intervals is the ''octave'', formed by two tones, one of whose frequencies is the exact double of the other. The full collection of tones that one can play between the two notes of an octave is called a ''scale.'' In Western music, most scales are ''semi-tonal'', with twelve tones between the octave notes. (The high end of the octave is considered a repetition of the low end, but at twice the frequency.) [[Oriental]] music commonly has ''quarter-tonal'' scales, with twenty-four separate tones within an octave. Quarter tones are often difficult to distinguish for a Western listener, and such music, as a result, tends to suggest the sinuous movement of a snake.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The [[Greece|Greeks]] recognized early that fundamental tones in music have a simple and strict [[mathematics|mathematical]] relationship. As mentioned, the octave consists of two notes, one at double the frequency of the other. At ''triple'' the frequency, one hears a low fundamental tone, and a higher tone that is past the octave but roughly midway toward the second octave. If one then divides the high-tone frequency by two, one creates the interval called the ''perfect fifth'' or ''dominant'' interval, one of the most common intervals used in Western music. One can test this relationship by striking a note on a [[piano]] while holding down another key that is one octave higher than the perfect fifth. The second note will sound in sympathy with the first--because it is resonating with the overtone from the first note.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Melody and counterpoint ===&lt;br /&gt;
''Melody'' is the series of notes that most closely captures the attention of the listener: the 'tune' one hums along with.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
''Counterpoint'' is a specific technique for creating secondary melodies that intertwine with and compliment the main melody. When two or more notes sound at the same time, it is called a ''chord,'' and the distance between the notes is the ''interval.''  In the western 12-note scale common usage, an interval is often  expressed in relative terms, using the eight notes that make up an octave and prefixing 'major' or 'minor' to account for the interstitial notes.  For instance, the interval between 'C' and 'E' is a ''3rd'' because 'E' is the 3rd note in the major scale of C.  One-half step below that is a ''minor 3rd,'' although this exact same note could also be called a ''major 2nd''.  &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Many of the feelings and emotions that music can evoke are a result of the tension between the ''harmonic'' sound of some intervals, and the ''dissonant'' sound of others.  During the development of western music, certain rules were established for proper melodic counterpoint, and these rules specified how intervals (chords) could change over time in the music.  For example, in the chants of Gregorian Monks, chords containing certain intervals, like 7ths, were required to 'resolve' to their harmonious natural key, while other intervals, like minor 5ths, were deemed ugly and even considered evil, and banned from use in liturgic music.  Johann Sebastian Bach (1685-1750) represents the pinnacle of this style of strict rule-based composition, as many of his keyboard compositions and all of his sacred work adhere to the rules of counterpoint.  From the height of the Baroque era (1700's) to the present, the history of western music has unfolded as each generation of composers has pushed the boundaries of these these rules right up to, and then in the 20th century, way beyond, all limits.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In modern popular music, the bass line is often seen as an example of counterpoint.  Another, more accurate example would be dueling guitar leads.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Rhythm ===&lt;br /&gt;
''Rhythm'' consists of all aspects of music that suggest ''forward movement.'' Most music contains a regularly repeating sequence of ''beats'', or strong elements, that typically lead with a ''down beat'' followed by any of a small number of slightly weaker beats. A down beat and its weaker beats form a ''measure.'' Usually, all measures in a piece of music have the same number of beats.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
A note in music is described not only by pitch, or frequency, but also by duration. Notes in Western music have names that typically describe how long they would sound in a typical measure. ''Whole notes'' are so called because normally they would sound for the full measure. ''Half notes'' would sound for half the measure, ''quarter notes'' for a fourth of the measure, and so on. A note may also carry a ''dot'' to the right of it, that indicates that the note is to sound for one and one-half times its usual duration.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Any one of these notes may carry a beat, and a measure may have any number of beats. Thus every piece of music commonly carries at least one ''time signature'' describing how many beats a measure has, and which type of note carries one beat. The most common time is &amp;quot;four-quarter time&amp;quot; (four beats per measure, with the beat given to the quarter note), which is therefore called &amp;quot;common time.&amp;quot; Other commonly used time signature include three-quarter, six-eighth, nine-eighth, or rarely, two-half (called ''Alla breve'' or &amp;quot;cut time&amp;quot;). Even rarer are the time signatures with prime numbers of beats (other than three-quarter), including five-quarter or even eleven-eighth.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
