I wasn't tweaking the noses of Deity believers, as you put it, I was expressing my opinion that any teaching about Religions, not a specific religion, in schools should teach about all religions and include information that there are people who do not believe in Deities. As pointed out Religious Studies is a mandatory subject in the UK, and must cover all religions even those that are run by religious bodies.

Like the one very close to where I live, Stonyhurst College, a Jesuit run Roman Catholic school, which includes in it's alumnae some people who did quite a bit in early US history, like sign the U.S. Declaration of Independence, and help draft the US Constitution.

@Bobby, just so people know, I am a "right wing atheist"

Just to keep you up to date on religious education in UK schools, Top judge leads calls to scrap mandatory daily Christian worship in UK schools

Just to keep you up to date on religious education in UK schools, Top judge leads calls to scrap mandatory daily Christian worship in UK schools

Totally agree, RE should'nt be taught in schools. It should be down to the parents & churches.

Just to keep you up to date on religious education in UK schools, Top judge leads calls to scrap mandatory daily Christian worship in UK schools

Interesting.

We, in the USA, stopped this practice in our Public Schools (Primary, Intermediate, High School) decades ago.

It appears Britain is finally accepting the Civilized Position. Adopted by The USA decades ago.

There is still hope for The UK.

:) :) :)

Bulter-Sloss doesn't seem to go quite that far, and tbh, I'm not completely sure a neutral and academic study of various belief systems and moral/ethical codes should be excluded from a secondary/high school curriculum.

@CLYDE, please note "public school" has a different meaning in a UK context than it has in a US context (in the UK it does not mean "publicly funded").

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

Just to keep you up to date on religious education in UK schools, Top judge leads calls to scrap mandatory daily Christian worship in UK schools

Totally agree, RE should'nt be taught in schools. It should be down to the parents & churches.

I disagree.
Religious education should be mandatory.
In the 60's we changed the education system not to be about Christian beliefs and all religions should be tought but not worshipped.

Muslims for instance are very unfamilary to the Quran.
The world would be a far better place to live in if they care to read it.

Allahu Akbar:)

Just to keep you up to date on religious education in UK schools, Top judge leads calls to scrap mandatory daily Christian worship in UK schools

Totally agree, RE should'nt be taught in schools. It should be down to the parents & churches.

I disagree.
Religious education should be mandatory.
In the 60's we changed the education system not to be about Christian beliefs and all religions should be tought but not worshipped.

Muslims for instance are very unfamilary to the Quran.
The world would be a far better place to live in if they care to read it.

Allahu Akbar:)

I agree...and Christians might have a better idea about what is actually in the bible. Plus you wouldn't get those anti-muslim morons attacking Sikhs or even not understanding that all muslims are not like Isis.

---

Reality Internet Personality

All Religions should be taught what is really in their Holy Book(s).

But it's all down to proper interpretation, isn't it?

Bit like the 2nd really.

All Religions should be taught what is really in their Holy Book(s).

But it's all down to proper interpretation, isn't it?

Bit like the 2nd really.

Correct.

Speaking of the 'Old Testament', and its Ancient Hebrew Words/Phrases, and Ancient Hebrew Culture.

Those with expertise in this matter. Have told me that some of the translations, by necessity, are just 'Educated Guesses'.

As all three of the religious groups, Jews, Christians and Muslims, all initially follow the same teachings. And get their idea that there is only one god from the prophet Abraham/Ibrahim.

All three religions regard themselves as "People of the Book", unfortunately they don't say which Book, and there are some teaching that refer to two or more "Books"

And when we consider the different interpretations of the oldest bibles known, all of which were probably written 100's of years after the events, put on by different faiths of the Christians. Is it any wonder that the three faiths have drifted so far apart.

Just to keep you up to date on religious education in UK schools, Top judge leads calls to scrap mandatory daily Christian worship in UK schools

Totally agree, RE should'nt be taught in schools. It should be down to the parents & churches.

I disagree.
Religious education should be mandatory.
In the 60's we changed the education system not to be about Christian beliefs and all religions should be tought but not worshipped.

Muslims for instance are very unfamilary to the Quran.
The world would be a far better place to live in if they care to read it.

Allahu Akbar:)

I agree...and Christians might have a better idea about what is actually in the bible. Plus you wouldn't get those anti-muslim morons attacking Sikhs or even not understanding that all muslims are not like Isis.

I wonder how many Christians there are that actually have read the Bible.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zEnWw_lH4tQ
Or the Quran.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sSh5yZdEZ24
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZDhfC44WN0

Oops another failure...

