# Is An Undersatnding Of Evolution Essential To An Understanding Of Biology? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 21, 2005, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-an-undersatnding-of-evolution-essential-to-an-understanding-of-biology/322757 "2005-09-21T19:15:52Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 14
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2005, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-an-undersatnding-of-evolution-essential-to-an-understanding-of-biology/322757/261 "2005-09-25T16:29:41Z")
> [@Contrapuntal](#): > > You did not say that the mechanism of evolution was reproduction. You said that reproduction was evolution. Hardly the same thing at all. Do you truly not see the distinction? The mechanism is not the result. Every change that occurs is not evolution; only the changes that are passed on to entire populations have evolutionary significance. > > Surely no more than you? Reproduction is not evolution. Evolution has not occurred until there has been a change in the properties of a population of organisms. > > You used the phrase “tiny unit.” If a grain of sand is a sand dune you have made your point. Would you like it better if I said that evolution is reproduction? ---
**Author:** ![CandidGamera](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/candidgamera/32/2878_2.png) [@CandidGamera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CandidGamera)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2005, 1:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-an-undersatnding-of-evolution-essential-to-an-understanding-of-biology/322757/262 "2005-09-26T01:30:21Z")
> [@Left Hand of Dorkness](#): > > An appeal to authority is only a fallacy when the authority isn’t an authority on the subject at hand. I’ve made a broad, interconnected appeal to authorities on this subject. Your “I’m an intellectual maverick!” act won’t cut it, either. You’re just mad because I said I didn’t care when you made your appeal to emotion, aren’t you? 😉 I’m only interested in reason, not decisions-by-committee. A couple of people have provided cites as to the absence of evolution as a specific test criteria in several places, so I don’t see a need to expand on that. ---
**Author:** ![CandidGamera](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/candidgamera/32/2878_2.png) [@CandidGamera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CandidGamera)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2005, 1:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-an-undersatnding-of-evolution-essential-to-an-understanding-of-biology/322757/263 "2005-09-26T01:34:40Z")
> [@Der Trihs](#): > > Second, let’s be realistic. The choice is not to teach evolution or not; it’s between teaching evolution or creationism. The option of leaving the subject alone does not exist; the creationists will see to that. Since the choice is between science and lies, I choose science. So teach it. Never said you shouldn’t. I just assert it’s a second-tier topic, since to teach it and have it be understood, you have to cover the real basics first. ---
**Author:** ![tnetennba](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7993a0/32.png) [@tnetennba](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tnetennba)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2005, 1:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-an-undersatnding-of-evolution-essential-to-an-understanding-of-biology/322757/264 "2005-09-26T01:40:51Z")
> [@CandidGamera](#): > > you have to cover the real basics first. Evolution is the “real” basics. ---
**Author:** ![CandidGamera](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/candidgamera/32/2878_2.png) [@CandidGamera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CandidGamera)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2005, 1:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-an-undersatnding-of-evolution-essential-to-an-understanding-of-biology/322757/265 "2005-09-26T01:51:05Z")
> [@cricetus](#): > > Evolution is the “real” basics. You assert that you can understand evolution before reproduction, heredity, and chromosomes? ---
**Author:** ![tnetennba](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7993a0/32.png) [@tnetennba](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tnetennba)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2005, 2:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-an-undersatnding-of-evolution-essential-to-an-understanding-of-biology/322757/266 "2005-09-26T02:50:47Z")
> [@CandidGamera](#): > > You assert that you can understand evolution before reproduction, heredity, and chromosomes? Creative reading. Who said there can only be one basic? ---
**Author:** ![Contrapuntal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e274bd/32.png) [@Contrapuntal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contrapuntal)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2005, 1:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-an-undersatnding-of-evolution-essential-to-an-understanding-of-biology/322757/267 "2005-09-26T13:41:29Z")
> [@Erinaceus europaeus](#): > > Isn’t it just as significant that certain changes are **not** passed on? No. ---
**Author:** ![CandidGamera](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/candidgamera/32/2878_2.png) [@CandidGamera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CandidGamera)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2005, 1:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-an-undersatnding-of-evolution-essential-to-an-understanding-of-biology/322757/268 "2005-09-26T13:41:30Z")
> [@cricetus](#): > > Creative reading. Who said there can only be one basic? Oh, I admit there can be different thresholds for different folks as to what ‘basic’ is - it’s just my contention that logically: 1. the processes of an individual organism are the things most likely to be encountered by students 2. learning about those processes is more likely to be useful 3. the processes of an individual organism, tied together, make a nice, cohesive whole for the purposes of education. So while one could argue that teaching students the definition of life gives them a “basic” understanding of biology - the processes of the individual organism is the logical basic unit. ---
