Latest Challenges to the Teaching of Evolution

@spendius,

If I had the science background, I could do it. In fact, I know a teacher who does have the science background who emobodies and I mean TOTALLY embodies this:

Quote:

but only if you could find teachers who were willing to suspend their own agenda and be objective enough to gather and present all the information in an evenhanded manner. The point would be for the students to be given the information - not for the students to be guided into an opinion

.
You apparently do have the science background - why don't you write the curriculum and do it?

1 Reply

@aidan,

Quote:

Well, I think we need a linguistic practioner on this thread to translate for me the FACT that PRESENTING a theory carries no implied ENDORSEMENT of that theory if you are also PRESENTING all of the other theories with equal objectivity.

I do think there are teachers who can do that. Apparently some people have never experienced that so they don't believe it is possible.

Maybe that's why they only want these kids to hear one side.

I think it is impossible to find teachers who can do that. Speak your weight machines get close and railstation announcements. Some might like to think they can do it but I'm afraid it is impossible. The teacher in an actual classroom for months or years on end brings a whole load of subjective baggage which even J.K Galbraith and Thorstein Veblen couldn't overcome and they were trying.

1 Reply

@edgarblythe,

I have no response to this because I have no idea what you mean except to say that the course would include the theory of evolution. How could that possibly be stepping back in time before all the facts of evolution were born out?

It wouldn't be misleading anyone - it would be collating all the information of all the theories and presenting them- I think it would be clarifying and enlightening.

But you believe what you want to believe.

2 Replies

@aidan,

And I just went back and read all my posts and I never ONCE used the term 'pros and cons'.

1 Reply

@aidan,

Quote:

You apparently do have the science background - why don't you write the curriculum and do it?

I'm not volunteering to be run out of town on a pole tarred and feathered.

0 Replies

@spendius,

Quote:

The teacher in an actual classroom for months or years on end brings a whole load of subjective baggage which even J.K Galbraith and Thorstein Veblen couldn't overcome and they were trying.

Well maybe that's true. Maybe since it's a survey course you could have an evolutionist come in to teach the evolution unit. You could have a creationist come in and teach the creationist unit....you know in that way you'd have each subject being presented by people who believed in what they were saying. Yeah, actually that'd be a better way to do it. Then the kids really would have a more objective view toward each separate theory as they wouldn't be attaching their feelings about the person presenting to the theory itself.

I think this is just getting better and better....

2 Replies

@aidan,

Quote:

Maybe since it's a survey course you could have an evolutionist come in to teach the evolution unit. You could have a creationist come in and teach the creationist unit....you know in that way you'd have each subject being presented by people who believed in what they were saying.

But suppose the kids were more drawn to other characteristics which the teachers exhibited. Like the evolution teacher was a spotty, four-eyed wimp with a second-hand car made in Poland and the creation teacher had all the girls swooning over him, coached the football squad and drove a customized souped up Buick 6.

I could elaborate on that but the Colts/ Jaguars game is on in a few minutes. Sky Sports. First things first.

1 Reply

@spendius,

That's a dilemma. I'll have to think about how to get around that sort of thing.

And just for the record, I am not a young earth creationist and I do understand carbon dating and I do believe that the fossil record is indicative of the true age of the earth and I also have two children and I would have no problem with them taking such a course and hearing what a creationist had to say. I think it'd be an interesting addition to their fund of general knowledge and make them more informed and well-rounded people.

I would never want them to disagree with something unless they were clear about what exactly they were disagreeing with and why first.

0 Replies

@aidan,

I give up. It makes no practical sense to have such a class.

2 Replies

@aidan,

You weren't being tagged with that particular phraseology -- it's the gist of what you are advocating. Weighing facts against the approach for arriving at those facts and the conclusions are the pros-and-cons regarding any science, but, in this case a science that explains where we came from. Not teaching evolution in a curriculum because of a fear that it will steer young minds into atheism is ridiculous on the surface and insane at the core.

2 Replies

@edgarblythe,

It would be a classroom for fools and charlatans.

0 Replies

@edgarblythe,

Don't worry - you wouldn't have to take it - no one would - it'd be an elective. But I've talked to quite a few people over here (atheist/agnostic doctors included) who said they'd find it very interesting.

To each his/her own.

0 Replies

@Lightwizard,

Okay - here's another thought. This is ONE class in which evolution theory could be taught. It wouldn't be the only one. There could be others. You know, just like teachers use the Diary of Anne Frank in English class AND in history class.

I never proposed that this would be the be all and end all of evolution theory in the public schools.

It would not negate the scientific merit of the teaching of evolution. In fact, it would make at least the introduction of it more available to more students because someone like me - who would never choose to take a science class I didn't absolutely have to take - all of my electives were in literature or psychology or sociology - might actually take a class such as this and be exposed to a little more science than I'd have been otherwise.

Quote:

Not teaching evolution in a curriculum because of a fear that it will steer young minds into atheism is ridiculous on the surface and insane at the core.

I never said this.

I think you guys have been out of schools too long to be aware of what is possible, and actually what is happening in some schools. I also think you give kids too little credit in terms of what they're capable of understanding.

2 Replies

I do not see any reason to have a separate elective class on the evolution-creationism debate. There is not enough material to teach an entire class. In U.S. history, our teacher briefly discussed the cultural reasons why teachers were prevented from teaching evolution in some American schools. There was really not much to say. In my class on world history, there was a brief discussion on how the heliocentric theory replaced the geocentric theory. Why the need for a separate class on either topic?

