|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Criticisms of Evolution? - 7/9/2008 5:10:19 PM
|
|
|
Carico
Posts: 532
Joined: 8/19/2005
Status: offline
|
Everyone knows, including all children that apes can't breed human descendants. What happens in the imaginations of men is not science so evolution should not be taught in the schools. But unfortunately, teachers are fired if they even say that evolution is a theory and even try to present Genesis as the cause of creation. So evolutionists are running scared because they are afraid to hear explanations of origins other than their own opinions. Fear of hearing opinions other than one's own opinion always demonstrates an inner knowledge that one's own opinion is false. 
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Criticisms of Evolution? - 7/9/2008 5:32:19 PM
|
|
|
Method
Posts: 1162
Joined: 9/19/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Carico
Everyone knows, including all children that apes can't breed human descendants.
Everyone, including children, are apes. Kind of shoots a hole in your whole argument.
Kids also know that Great Danes can't breed Chihuahuas. Does this mean that Chihuahuas and Great Danes are not dogs?
quote:
What happens in the imaginations of men is not science
Orthologous ERV's are not imagined.
quote:
But unfortunately, teachers are fired if they even say that evolution is a theory and even try to present Genesis as the cause of creation.
Evolution is a theory. No teacher should be fired for that. However, they should be fired for presenting religion in science class in public schools.
quote:
So evolutionists are running scared because they are afraid to hear explanations of origins other than their own opinions.
We aren't scared at all. What we don't like is religion being taught in science class. These supposed scared scientists are waiting for you at scientific conferences. Perhaps you should present your material there and see just how scared they really are.
quote:
Fear of hearing opinions other than one's own opinion always demonstrates an inner knowledge that one's own opinion is false.
Perhaps you should take that to heart.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Criticisms of Evolution? - 7/9/2008 7:26:52 PM
|
|
|
Bettawrekonize
Posts: 1458
Joined: 4/17/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Method
They should lose their job. Teaching kids that HIV does not lead to AIDS is extremely dangerous to their health, especially when they are at an age where they make bad decisions to begin with.
I didn't say that they should teach kids that HIV doesn't exist, I said that they should be able to teach kids the alleged arguments of those that believe HIV does not exist. Then they are free to refute them if they wish. If they want to teach students that HIV does not exist, they should also teach them criticisms and opposing views. If they want to teach students evolution, they should likewise teach them criticisms and opposing views.
quote:
Are you confident enough in teenagers for them to make in informed decision, a decision where their life hangs in the balance?
I think most teenagers know not to run around in traffic on freeways. Some teenagers are lifeguards at swimming pools and they're CPR certified.
quote:
I am not confident in the students.
Then they should not be taught evolution either.
quote:
I agree that everyone has biases and ideologies. It's impossible to be a human and avoid these things. However, this is exactly why we have science, to reduce the bias and ideology as much as we can.
Science is performed by scientists which are people who also have biases and ideologies.
quote:
There are ways to approach the subject, but I really don't see how a philosophy teacher would be equipped to tackle the finer points of biology.
Some biology teacher who is familiar with intelligent design would do (preferably an Intelligent Design advocate, but not necessarily, as long as criticisms and opposing views of evolution are fairly exposed to students).
quote:
These books did not pass peer review.
So? They do have criticisms and opposing views and if "scientists" feel those criticisms and opposing views are not adequate enough to "pass peer review" then they should be able to justify why they aren't to those who are exposed to evolution. In order to justify their position, those who are exposed to evolution should also be exposed to the strongest criticisms and opposing views and then "scientists" are free to explain why those criticisms and opposing views "fail peer review." If the secular community is unable to justify their position to those who are taught evolution then there is no reason for anyone to take their peer review process seriously.
quote:
If you won't put forth these criticisms to the experts in the field then they are not fit for the high school science class.
I do not mind the "experts in the field" reading them either. They are free to pick up Darwins black box and read it, I encourage them to. If the "experts" feel like the criticisms and opposing views should not "pass peer review" then they should be able to justify this position in the face of students that are taught evolution. To do so, those students should also be taught those criticisms and opposing views. If the experts can't defend their position, then why should I take them seriously?
quote:
It's not a belief. It's a fact. DBB did not pass peer review because Behe knew it wouldn't pass peer review. You want to run around the peer review process, not in the name of "academic freedom", but because ID is not scientific. Can you name one theory taught in any high school science class that did not first pass through peer review? I can't think of one. So why do these "criticisms" deserve special treatment?
