Double Helixes and Double Crosses (was: Favorite NON-fiction)

Wed Jan 29 03:22:42 PST 2003

"Chris Olson - SunPS" wrote...
> Ok.  I can understand where you're coming from, and I'll admit that
> many people would agree with you.  I just don't think that way.  I
> think that explaining to kids that there is more beyond what they're
> being taught now might give them more reason to *want* to learn more.
> Being told "this is the way it is" and then later being told "oh, well,
> that isn't *completely* the way it is" doesn't help.  I'm reminded of
> being taught english in school.  Yes, it's important to start with the
> basics: This is how to draw a "T", this is how to spell "Cat"; and then
> move on to bigger and better.  But it's not right to tell kids "'I' before
> 'E', except after 'C'" when there are SO many examples of this not being
> the case.  It should be explained that, most of the time, this is true,
> but sometimes, it's not.  And it would even be nice to tell them why
> this is the case.  "Well, Suzie, this is because our language comes from
> so many different cultures and other languages, just like our great
> here, that not every rule of usage applies."

I certainly remember being taught the I before E except after C but also
with it went the comment that "the exception proved the rule". Similar
explanations to the rule that *every word must have a vowel*.

Even to a small extent in Physics and Chemistry classes was that there were
Laws and Rules but for many there was always an exception (such as Newton's
Laws changing when you approach the speed of light).

Then again even for things people have believed to be a constant (such as
Light) as recently as last year a paper was published saying that Light may
not necessarily travel at a constant speed, which opens another whole can of

It's easier to ask forgiveness than to get permission. - W. Slovotsky
Costumier & Reprobate