Worrying news from UK schools. A third of British teachers believe creationism, the idea that Earth and human beings were created by some kind of deity, should be given the same status as science in the classroom.
According to a survey of 1200 teachers by Teachers’ TV, nearly nine out of ten also think that they should discuss creationism or intelligent design ( which states that life is too complex to be explained purely by evolution) if pupils raise the subject in a science lesson. This is about as sensible as giving a joint lesson on astronomy and astrology.
The problem is that creationism and evolution are two totally different categories of thinking. Creationism is a fixed theory, cast in stone, which relies totally on blind faith. Evolution, our current best guide to how the human race developed, is based on evidence and logical thinking and is constantly being adapted in the light of new research.
School students need to understand the difference. By learning and using scientific method, namely testing hypotheses by examining the evidence and then deducing the most likely conclusions, they will gain valuable techniques for future life and will be less likely to fall prey to cranks and snake oil artists, religious, political or otherwise.
By all means tackle the subject of creationism, but do it in general or moral studies. Just keep it out of the science department.
3 Comments
Greetings,
Intelligent design/creationism is not only cherry-picked science, it is faulty theology as well. Startling as it may seem, by continually protesting that “blind” chance could only lead to “accidental evolution”, all denialist forms of creationism contradict the Bible’s clear teachings that chance occurrence in the universe (randomness), is always under God’s direct control!…Oops! Try this:
http://open.salon.com/content.php?cid=34289
It’s called: “Intelligent Design Rules Out God’s Sovereignty Over Chance”
I expect there is a large body of students for which creationism is a more appropriate thing to learn whether it is true or not. You are assuming that everyone has the minds of scientists - they don’t by a very long shot. If you can stress how science relies upon material evidence and how evidence collated from elsewhere isn’t worth a bean I expect you’re onto a winner. Good luck one & all.
Why is it that evolutionists are so blinkered to the possibility that there pet, naturalistic theory just might have some holes in it? It has nothing to do with science, as many leading scientists reject much of the evolutionist arguments as flawed.
That highly educated and thoughtful people, like teachers, hold that there just might be an alternative to Darwinistic evolutionism is rejected, and sarcastic denouncements of their intelligence is stated.
The real cherrypicking is seen by evolutionists listening to those who promote their favoured viewpoint only and rejecting any who disagree with them. That my friends is NOT true science.