Cornel Slenters response to the Council of Europe

Subject: Council of Europe report on The Dangers of Creationism in Education, doc 11297, 8 June 2007

Response transmitted on 29 June 2007

Dear Mr. Lengagne,

While the motives behind the above report are noble, the tone and direction spell disaster for generations of students in Europe and those responsible for implementation. My brief communication here outlines the growing dilemma to be faced and a suggested modified scenario with brighter prospects for our youngsters.

The growing dilemma

Surprisingly absent in your 15 page report is the notion of ‘self-organising systems’, the mathematical foundation for much of what we can observe around us, including the dynamics behind classical theories of evolution. Given then that classical theories of evolution are so much easier to defend with the aid of such a mathematical foundation, why was it omitted? Possibly: Because self-organising system theories predict an additional dimension to the classical theories of evolution, a dimension of higher energy (spiritual connection?).
 

Hence, interpretations of evolutionary principles on pure materialistic criteria are heading for a growing dilemma. Yet understandably, the scientific communities involved will wish to maintain their scientific independence unobstructed by religious dogma. The result is ‘science by policy’, which is no longer in the spirit of open enquiry and leads to ‘mental amputation’ of the student’s full potentials.

Moving now from theory to facts:

How many people can sense their souls?

After a brief introduction to a diverse audience of young adults, 50 to 80 percent of the audience can sense their souls. Are we denying these people the legitimacy of their own feelings? Moreover, these aspects should be encouraged because the soul is an important pathway to a person’s full creative potential. Are we denying these people the opportunity for the development of their full creative potential because of a ‘science by policy’?

There are thousands of excellent scientists around the world who have learned to tap into these potentials and are now in one of your boxes as ‘undesirable aliens’, as if the enemy is on the outside.

Recommended changes to curriculum

1. The polarization between religion and evolution can be diminished if we add a third ‘pole’ to the curriculum. This pole would provide an extended offering of courses on Emotional Intelligence. With the third ‘pole’ in place, questions about the soul can be raised in the context of Emotional Intelligence, thus allowing students to explore their own feelings, away from religious dogma and the rigours of science.

2. The treatment of evolution should be taught in the context of self-organizing systems principles, thereby gaining broader acceptance because these principles can be observed in every day life.

3.  Students should be taught simple meditation techniques, again in the context of Emotional Intelligence. Disconnected from religion and mystique they can be taught the benefits from learning to ‘stop their thoughts’. The benefits for students and society are immense: greater self-reliance, reduced drug consumption, greater creativity etc.

With my thanks for your consideration,

yours sincerely,

Cornel Slenters