''Tempo'' (Italian for &amp;quot;time&amp;quot;) describes how frequently the beats occur. The typical tempo signature is a drawing of the note that has the beat, followed by the number of beats per minute.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Notes may be ''accented'' at any time. In fact, often the accent will fall on the weak beat and make the beats seem to sound out-of-sequence. The result is ''syncopated'' rhythm.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The genre of music called [[rock and roll]] features a unique rhythm convention: the ''backbeat.''&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2003/12/07/RockRules Normative Backbeat] at Tbray.org&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; This is a third beat, in four-quarter time, that is stressed even more strongly than the down beat. This produces a profound sense of restlessness in the listener.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Types of instruments ==&lt;br /&gt;
: ''Main Article: [[Musical instruments]]''&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== History ==&lt;br /&gt;
[[Image:Musica Cassell.jpg|right]]&lt;br /&gt;
The [[Bible]] suggests that music actually began in [[heaven]], and that the first musician was [[Satan|Lucifer]], then the chief of [[God]]'s messengers, or [[angels]].&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Human music goes back to [[antediluvian civilization]]. The Bible specifically credits [[Jubal]], son of [[Lamech the Murderer]] by his wife [[Adah]], with introducing music to mankind.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;{{Bible ref|book=Genesis|chap=5|verses=19-21|version=KJV}}&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The earliest ''post''-diluvian records of music have been found in [[Iraq]] and [[India]], and date at least from the time of [[Abraham]]. They probably were made shortly after the construction of the [[Tower of Babel]].&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Almost every culture and religious movement has its own particular form of music. Some forms are richer and more sophisticated than others. The [[Hebrew]] people, and especially the children of [[Jacob|Israel]], have some of the grandest of all musical traditions. Mentions of &amp;quot;singing to the Lord&amp;quot; abound in the Old Testament. The most specific testimony to the power of music over human emotions is surely contained in the story of King [[Saul]] and how he came to recruit the young [[David]] as his armorbearer and personal musician.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;{{Bible ref|book=I_Samuel|chap=16|verses=14-23|version=KJV}}&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
King [[David]], at the height of his reign, once had a ''four-thousand-voice choir'' to assist in the worship of [[God]]. The Book of [[Psalms]] is in fact a collection of lyrics for some of the first worship songs in Israelite tradition. (Most of these came from David, but at least one comes from [[Moses]].) The [[Song of Solomon]] is a grand ballad of love that most scholars regard as a type of the love of [[Jesus Christ]] for His elect.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The Greeks, when [[Alexander the Great]] accepted the surrender of [[Jerusalem]] in his wars of conquest, introduced their own brand of music to the region--which the Jews largely resisted. But music was highly prominent throughout the Greek world--and later in the [[Rome|Roman]] world following Rome's conquest of Greece. The Greeks' contributions to music theory influenced artists for centuries to come, and still have a strong influence today, especially on composers who prefer to adhere to the classical traditions of music.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The earliest Greek music was associated with Greek [[theater]]. Beginning with the fall of Rome, however, music became largely liturgical. The primary influence remained the [[Roman Catholic Church]] until the twin movements of the Renaissance and the Reformation, each of which introduced a countervailing tradition.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
From that time forward, most scholars divide music into &amp;quot;classical&amp;quot; music (composed primarily to achieve a high art) and &amp;quot;popular&amp;quot; music (composed for the masses and tending to achieve wide, but ephemeral, appeal).&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.thefreedictionary.com/popular%20music Popular music] defined at the Free Dictionary&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Classical music&amp;quot; tends to rely more on written notation, as a piece of classical music is generally held to transcend any particular interpretation of it.  In current practice, such music is performed in concerts where the audience is expected to remain respectfully silent and the performers dress formally; however, in the past such music was often performed at salons and other informal private gatherings.  In addition, the increasing importance of the written transmission of such music has reduced the role of improvisation, which was extremely important through the beginning of the &amp;quot;Romantic&amp;quot; era.  Classical music also displays great musical complexity through the use of varied rhythms, chord progressions, counterpoint, and other compositional techniques, while maintaining a deep emotional content.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Popular music&amp;quot; on the other hand, tends to be more accessible to the general public through the use of simpler forms and relatively simple compositional techniques.  Much popular music is the product of modern business enterprise, as opposed to folk music (created by ordinary people for their own enjoyment) or classical music (which was originally written for religious practice or for the entertainment of the nobility).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
