On July 21st, the Texas State Board of Education met to debate the subject of how evolution vs. intelligent design is taught in public schools and higher education. Barbara Cargill, a conservative member, was named chairwoman by Rick Perry. She believes that the theory of evolution has flaws and weaknesses that should be taught in classrooms instead of presenting the information as fact. Many members on the board believe that "creationism and intelligent design are philosophy not science. If you must teach them, teach them as the philosophy they are, not science."
Though I have my beliefs and opinions, I acknowledge that evolution is not taught as a "theory" in the school system. The definition of the word has changed through the years and has become basically a term of fact, as many people accept it. Either way, I think every aspect of creationism and intelligent design should be discussed if the theory of evolution is described in detail. I know many students, myself included, who have felt belittled when a teacher, instructor, or professor puts down one theory or another. Instead of focusing on presenting the information as it should be, the education system has shifted its focus from an unbiased point of view. In fact, to have a session for the board of education to have to debate the issue itself proves something is wrong with the way the information is being presented. I believe the issue that is being focused on is really about how many conservatives or Christians have votes on the board. Instead, it should solely be about how both sides are represented equally when the information is being presented.
In the article Evolution Debate in Education, Chelsea discusses the dilemma in education regarding whether or not creationism should be taught alongside evolution and if evolution should be portrayed as absolute fact or a theory. I agree with Chelsea that intelligent design ought to be talked about in school but maybe not science class. It should be mentioned in social science classes such as history much like it currently is. As a scientific theory, intelligent design is not much more than a starting point that does not have to conflict with evolution.
ReplyDeleteCurrently, evolution is taught in schools as a fact. The meaning of the word evolution is a change over time. Science believes that over millions of years life has changed from almost nothing to what we see today. Evolution can be shown to occur, every human has on average 3 genetic mutations in their DNA. A mutation is the vehicle for evolution; a genetic mess up not inherited from either the mother or the father but accidentally acquired when genes are crossed, only sometimes do these mess ups move the resulted organism in a positive direction. Evolution becomes a theory when scientists expand these mutations to explain every change between single celled organisms to humans. Evolution is a theory in the same way the molecular orbital theory is. Both are taught as the best known explanations for something we know to occur. But no one complains about general chemistry classes teaching M.O. theory.
I say the way we teach things now, at least throughout my education, is pretty good. The only thing that should be considered is science teachers telling kids that while evolution may be likely, it is still only the best known explanation for our current situation. Though I am religious, Baptist, I don't believe that scientists are cheating us out of anything. If anyone is cheating us, it's the whack-jobs in religion who attempt to control people through religion (much like the catholic church has been known to do throughout time) asking people to asking people to disregard evidence and take their word that the Earth is 6000 years old, which is false. The Bible never says this.
I agree with you that science textbooks should present both the theory of evolution and the theory of intelligent design in order to provide academic equality. Promoting the idea that unbiased viewpoints should be taught in school in all areas except science creates a double standard. Science should be included too. You're right that this is not a matter of spiritual beliefs -- after-all, renown British atheist Antony Flew studied both theories and became a proponent of intelligent design (after-which, he became a theist). Instead, it's a matter of equality.
ReplyDeleteTherefore, scientific proof is normally made through the scientific method which includes hypothesis, observation, and repeated experimentation. But scientists can't prove the world came about through evolution because we obviously can't experiment and create the world again. Evolution should be treated as a theory as it cannot be proven and is still contested in scientific circles.
Knowledge gives people the power to make educated choices about truth. People shouldn't believe something is true simply because they were blindly ignorant of any alternatives. Truth should be able to stand up on its own merit. Educating students about both theories allows them to understand the pros and cons of both sides rather than just the pros of one side. This provides a much more balanced, unbiased education.
I have to say I dislike the idea of intelligent design being taught as an equal to evolution. The main problem I have with the teaching of intelligent design is design seems to be the view point of a small group. Evolution is a more broad, across many people, type of founding for earth. Evolution has a mound of evidence that can be found in the natural tangible world. Another issue I have is why does this one belief get to be taught and not the others. If we teach design why wouldn't we teach the Native American stories, or Hindu, or even the old Greek gods as possible starts of the world. All these ideas have no attachment in physical ways to the physical world. Evolution is the only that has a clear line from the idea to real world.
ReplyDelete