Biggest Academy failing pupils

... while delivering in London last year saw something I never thought I'd ever see..

...long standing school & hospital buildings transformed into "luxury apartments"...


... it seems that academdies don't seem to be working well, those schools did though :-(

Can it work or is it another soundbite?

Flexible working

Sigh.



The person who shared this said 10 and after I wrote out the solution, following the order of operations (yielding 20) insisted it was 10.

---

Capitalize on this good fortune, one word can bring you round ... changes.

Well. Once I bought a burger at Burger King that cost 32 Kronor and gave 100 Kronor to the one who sold it.
She got very confused and after a while she had to ask a colleague how much the change was!

Sigh...

Sigh.



The person who shared this said 10 and after I wrote out the solution, following the order of operations (yielding 20) insisted it was 10.

Person (10 + 10) * 0 + 10
You 10 + (10 * 0) + 10

Me, the computer geek, is your problem in infix or RPN?

---

Sigh.



The person who shared this said 10 and after I wrote out the solution, following the order of operations (yielding 20) insisted it was 10.

Person (10 + 10) * 0 + 10
You 10 + (10 * 0) + 10

Me, the computer geek, is your problem in infix or RPN?

if the precedence of operators is in question, then wouldn't it be:

(10 + 10) * (0 + 10) = 200
?

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

if the precedence of operators is in question, then wouldn't it be:
(10 + 10) * (0 + 10) = 200
?

No:)
You use parenthesis to change the precedence of operators as you just did.
200 is the correct answer in your case.
But the question given is without any parenthesis and gives 10 + 0 + 10 = 20.

if the precedence of operators is in question, then wouldn't it be:
(10 + 10) * (0 + 10) = 200
?

No:)
You use parenthesis to change the precedence of operators as you just did.
200 is the correct answer in your case.
But the question given is without any parenthesis and gives 10 + 0 + 10 = 20.

NO. The precedence has not been specified. Computer Geeks know that there is more than one system of precedence and know that the system must be specified or the problem can't be parsed.

in a western math class 20 is the answer, but that incurs an assumption

---

if the precedence of operators is in question, then wouldn't it be:
(10 + 10) * (0 + 10) = 200
?

No:)
You use parenthesis to change the precedence of operators as you just did.
200 is the correct answer in your case.
But the question given is without any parenthesis and gives 10 + 0 + 10 = 20.

NO. The precedence has not been specified. Computer Geeks know that there is more than one system of precedence and know that the system must be specified or the problem can't be parsed.

in a western math class 20 is the answer, but that incurs an assumption

When I use MAPLE, a computer algebra system that will do arithmetic, algebra, calculus and more, it knows the order of operations. So do TI-83/84 graphing calculators. Though it's been a while, I do not recall ever being told when I learned to program that the language being used "was unaware" of the usual order.

Bobby, Janne is correct.

---

Capitalize on this good fortune, one word can bring you round ... changes.

if the precedence of operators is in question, then wouldn't it be:
(10 + 10) * (0 + 10) = 200
?

No:)
You use parenthesis to change the precedence of operators as you just did.
200 is the correct answer in your case.
But the question given is without any parenthesis and gives 10 + 0 + 10 = 20.

NO. The precedence has not been specified. Computer Geeks know that there is more than one system of precedence and know that the system must be specified or the problem can't be parsed.

in a western math class 20 is the answer, but that incurs an assumption

When I use MAPLE, a computer algebra system that will do arithmetic, algebra, calculus and more, it knows the order of operations. So do TI-83/84 graphing calculators. Though it's been a while, I do not recall ever being told when I learned to program that the language being used "was unaware" of the usual order.

Bobby, Janne is correct.

So many people have forgotten the first HP calculators ...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_Polish_notation

Yes, there is another way. And in RPN there is no operator precedence to worry about, just order.

Sarge, the language is the formal specification of the "order". It is the job of the parser to take the human input and break it apart into an internal representation [frequently 3-tuples] which can then be translated into machine instructions. If you care http://www.amazon.com/Compiler-Construction-Principles-Kenneth-Louden/dp/0534939724

---

HP calculators?
At highschool I used this.

The parser was me hopefully knowing where the parenthesis should be in a more complex calculation.
Actually there are rules for that and used long before the computer age.

It is the job of the parser to take the human input and break it apart into an internal representation

Yes, but it's up to the human input to give algoritms that the parser could understand. Parenthesis gives instructions to the parser how to handle precedences.

Whatever. I think it's a big problem when simple math cannot be taught in school anymore and students are completely depended on computers.