These two genres; however, are not necessarily distinct, as composers such as [[Johann Sebastian Bach|Bach]] and [[Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart|Mozart]] would often incorporate themes from &amp;quot;popular music&amp;quot; of their time into their works.  Other classical composers like [[Maurice Ravel|Ravel]] and [[George Gershwin|Gershwin]] were well-known for their use of jazz idiom in works like the Concerto in F for Piano and Orchestra and [[Rhapsody in Blue]].  On the other hand, popular music has borrowed many themes from classical works (one notable example is &amp;quot;A Whiter Shade of Pale&amp;quot; by [[Procol Harum]]).  In addition, &amp;quot;popular music&amp;quot; is not necessarily simpler than classical, as forms like jazz and progressive rock make use of complex time signatures that do not often occur in classical works, and some popular musicians like [[Frank Zappa]] are considered serious composers in their own right.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
=== Different uses of classical and popular music ===&lt;br /&gt;
Classical music has typically found these uses:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
# As an aid to worship, by placing the listener into a proper frame of mind for worship or instill in the listener a proper appreciation of the grandeur and glory of [[God]] and of the listener's own place in relation to Him.&lt;br /&gt;
# For the entertainment of the nobility; or, in more recent times, by commission from a particular group of people (often an orchestra or a university).&lt;br /&gt;
# To rally troops, either during training, on the march, or in battle.&lt;br /&gt;
# To celebrate military victory or the reign of a king, usually the one presently on the throne.&lt;br /&gt;
# Occasionally as a supplement to various forms of [[theater]]. Originally (especially in the Greek era) this meant the open-air live theater of classical fame. Today such music might accompany a live stage performance or several scenes in a [[motion picture]].&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Popular music, on the other hand, is typically used:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
# For entertainment, and more particularly for financial remuneration.&lt;br /&gt;
# Very frequently as a supplement to modern [[theater]] in all its forms, including stage, [[motion picture|motion pictures]], and especially [[television]].&lt;br /&gt;
# As a powerful aid of [[propaganda]], and the closely related use in [[advertisement]].&lt;br /&gt;
# Rarely, to rally troops. One popular artist who achieved great distinction by winning acceptance of his music by military bands was [[Glenn Miller]].&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Both forms of music can be used as propaganda, as in some of the works of [[Dmitri Shostakovich]] (although this is debated; see the article on Shostakovich for a more complete discussion).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
All types of music are often used as an accompaniment to dancing. This was as true in the past as it is today, all over the world, whether in the discos of American nightclubs or the salsa bars of Latin America. Today, people may dance to Maddonna )the female recording artist), while a generation ago people were dancing to the works of Duke Ellington and Sammy Nestico. Before that, the waltzes of Strauss were popular, while in the Baroque era (1650-1750), the dance suite was a popular compositional form. Dancing to music, whether melodic or rhythmic in nature, often plays a ritualistic role in societies across the world.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== The power of music over human emotion ==&lt;br /&gt;
Music has a very powerful effect on the emotions of the listener. Music relies on [[sound]], and if &amp;quot;faith comes through hearing,&amp;quot; then so does emotion. Music can instantly bring joy or sorrow, ecstasy or despair, and far more quickly than can any other form of art. Many musical composers insist that their music merely expresses emotions. This does not do music justice. Music does more than express emotions; it induces them.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.musica.uci.edu/mrn/V3I1S96.html MuSICA Notes III(1), Spring 1996]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The amateur botanist Dorothy L. Retallack, in [[1973]], claimed to have found that music can have an effect on plants. &amp;quot;Positive&amp;quot; music (that produces joy or contentment) supposedly made plants flourish and even &amp;quot;reach&amp;quot; for, or grow toward, such music. Negative music (that produces frustration, restlessness, or especially anger and rage) supposedly caused plants to &amp;quot;recoil&amp;quot; (grow away) from the music, and prolonged or repeated exposure debilitates and eventually killed plants, or so she said.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;Retallack, Dorothy L. ''The Sound of Music and Plants''. Devorss and Company, June 1973, 96 pp., paperback. ISBN 0875161707&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.dovesong.com/positive_music/ About Positive and Negative Music] from the Dovesong Foundation&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