**Author:** ![tnetennba](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7993a0/32.png) [@tnetennba](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tnetennba)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2005, 2:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-an-undersatnding-of-evolution-essential-to-an-understanding-of-biology/322757/269 "2005-09-26T14:12:06Z")
> [@CandidGamera](#): > > So while one could argue that teaching students the definition of life gives them a “basic” understanding of biology - the processes of the individual organism is the logical basic unit. I think that “big picture” is more the way to teach biology, both for comprehension and student motivation. They could get students enthralled by the most amazing thing in the universe, which is the genesis and development of life – instead they disect flobber worms and worry pedantically about the details of photosynthesis and cell mitosis. As with so many subjects in school, it seems like their covert purpose is to destroy interest in the material. ---
**Author:** ![CandidGamera](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/candidgamera/32/2878_2.png) [@CandidGamera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CandidGamera)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2005, 2:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-an-undersatnding-of-evolution-essential-to-an-understanding-of-biology/322757/270 "2005-09-26T14:54:07Z")
> [@cricetus](#): > > I think that “big picture” is more the way to teach biology, both for comprehension and student motivation. They could get students enthralled by the most amazing thing in the universe, which is the genesis and development of life – instead they disect flobber worms and worry pedantically about the details of photosynthesis and cell mitosis. As with so many subjects in school, it seems like their covert purpose is to destroy interest in the material. Well, let’s not stray too far into a debate on educational methodology. I was just illustrating my idea of ‘basic understanding of biology’. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2005, 3:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-an-undersatnding-of-evolution-essential-to-an-understanding-of-biology/322757/271 "2005-09-26T15:01:28Z")
> [@CandidGamera](#): > > You’re just mad because I said I didn’t care when you made your appeal to emotion, aren’t you? 😉 Gosh, you really have no concept what constitutes a logical fallacy, do you? First, you incorrectly suggest that my appeal to authority is irrelevant; second, you imply that an example of the use of evolution in a classroom is irrelevant. > [@](#): > > I’m only interested in reason, not decisions-by-committee. I believe half of that. You’ve shown a poor understanding of reason in this thread, and you’ve shown a disregard for the conclusions of people with far more training in the two necessary fields than you have. > [@](#): > > A couple of people have provided cites as to the absence of evolution as a specific test criteria in several places, so I don’t see a need to expand on that. Absence of evidence does not equal… The fact that there are some places that do not currently test on evolution is not the subject of this thread. The subject is whether it’s essential to an understanding of biology. Pretty much every scientific and pedagogical body that has discussed this specific issue is in agreement that it’s necessary. You’ve offered no real arguments to the contrary, hoping instead that listing the names of logical fallacies will constitute a rebuttal. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![Contrapuntal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e274bd/32.png) [@Contrapuntal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contrapuntal)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2005, 3:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-an-undersatnding-of-evolution-essential-to-an-understanding-of-biology/322757/272 "2005-09-26T15:56:18Z")
[Hijack] **Lefty** , I got the Pinker. Be prepared for me to crush you with the mighty force of my knowledge-fu! 🙂 [/Hijack]] ---
**Author:** ![tnetennba](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7993a0/32.png) [@tnetennba](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tnetennba)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2005, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-an-undersatnding-of-evolution-essential-to-an-understanding-of-biology/322757/273 "2005-09-26T16:54:39Z")
Candid - My point is that “basic” is subjective, but to the extent that you try to make it empirical, evolution comes quickly to play. “Origins” and “Context” are usually considered basics. “Specifics” and “Details” are not. Interestingly enough, I’ve had reason through work to discuss the core curriculum of college biology courses. The science professor feels what is most missing from incoming college freshmen’s education is appreciation for the synthesis of different biological concepts and the different levels of biology from cells to ecosystems. Evolution IS (theoretically and factually) the synthesis he means. Evolution is the foundation for understanding biology. ---
**Author:** ![CandidGamera](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/candidgamera/32/2878_2.png) [@CandidGamera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CandidGamera)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2005, 5:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-an-undersatnding-of-evolution-essential-to-an-understanding-of-biology/322757/274 "2005-09-26T17:39:18Z")
> [@cricetus](#): > > Candid - My point is that “basic” is subjective, but to the extent that you try to make it empirical, evolution comes quickly to play. “Origins” and “Context” are usually considered basics. “Specifics” and “Details” are not. > > Interestingly enough, I’ve had reason through work to discuss the core curriculum of college biology courses. The science professor feels what is most missing from incoming college freshmen’s education is appreciation for the synthesis of different biological concepts and the different levels of biology from cells to ecosystems. Evolution IS (theoretically and factually) the synthesis he means. > > Evolution is the foundation for understanding biology. So many people seem to believe that passionately, but can’t seem to offer any objective evidence of it. ---
