What's the matter with Kansas?
Kansas wackos approved a new state science curriculum that weakens the teaching of evolution.
Yep.
Proponents of "intelligent" design pseudoscience object chiefly to holes in evolutionary theory. But just because evolution doesn't perfectly explain everything doesn't mean it's wrong, just that the theory is incomplete--but we shouldn't rush to plug the gaps with God. We don't know everything about the structure of matter, either, but nobody objects to teaching quantum mechanics.
It's like the Enlightenment never happened. This kind of thinking ("we don't know what caused it, so it must be God") will push us back into Ye Darke Ayges.
"This is neo-creationism, trying to avoid the legal morass of trying to teach creationism overtly and slip it in through the backdoor," said Eugenie Scott, executive director of the National Center for Science Education.
Yep.
Proponents of "intelligent" design pseudoscience object chiefly to holes in evolutionary theory. But just because evolution doesn't perfectly explain everything doesn't mean it's wrong, just that the theory is incomplete--but we shouldn't rush to plug the gaps with God. We don't know everything about the structure of matter, either, but nobody objects to teaching quantum mechanics.
It's like the Enlightenment never happened. This kind of thinking ("we don't know what caused it, so it must be God") will push us back into Ye Darke Ayges.
12 Comments:
Yet another supporting private schools and school voutures. If you want this kind of curricula, you can have it.
Also, it's pretty obvious that public schools average far, far on the side of secularism.
So far in fact, that I think it's bad for education. We probably shouldn't be talking about religion in biology class, but I also don't think biology, as a hard science, is the appropriate place to discuss "where we came from."
Questions like this are better approached in some kind of high level physics or cosmology course. The thing about these courses, is that a lot of times, you find yourself discussing near theology and a purely secularist school is not equipped to handle these ideas.
That and how can you study history and politics without discussing religion.
Government has reached a point where everything manifests in polar extremes. Let's stop letting government do so much.
By Ben Polidore, At 12:40 PM EDT
I believe many a great Christian scholar has reconciled science and Religion. The two are not mutually exclusive fields and to suggest a return to the "Dark Ages" because of this Intelligent Design push is, of course, utter nonsense. Hyperbole makes for a better blog post, so it's understandable.
I agree that God should not be taught in biology class. But God is the pink elephant in the secular classroom today. Not even evolution explains what "caused" evolution- it's an explanation of the process and it fails to answer the question of "Why?"
Probably the ID people have an agenda- to introduce God into the classroom. But tell me that evolutionists don't also have an agenda. Tell me they don't hold onto the theory as "proof" that God does not exist. Evolution is a rather unimportant theory, really. It will never be proven because it takes millions of years to observe. It's a conjecture as to how we came to be. But very little operational science is founded on this theory.
By Holmes, At 2:14 PM EDT
Many a scholar has reconciled science and religion. The Catholic Church accepts the validity of evolutionary theory. Apparently, American evangelical christians do not.
I don't have an evolution agenda any more than I have a gravity agenda or an electromagnetism agenda. This should be a question of basic science. You're right, it's not the place of the scientist to answer questions of philosophy. So in biology class, teach biology. Like Ben said, leave that for the theologians and cosmologists.
Evolution only takes a day or two to observe. In a petri dish, you can watch bacteria develop resistance to antibiotics. Evolution's a pretty good, if incompletely understood, explanation of how life changes and diversifies. We do know why species evolve. There's not much dispute about this in the scientific community. Hyperbole or no, intelligent design doesn't strike me as the product of intelligent analysis, it's just a blunt tool to get God back in the bio lab.
By Tim McGuire, At 6:04 PM EDT
The thing I don't like about "teaching" intelligent design in biology is that it's just not... teachable in that context.
"Now, Jonny, this is the heart. It developed because open circulatory systems weren't working out that well... oh, or maybe god made it."
That just makes religious people look like base children.
I think true, intelligent believers think that God made the entire universe and that we have a closed circulatory system is a natural development of the perfection of His design. Something far bigger and more transcendental than God writing your anatomy book.
We can't ever hope to completely understand the universe which is what many on both extremes are trying to do. The hard science we have is purely descriptive, and I think we should keep it that way.
...But let's not ignore those large questions where science and religion intersect or be afraid to step back and appreciate humanity for what it is.
By Ben Polidore, At 6:55 PM EDT
"Evolution only takes a day or two to observe. In a petri dish, you can watch bacteria develop resistance to antibiotics."
I should have been more specific; I was referring to MacroEvolution, which is really what we're talking about here. The petri dish example is one of MicroEvolution- a particular species adapting to its environs. It's the leap to a new species that is the real hot issue, and why the "Missing Link" is so sought after by researchers.
Interesting tid bit, apropos of nothing- Scopes, of the Scopes Monkey Trial, was actually using a book that taught social darwinism and the supremacy of the white race. He was not the enlightened oracle he was portrayed to be in subsequent books/movies. Even supporters of evolutionary theory can be backwards ignoramouses :)
But back to Ben's point- this shows how those trapped in the public school system must behave. It's winner take all for the curriculum without any other options.
By Holmes, At 12:43 AM EDT
Interesting point about Scopes. Never knew that.
I guess that's another example of the public school system's weakness.
By Ben Polidore, At 12:48 AM EDT
At least in "Ye Darke Ayges" one could get a piece of meat cooked the way it should be instead of "slightly crispier than the charcoal it was cooked over."
And so what if it was seasoned with a touch of the Black Death? Cows are so tastey.
By Marc Moseley, At 9:38 AM EDT
There's a crop of ideas about macroevolution. Gould's punctuated equilibrium is leading the field. An overview of evolution's a little outside the scope of the article, though.
By Tim McGuire, At 11:11 AM EDT
Evolution is very interesting. But it's kind of like finding a 10th planet- it doesn't really change where we are or help us in any concrete way.
By Holmes, At 1:55 PM EDT
I suppose that's true. It's simply description. I guess it provides some framework for ecology.
By Tim McGuire, At 2:19 PM EDT
BTW, did one of your contributors drop out or was that my imagination?
By Holmes, At 12:25 PM EDT
Yeah. He only contributed one article since the blog's inception. That byline doesn't come for free!
By Tim McGuire, At 12:34 PM EDT
Post a Comment
<< Home