So today I was substitute teaching and a student mentioned a wigi board. Another student then made an off hand comment about how he had used one and it angered the spirits (he sounded serious but I don't think he was). Nothing more really came of it, but it got me thinking about whether or not I could have said something criticizing belief in spirits and the efficacy of wigi boards. While it seems very obvious to me that wigi boards are complete nonsense, as an atheist I really could make the same argument about religion (I do see a difference between Christianity and belief in wigi boards).
I feel very strongly about the separation of church and state and would never criticize or promote any religious philosophy as a teacher, but what constitutes a religious philosophy? Is belief in spirits a religion (like wicca/paganism)? How do we define what religion really is?
FWIW as a teacher I would try to refrain from talking about anything even remotely related to religion/spirits etc. and it almost never comes up anyway. However I should also mention that if I was teaching biology, I would teach evolution and criticize young earth creationism if it came up (mostly I would say that it is a religious and not scientific belief).
In the murder trial of Joshua Tucker, his mother insisted that he had carried out the murders while possessed by the Devil who found him when he was using a Ouija board.
While Ouija believers feel the paranormal or supernatural is responsible for Ouija's action, it may be parsimoniously explained by unconscious movements of those controlling the pointer, a psychophysiological phenomenon known as the ideomotor effect.
Don't ya just love how science tries to own everything with an explanation and a label.
George Bernard Shaw once said "Science never solves a problem without creating ten more."