**Author:** ![CandidGamera](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/candidgamera/32/2878_2.png) [@CandidGamera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CandidGamera)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2005, 5:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-an-undersatnding-of-evolution-essential-to-an-understanding-of-biology/322757/275 "2005-09-26T17:44:29Z")
> [@Left Hand of Dorkness](#): > > Gosh, you really have no concept what constitutes a logical fallacy, do you? First, you incorrectly suggest that my appeal to authority is irrelevant; second, you imply that an example of the use of evolution in a classroom is irrelevant. I never said appeal to authority was a fallacy in this context. Appeal to authority just doesn’t convince me of anything, unless it’s used in a strictly factual context. As for the appeal to emotion, what other purpose does this paragraph serve? > [@LHoD](#): > > Of course many people are saying that I should be denied the right to use that connection. Not in this thread, but it underlies this thread. After all, if we conclude (as a society) that an understanding of evolution is not necessary to understanding biology, then it becomes very difficult to advance an argument in favor of such lessons, in the face of people who claim that such lessons violate their religious freedom. Won’t SOMEbody think of the CHILdren? Perhaps you meant it differently, but when you speak of the struggle to argue in favor of evolution in the classroom, I just get mental pictures and sounds of a chorus of violins… ---
**Author:** ![tnetennba](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7993a0/32.png) [@tnetennba](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tnetennba)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2005, 5:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-an-undersatnding-of-evolution-essential-to-an-understanding-of-biology/322757/276 "2005-09-26T17:51:57Z")
> [@CandidGamera](#): > > So many people seem to believe that passionately, but can’t seem to offer any objective evidence of it. What would constitute “objective evidence” for a subjective idea? Topics are artificial, their epistemological framework is artificial. There’s no way to turn a topic on its back and reveal its “essence” like it’s the sex of a puppy. On the other hand, any intellectually honest person would grant that the “essence” of a topic is its origins and destiny, not the mechanics of this or that element. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2005, 6:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-an-undersatnding-of-evolution-essential-to-an-understanding-of-biology/322757/277 "2005-09-26T18:27:37Z")
> [@CandidGamera](#): > > Won’t SOMEbody think of the CHILdren? For pity’s sake. When we’re discussing the education of children, it is appropriate to be thinking about the children. It is hard to think of a more relevant example when discussing the appropriateness of aspects of pre-college education than an example of education happening in a pre-college environment. Once again, you demonstrate that you don’t understand the bad arguments that you’re listing the names of. “Won’t someone think of the children” is a crappy argument to bring up when discussing whether adults should be able to drink high-octane beers, or watch racy movies, or gamble; it’s usually a silly argument to bring up in discussions of fishery management, tax reform, or new weapons systems. But if you’re trying to discuss childhood education without thinking of children–I guess that explains the dificulties you’re having in this conversation. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![CandidGamera](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/candidgamera/32/2878_2.png) [@CandidGamera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CandidGamera)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2005, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-an-undersatnding-of-evolution-essential-to-an-understanding-of-biology/322757/278 "2005-09-26T18:57:39Z")
> [@Left Hand of Dorkness](#): > > But if you’re trying to discuss childhood education without thinking of children–I guess that explains the dificulties you’re having in this conversation. You’re way too wrapped up in this. The object of my ridicule is the melodrama being projected on the noble quest to defend Evolution from the theistic hordes knocking on the door. ---
**Author:** ![tnetennba](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7993a0/32.png) [@tnetennba](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tnetennba)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2005, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-an-undersatnding-of-evolution-essential-to-an-understanding-of-biology/322757/279 "2005-09-26T18:59:17Z")
> [@CandidGamera](#): > > You’re way too wrapped up in this. The object of my ridicule is the melodrama being projected on the noble quest to defend Evolution from the theistic hordes knocking on the door. Get those strawmen, Candid. Go get 'em. ---
**Author:** ![CandidGamera](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/candidgamera/32/2878_2.png) [@CandidGamera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CandidGamera)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2005, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-an-undersatnding-of-evolution-essential-to-an-understanding-of-biology/322757/280 "2005-09-26T19:00:11Z")
> [@cricetus](#): > > What would constitute “objective evidence” for a subjective idea? Topics are artificial, their epistemological framework is artificial. There’s no way to turn a topic on its back and reveal its “essence” like it’s the sex of a puppy. > > On the other hand, any intellectually honest person would grant that the “essence” of a topic is its origins and destiny, not the mechanics of this or that element. Hardly. The essence of a science - from an educational perspective - is those ground-level details and the practical ramifications. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-an-undersatnding-of-evolution-essential-to-an-understanding-of-biology/322757.md?page=13) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-an-undersatnding-of-evolution-essential-to-an-understanding-of-biology/322757.md?page=15)