heh, even further:
Evolution is not a theory. Evolution is a fact.
Darwin’s theory of evolution is just a theory. Believe whatever you want about how evolution works. But you can’t deny the observation of evolution any more than you can deny the observation of gravity.
The Texas Freedom Network has some talking points about Evolution & Science Education in Texas. Including:
Right now, our Board of Education is “looking at” social studies; the panel of “experts” includes Peter Marshall & David Barton.
(Note to self: Re-up with the TFN.)
I’m going to chime in from the other direction, as a mythologist. Half of the problem is that neither scientists nor fundamentalists seem to understand what myth is [using “myth” in its academic sense of “sacred narrative”] or how it works. The story of creation is neither incompatible with nor a substitute for evolution. Myths run on parallel tracks to science: they explain the same things in different ways for different reasons. Even belief is different: myths are true, but it’s supposed to be a metaphysical truth, not a literal one. When you start to treat the narratives in Genesis as if they were history, you’re already starting off on the wrong foot. I think if we had a little comparative religion in schools, we’d get some of the stupid out of the science classrooms, but of course that will never happen. And I’m insulted that you left out the California schools in the race to the stupid. Sure, we were once #1, but we’re sliding really, really fast.
And yet the curriculum in CA includes some of the best education about evolution in the nation. It’s taught at every level of elementary and middle school (except maybe one or two where the emphasis is on earth science).
As an atheist, I have no problem with (Christian) creationism being taught as a myth, as long as other creationism theories are also taught as myths in the same class. I DON’T want creationism myths taught in science classes. I also think that a little comparative religion education in public schools would be a GOOD thing.
<slightly off-topic opinion/commentary>
Respectfully, IMHO, this is the sort of po-mo “fashionably relativist” (Dawkins’ term) ideology that allows utter hogwash to assume the esteemed mantle of Truth, when in fact it possesses no actual truth. This type of thought is ultimately counterproductive, because it allows pretty much anyone to come forward and assert various kinds of “truths”, invariably contributing to the factually baseless perception of a “controversy” in areas such as science.
Yeah, I know that an academic argument can be made to the effect that there are different kinds of “truths” (and indeed, I recognise and acknowledge, perhaps ironically, that this is a truism in itself), but I really think that calling a creation myth any kind of “truth” is a reeeeeal stretch. It might just have partially been this academic relativism that has allowed creationism/ID to have grown in influence and respect!
</opinion/commentary>
Carry on.
^ Win.
This is HUGELY important. Darwin himself sketched this position. If scientists, science teachers, and science advocates were to begin the discussion this way, it would likely preempt a whole helluva lotta emotional opposition.
I’m a (liberal) Christian. I’m also a fierce advocate of science. And it’s precisely the kind of facts that Dio describes here, that allows the co-existence of these two belief systems, within me, with no cognitive dissonance.
(Of course, it doesn’t help matters that Stephen Hawking goes around talking about “cosmic evolution”, but that’s just an unfortunately poorly chosen metaphor on his part. :smack: )
Or ask them if men and women have the same number of ribs?
No, this is neither post-modernism nor an attempt to elevate mythic truth to the same plane as reality. Myths are held to be true by those who tell them. Those who tell them (barring some fundamentalists) are equally capable of distinguishing the improbable and surreal moments of myth from everyday reality. Ergo, true, but a different kind of true. If you like, you can say (with equal validity) that no myths are true, though that’s a bit insulting to the believers. They don’t fit well into the true / false dichotomy. The important thing is that no matter what you think about myth, it shouldn’t color what you think about science, any more than what you think about literature colors how you think about math.
The problem with California is money, not morons in the Board of Education. I got myself on the textbook review committee for our district the year they were redoing the set of biology books used. They were selected by a committee of bio teachers. They didn’t give us much time to review them, so I looked at what the books said about evolution. They were right on the money, with one exception. The book meant for the continuation school oversimplified things a bit. The book for AP had a full page interview with Richard Dawkins, which I thought was awesome.
My kids also had a nice section on comparative religions in their world history class, which was also well done. Purely factual, treated all religions with respect, and it probably would have given a fundie a fit. However I live in the Bay Area, and I think traditional Christians are a minority in my kids schools.
Yes, but it is a theory on the origins of man (among other species) which gets the Fundies’ knickers all in a twist. “You can’t teach my children that we came from monkeys! God made man in his current form 6,000 years ago from a cloud of smoke using super powers!”
Your opposition to cognitive dissonance is admirable. We of the Mother’s March Against Cognitive Dissonance also recognize, as you do, that CD is the number one threat to the Republic, and we must all…hey, stop that! Quit shoving! Man, that is so uncool!..I got a right to say…stop it!
I would be perfectly happy to have creationism taught in schools, as long as it’s in philosophy, history or religious studies classes.
Do you know why Texas gets so much pull with the text book publishers when CA has considerably more people than they do?
IIRC, you live in the East Bay, right? I wouldn’t be surprised if Christians were in the minority!
Just take cute little Toothy to the Raptor Whisperer, and all will be OK.
Actually it has. In Catholic schools. We had a bit of comparative religion in my Catholic high school, and again later on at St John’s University.
What else can they be with the amount of money they are given to work with. I can’t speak for the administrators, but teachers are being asked to do the work of about four people. There is no time left for the kind of learning situation that NinjaChick describes – a journey of discovery along with Darwin, for example.
But somehow, because some students insist and endure, schools do produce critical and creative thinkers like the best of the Dopers on this board.
NinjaChick, your ideas are the very best kind of education.
I believe it is still illegal to do that in any school within the U.S.
I’m flattered, but puzzled.
Well not all news is bad on the science versus creationism front.
The Tellus Science Museum opened last year smack dab in semi-rural, Bible-belty northwest Georgia. It’s a really nice facility, and a hot destination for school field trips. A kid will have a hard time seeing that place and not wondering if the Bible is really the straight dope.
The word “evolution” gets used a fair bit in astronomy. Galaxy evolution, evolution of the solar system, etc. We use it to mean “change over time”. Galaxy evolution is how galaxies change after they are formed.
Maybe, maybe not. I’m sure there are some kids who are using their religion’s opposition to evolution as an excuse to not have to put in the effort to study it. I’m sure there are some kids who are trying to get a discussion of creationism vs evolution started in class to waste class time.