2 Replies

@wandeljw,

And when where you in highschool? I'll assume it's been at least as long ago as when I was in highschool. The explosion of information in terms of evolutionary discoveries in the last twenty years has been phenomenal. I was just reading an article yesterday in which they spoke of isolating genetic material that causes specific sorts of cancer in specific people to the point that they will be able to personalize cancer treatments - not to the type of cancer- but to the specific cancer in that specific person. THAT will have an effect on the way our species evolves. They've also determined that genetic material donated by the male to an offspring has a totally different effect than the same genetic material donated by the female. So in other words, if a child gets a copy of a certain gene from his mother, he will have an increased risk for diabetes. But if he gets a copy of the same gene from the father, he will have increased protection for diabetes.
THAT discovery will have an effect on the evolution of our species.

I'm in major disagreement that there wouldn't be enough material to cover to fill a class, even just with the science, but when you add in the cultural, historical and political influences and repercussions - I don't think a creative thinker would run out of material for such a class.

But you know what - I get it. I understand you guys disagree. That's not going to change my mind though. Just as I understand you won't change yours.

1 Reply

@aidan,

Quote:

Well, I think we need a linguistic practioner on this thread to translate for me the FACT that PRESENTING a theory carries no implied ENDORSEMENT of that theory if you are also PRESENTING all of the other theories with equal objectivity.

This is the problem I have with everything youve been presenting. If you preent the theory of natural selection, what is another theory that stands up next to it and is equally compelling?? If you are perfectly objective, youll have to agree that there IS NO "other theory" out there.
If you call ID or creationism "theories", then I wonder how much weve actually accomplished by teaching these kids biology , chemistry, and physics.

Quote:

Maybe ,since it's a survey course, you could have an evolutionist come in to teach the evolution unit. You could have a creationist come in and teach the creationist unit....you know in that way you'd have each subject being presented by people who believed in what they were saying.

And then you follwo up with this. Why not have an animist come in and preent a "theory" that the earth arose in 4 stages on the back of a cosmic turtle? WOuld that be beneficial?
I think it would be a disaster. The "very bright kids" might get the dichotomy and the humor, but, when a Creationist comes into the classroom, all shiny suited and slick talking, how does a high school teacher properly moderate the proceedings ?
Most all high school teachers ARE NOT experts in the subject they teach. They are, in reality, experts on the process of teaching kids. The subjects arent able to be presented with some philosophical goal of "critical thinking" until the kids are fairly well grounded in the subjects you wish to "survey". ALso, how would your course NOT be in the science curriculum?

I often act as a judge in High SChool Scince and EBgineering fairs. EVery year, in the three counties I volunteer, we have at least one or two students who do actual projects in "SCIENCE" using the "theories of Biblical science" as the core of their projects.
Im in a minority who feels that this kind of crap shouldnt be entertained and tolerated out of some "religious respect". These projects are travesties to the principles of science and they can be somewhat SCARY when we think about the fact that these kids, presenting their projects, are possibly the best and brightest in thwior classes and nobody is guiding their young minds except some Midieval Thinking about the inerrancy of the Bible.

I guess you know where I stand on this . If you came to a high school near me and presented a syllabus for such a survey course, I would ask to be on the board meeting agenda to critically question the basis and goals of your survey course.

There is no valid , objective alternative to a biology curriculum or a physical science curriculum thatis based upon two realities:

1. The earth is very old and we have very strong evidence of this fact

2. Evolution and natural selection are the guiding theories of biological thought.

ANYTHING ELSE IS RELIGION AND MYTH .

2 Replies

Why not have a course in the worlds religions and teach all creationist ideas ? And science can still be taught as a seperate subject.

0 Replies

@aidan,

Quote:

And when where you in highschool?

What wandel meant (I am sure) , is that , from the Creationist side, theres not enough actual information available unless we teach the kids ONLY about how the Creationists have NEVER conducted any researchor have been able to present a convincing evidence strewn argument about their "beliefs".
Their argument could be presented in about two minutes and then what? Does your course become a discussion of evolution only? Ok then its morphs into a science class after all.

0 Replies

@Lightwizard,

Quote:

Not teaching evolution in a curriculum because of a fear that it will steer young minds into atheism is ridiculous on the surface and insane at the core.

And that's meaningless. It's just an assertion. Which some might say is insane on the grounds that meaningless noises are the equivalent of a squeaky door hinge.

A creationist might easily say "Not teaching evolution in a curriculum because of a fear that it will steer young minds into atheism is responsible on the surface and necessary at the core".

And with you anti-IDers ducking the issue of how 301 million atheists would organise their society it is eminently defensible despite assertions that such a defence is trolling on a thread about challenges to teaching evolution.

Quote:

a science that explains where we came from.

Unless the explanation goes all the way it is a similar explanation to saying that the bus comes from round the corner rather than from a process of scientific and technological development dating back to the good bishop Cusanus of Brixen and beyond to Jesus. And even that explanation of where the bus came from is unsatisfactory because Jesus was socialised.

We will never know where we came from and so the maternity ward is as good an explanation as any other except for those making a living hunting fossils and interpreting them.

To tell the kids that you know where we came from is a downright lie and such things don't belong in science classes or any other classes.

Quote:

It would be a classroom for fools and charlatans

Which is also meaningless and compounds the previous insanity.

An oilcan is called for.

1 Reply

@spendius,

Quote:

And with you anti-IDers ducking the issue of how 301 million atheists would organise their society it is eminently defensible despite assertions that such a defence is trolling on a thread about challenges to teaching evolution.

It appears that the spendi-one is terrified of the world suddenly becoming atheistic . Try to relax spendi, when we take over we will be releasing all prisoners after a relatively short period of retraining.

1 Reply

Latest Challenges to the Teaching of Evolution

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know