No botanist has ever reproduced Retallack's claimed results. But the effects on animals and humans are far better documented and much more profound than any effect on plants that Retallack ever claimed. That animals, and especially [[dog]]s and [[cat]]s, recoil in horror from the sound of a poorly trained voice, is proverbial (and in fact the animals might be reacting to a sound that is not merely grating but acutely and physically painful to their ears). The Dovesong Foundation has found evidence for musical preferences by cattle&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.dovesong.com/positive_music/archives/basement/Cows%20and%20Classical%20Music.asp Cows Prefer Classical Music]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; and cetaceans.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.dovesong.com/positive_music/archives/basement/Steinhart_Dolphins.asp Dolphins Don't Like Rock] (The article refers to the classic [[dolphin]] (family [[Cetacea]]), aka &amp;quot;porpoise,&amp;quot; not the fish of that name.)&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Music has also had a profound and well-documented effect in human history.  The history of warfare includes a rich history of martial music. More recently, music has now found a use in the healing of negative emotional states and even as an aid to the healing of physical disabilities.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.musictherapy.org/ The American Music Therapy Association]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Commercial enterprises always attempt, at great expense of time, money, and effort, to find and deploy forms of music that will enhance worker productivity or cause prospective customers to behave in a manner calculated to make them purchase their goods and/or services. The pop selections played in supermarkets are a prime example.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Music has always been an adjunct to [[theater]]. This is especially true of the performing arts called ''opera'' and ''ballet'', but applies also to the use of music as an adjunct to a theatrical production, whether on the stage, as a [[motion picture]], or as a [[television]] show.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Music also has an obvious use in [[propaganda]], in which the propagandist seeks to manipulate people's emotions and stir them typically to rage and hostility against certain groups.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Finally, music can strengthen in the listener a curiosity about, or even a desire for, an act of sexual or other [[sin]].&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://cranach.worldmagblog.com/cranach/archives/2006/08/draft_linking_s.html Linking Sexual Music and Teen Behavior] by Gene Edward Veith at the [http://www.worldmagblog.com World Magazine Blog]&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=51496 Face the music, parents] at [http://www.worldnetdaily.com/ WorldNetDaily] 12 August 2006&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; Sadly, this use of music is probably as old as &amp;quot;the oldest profession.&amp;quot; Cultural critics observe, pointedly, that permissive cultures have permissive music, and non-permissive cultures avoid such music.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Yet for all this, music is still important in worship. If it were not, then it would not have received the favorable attention that the [[Bible]] clearly gives to it. As powerful a force for evil as it might be, music can be an equally powerful force to encourage the listener to worship, appreciate, and above all obey God and keep His laws--at least, as best as any human being is able.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Traditions and principles for liturgical music ==&lt;br /&gt;
[[Saint Paul]] specifically exhorts his readers to employ music, and specifically &amp;quot;psalms, hymns, and spiritual odes,&amp;quot; to bring them closer to God.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;{{Bible ref|book=Ephesians|chap=5|verses=19|version=KJV}}&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; &amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;{{Bible ref|book=Colossians|chap=3|verses=16|version=KJV}}&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt; In this context, a ''psalm'' is not necessarily a chapter out of the Book of [[Psalms]]; it can be any song that primarily quotes any part of Scripture. ''Hymns'' are songs primarily of praise and magnification of [[God]]; they do not, however, directly quote Scripture in most of their lyrics, as &amp;quot;psalms&amp;quot; do. ''Spiritual odes'' are primarily personal testimonies, either of salvation or of one's own perception of God. ''Amazing Grace'', by John Newton, is a prime example. ''It Is Well With My Soul'', by Horatio Spafford, is one song that has features of a hymn ''and'' a spiritual ode.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The Rev. Alan B. Brown, MDiv, ThM, has studied liturgical music extensively. In his view&amp;lt;ref name=Brown/&amp;gt;, liturgical music ought to satisfy three prime tests:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
