The Dominance of Evolution: The Only Way to Avoid Bias In the Classroom
Due to my wife's injury, blogging has definitely taken a backseat (as it should), but I will continue to do my best at consistency. As best I can, I continue to follow the trial in Pennsylvania regarding the teaching of Intelligent Design Theory in the classroom. Of course, describing it as "teaching" is quite a stretch, since the whole case is over whether or not a brief and simplistic paragraph on the existence of an opposing theory can be read before the teacher engages in an entire course of study on Darwinism.
Yesterday, while reading the Louisville Courier-Journal, I came across an article on the subject in which concerns were voiced within the Rio Rancho, New Mexico school board by faculty who are "averse to teaching a concept whose scientific validity has been questioned." If that is the concern, then Darwinism needs to be scrapped as well. As a matter of fact, the validity of Darwinism's "scientific validity" is being questioned more and more everyday as people are coming to realize that this weak, philosophical framework is not only full of holes, but unable to adequately come to terms with the reasons for which it should even be taken seriously. After all, if intelligence grew from random mutations, there is no reason to accept any statements, beliefs, or propositions as trustworthy (grounded in fact/reality), including Darwinism itself. But the kicker is that no one lives this way! To believe that Darwinism is true, you must do so from the foundation of a worldview other than Darwinism. Naturalism, the worldview upon which Darwinism is built, offers no grounds by which this type of certainty can be upheld. Sorry, folks, it's just not there.
Let's apply this teacher's philosophy to other areas of life and see if we support his argument: Microsoft, which dominates the software industry, grows to such a degree that every computer in the world is running Windows (quite a stretch, huh?). Then some developers come up with a new operating system that they call Linux. They do so because they feel that Windows isn't as great as everyone believes and doesn't like Microsoft maintaining a monopoly with an inferior OS (remember this is an analogy...I make no statements regarding the superiority of Linux or MS...so to the computer geeks who may take this way too seriously I say, relax.) However, as they attempt to introduce this new operating system to the market, the United States government prohibits them. Why? Because they don't want to introduce bias into the system. Of course, we all know that the only way to prevent such a monopoly is to eliminate the competition. What a wonderful idea that is.
Secondly, teachers who make statements like the above-mentioned are already preaching in the classroom. Only, they are preaching the religion of Darwinism. For an hour everyday, these students are attending a church service in which they are involuntarily submitted to the indoctrination and prosylitazation of these Darwinian science teachers. I know I've just upset a bunch of Darwinists because only they are allowed to use such language in attacking ID. But it's high time we call a spade a spade. Darwinism is nothing less than a religion based on a philosophic worldview in which a large number of scientists (though not a majority of Americans) are predisposed to believing by faith, absent conclusive scientific evidence. Sure, they'll spew out mouthfuls of vitriol against ID and those who adhere to it, but their verbal attacks do not...cannot...change the facts regarding their substandard and ineffective worldview.
Rick Cole, a science teacher from the one of the local high schools who has taught ID alongside evolution for 11 years before being ordered to stop sums it up pretty well in the concluding remarks of the article:
For anyone wanting to know why Intelligent Design will dominate at the end of the day, this article by Doug Kern is a must-read. Also, Alex Forrest has a good post here on the application of Intelligent Design in real life.
UPDATE: Check out this post at Short Attention Span;
10-11-05 UPDATE: Read this article from todays edition of USA Today, "The Whole World, From Whose Hands?"
Yesterday, while reading the Louisville Courier-Journal, I came across an article on the subject in which concerns were voiced within the Rio Rancho, New Mexico school board by faculty who are "averse to teaching a concept whose scientific validity has been questioned." If that is the concern, then Darwinism needs to be scrapped as well. As a matter of fact, the validity of Darwinism's "scientific validity" is being questioned more and more everyday as people are coming to realize that this weak, philosophical framework is not only full of holes, but unable to adequately come to terms with the reasons for which it should even be taken seriously. After all, if intelligence grew from random mutations, there is no reason to accept any statements, beliefs, or propositions as trustworthy (grounded in fact/reality), including Darwinism itself. But the kicker is that no one lives this way! To believe that Darwinism is true, you must do so from the foundation of a worldview other than Darwinism. Naturalism, the worldview upon which Darwinism is built, offers no grounds by which this type of certainty can be upheld. Sorry, folks, it's just not there.
The thing that makes me nervous is that in the classroom a teacher is to be unbiased, but students are allowed to express their opinions. Can a teacher remain unbiased? Can we keep it from becoming a preaching session?The teacher who made this statement in the article doesn't believe what he is saying for two reasons: First, the statement itself belies the bias he feels towards Evolution. If teachers like this truly wanted to be unbiased, they would desire to teach both theories equally. One doesn't battle bias by eliminating other possibilities.
Let's apply this teacher's philosophy to other areas of life and see if we support his argument: Microsoft, which dominates the software industry, grows to such a degree that every computer in the world is running Windows (quite a stretch, huh?). Then some developers come up with a new operating system that they call Linux. They do so because they feel that Windows isn't as great as everyone believes and doesn't like Microsoft maintaining a monopoly with an inferior OS (remember this is an analogy...I make no statements regarding the superiority of Linux or MS...so to the computer geeks who may take this way too seriously I say, relax.) However, as they attempt to introduce this new operating system to the market, the United States government prohibits them. Why? Because they don't want to introduce bias into the system. Of course, we all know that the only way to prevent such a monopoly is to eliminate the competition. What a wonderful idea that is.
Secondly, teachers who make statements like the above-mentioned are already preaching in the classroom. Only, they are preaching the religion of Darwinism. For an hour everyday, these students are attending a church service in which they are involuntarily submitted to the indoctrination and prosylitazation of these Darwinian science teachers. I know I've just upset a bunch of Darwinists because only they are allowed to use such language in attacking ID. But it's high time we call a spade a spade. Darwinism is nothing less than a religion based on a philosophic worldview in which a large number of scientists (though not a majority of Americans) are predisposed to believing by faith, absent conclusive scientific evidence. Sure, they'll spew out mouthfuls of vitriol against ID and those who adhere to it, but their verbal attacks do not...cannot...change the facts regarding their substandard and ineffective worldview.
Rick Cole, a science teacher from the one of the local high schools who has taught ID alongside evolution for 11 years before being ordered to stop sums it up pretty well in the concluding remarks of the article:
The teachings avoided religious discussions, Cole said. According to student surveys he collected through the time he taught intelligent design, 98 percent of the nearly 1,000 students he taught preferred a side-by-side presentation, he said.To all of those teachers of evolution who fear the controversy, grow a backbone (it's OK, surely you've evolved that far).
'When it comes to the origin of life, it's been very much a closed market, and no opportunity to consider alternative explanation,' said Cole, who hopes to restore intelligent design this year. 'The majority of science teachers choose to avoid the subject because of the controversy; they would just rather not even teach it.'
For anyone wanting to know why Intelligent Design will dominate at the end of the day, this article by Doug Kern is a must-read. Also, Alex Forrest has a good post here on the application of Intelligent Design in real life.
UPDATE: Check out this post at Short Attention Span;
10-11-05 UPDATE: Read this article from todays edition of USA Today, "The Whole World, From Whose Hands?"
Labels: David C. Price
posted by DAVID C. PRICE at 10/10/2005 10:25:00 PM
|
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home