# Are the lyrics ''accurate'', either when they quote Scripture or reflect [[Christian]] principles?&lt;br /&gt;
# Can you properly ''associate'' the lyrics and/or the notes with Godly things, as opposed to worldly things?&lt;br /&gt;
# Are the lyrics and/or the notes ''appropriate'' for worship in general, and in the setting of a particular celebration?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The actual notes to the tunes that, say, King David's choir might have sung, or his royal orchestra might have produced, are lost to us today. But the titles of many of the Psalms contain specific instructions, originally to the music director at King David's court, as to the type of tune and the types of instruments required. Hymnists of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries often set the Psalms and other portions of Scripture to music, often with very good effect. The best-known example is the ''Doxology'' (literally, &amp;quot;study in glory&amp;quot;) that is a paraphrase of Psalm 100; the tune is called &amp;quot;Old Hundredth&amp;quot; and remains popular today.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Controversies surrounding music today ==&lt;br /&gt;
Music perhaps has always been controversial, but the controversies surrounding music today rage with particular vehemence. The question of what is, and what is not, music is relatively tame. Different composers have always experimented with different music conventions, and always will. (And perhaps they must.) Many such experiments fail, in that the works produced draw only small audiences, and ultimately no one will play them, because no one will pay to listen to them or to have them played for other people.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Rather, the most raging controversy concerns certain genres of popular music that have provoked adverse political comment precisely because of the emotions they incite and the themes they sound, both in lyrics and in notes. Parents of adolescent and pre-adolescent children object to music that explicitly (mainly through its lyrics) exhorts its listeners to sexual sin. Members of various political interest groups object to music that they believe provokes its listeners to show ''disrespect'' for members of those groups.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Some listeners and music critics attempt to defend music as &amp;quot;amoral,&amp;quot; that is, morally neutral. They maintain that music exists only for people to enjoy, not to make a political point. For some, indeed, music is an escape. To them, one who tries to infer a serious purpose in a given piece of music ought to abandon the attempt and simply enjoy it for what it is. This attitude recalls [[Mark Twain]]'s famous introduction to [[The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn]]:&amp;lt;blockquote&amp;gt;PERSONS attempting to find a motive in this narrative will be prosecuted; persons attempting to find a moral in it will be banished; persons attempting to find a plot in it will be shot.&amp;lt;br&amp;gt;&amp;lt;br&amp;gt;BY ORDER OF THE AUTHOR,&amp;lt;br&amp;gt;Per G.G., Chief of Ordnance.&amp;lt;/blockquote&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The reaction of so many interested parties to various types of popular music today would seem to militate against that stance. Indeed, history is replete with examples of various pieces of music from earlier eras inciting their listeners to violence; [[Maurice Ravel]]'s signature work ''Bolero'', for example, was known to incite riots&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.kalvos.org/bazzr086.html Essay 86: Bolero v. Gliere, Round 1] by David Gunn, at Kalvos &amp;amp; Damian's New Music Bazaar&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;, as was [[Igor Stravinsky]]'s work ''The Rite of Spring''.&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;[http://www.nottinghamphilharmonic.co.uk/notes/SRS.html The Rite of Spring] by the Nottingham Philharmonic Orchestra&amp;lt;/ref&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Riots have also broken out at many rock-and-roll concerts, and often the responding law-enforcement authorities have been at a loss to determine the ultimate causes of those riots. The ''proximate'' cause typically is a one-on-one fight in which other concert attendees joined in--but what put the original combatants into a fighting mood, or causes others to join a fight that was, strictly speaking, not theirs, is far more difficult to explain. Perhaps too many of the listeners are worshiping the performers as if they were [[pagan]] [[idol]]s--a problem that, some say, composers like [[Franz Liszt]] and [[Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart|Mozart]] had to contend with. Perhaps the causes have as much to do with the subculture of which rock-and-roll music is a part, as with the music itself. Then, too, no [[physician]] has ever investigated the chronic, or long-standing, effects of a steady aural diet of different genres of music--beyond expressing concern that many listeners are listening to their music too loud and damaging their hearing with the sheer physical stress of the loud sounds. The only signs that anyone can study, if thry are signs of anything at all, are the statistics concerning psychological stress affecting, and substance abuse by, performers of various types of music. (Riots do not routinely break out at classical performances--at least, not since the ''Rite of Spring'' riot mentioned above. This might simply be due to wild behavior not being normative on the part of those who routinely patronize such music.)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== References ==&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;lt;references/&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Culture]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Sociology]]&lt;br /&gt;
[[Category:Music]]&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Paddyduffy</name></author>
	</entry>
</feed>