Again, they don't have to label it science.
quote:
They do do this AT SCIENTIFIC CONFERENCES, NOT IN HIGH SCHOOLS.
I think that teaching students what is discussed at science conferences can only be helpful to their education.
quote:
Learning should not include being taught religion masquerading as science.
Again, they don't have to label it "science".
quote:
False dichotomy. Sometimes there aren't two sides.
Truth is independent of what "side" you take, but different people may take different positions and your opinion is not the ultimate authority over which position is correct (or "scientific" for that matter).
< Message edited by Bettawrekonize -- 7/9/2008 8:56:23 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Criticisms of Evolution? - 7/9/2008 7:32:11 PM
|
|
|
Bettawrekonize
Posts: 1458
Joined: 4/17/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Method
We aren't scared at all. What we don't like is religion being taught in science class. These supposed scared scientists are waiting for you at scientific conferences. Perhaps you should present your material there and see just how scared they really are.
They know that they are unable to justify their position to reject criticisms and opposing views of evolution in their peer review process so they resort to the censorship of those criticisms and opposing views in public schools. If they can't justify their position to reject criticisms and opposing views of evolution then there is no reason to take them seriously. Students should be allowed to be exposed to criticisms and opposing views of evolution and if the secular community is correct in rejecting evolution from their peer review process then they should have no problems refuting those criticisms and opposing views. If anything, doing this could help improve the education of students, if evolution is correct students would have a better understanding of why it stands up to criticisms and opposing views and why those criticisms and opposing views "fail peer review."
quote:
Mr. Stern said a survey of Louisiana public school science teachers a few years ago showed that many felt uncomfortable teaching evolution, global warming and other topics that "tend to be taught from only one perspective."
New front opens on evolution wars
It seems like many science teachers do want to be able to teach more perspectives on such issues, and they should be allowed to. They certainly should not be fired or in any other way dishonestly discriminated against, science does not promote an alleged consensus that maintains itself by method of dishonestly discriminating against those that disagree with it.
< Message edited by Bettawrekonize -- 7/9/2008 8:09:15 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Criticisms of Evolution? - 7/9/2008 11:19:49 PM
|
|
|
cih92
Posts: 95
Joined: 4/18/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
Then show me someone who does not have brain activity but still has thoughts.
When a believer dies, he goes to heaven. He is in a disembodied state with no brain activity, but he still has thoughts.
quote:
Actually, that is exactly what they are doing with fMRI. They are using brain activity to read people's thoughts.
Scientists can accurately predict which of a thousand pictures a person is looking at by analyzing brain activity using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). The approach should shed light on how the brain processes visual information, and it might one day be used to reconstruct dreams.
"[The research] suggests that fMRI-based measurements of brain activity contain much more information about underlying neural processes than has previously been appreciated," says Jack Gallant, a neuroscientist at the University of California, Berkeley, and senior author of the study.
http://www.technologyreview.com/Biotech/20380/?a=f
Just because there is a correlation between brain activity and thoughts does not mean that they are the same thing. Thoughts do not a certain frequency or amplitude.
quote:
quote:
Thoughts are not identical with brain waves because thoughts have different properties than brain waves.
quote:
Ocean waves have different properties than wind. Does this mean that waves are not caused by wind?
You misunderstood what I wrote. If I were to apply what I said about thoughts and brain waves to ocean waves and the wind, I would not draw the conclusion that waves are not caused by the wind. If you think that I would draw that conclusion, then you are misunderstanding what I said. The conclusion I would draw is that ocean waves are not the same as the wind.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Criticisms of Evolution? - 7/9/2008 11:29:02 PM
|
|
|
ianz
Posts: 338
Joined: 12/22/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bettawrekonize
I didn't say that they should teach kids that HIV doesn't exist, I said that they should be able to teach kids the alleged arguments of those that believe HIV does not exist. Then they are free to refute them if they wish. If they want to teach students that HIV does not exist, they should also teach them criticisms and opposing views. If they want to teach students evolution, they should likewise teach them criticisms and opposing views. Good grief--what if even one of the children in the class accepts the presented argument that HIV doesn't exist? Why don't we invite the local Nazis in and ask them to teach our kids about fascism and its benefits? How about the jihadists--let's wheel them in and promise boys 72 virgins if they follow their particular brand of religious fanaticism? (Heck, there's no HIV--why not!)
The power of persuasion is such that we risk our children being presented with bogus arguments that they accept, because they may lack the ability to judge otherwise.
I am all for educating children on how to judge what is presented to them. But we have to be careful to choose what to present, and present each on its merits--so automatically you require a filtering process. In science class, this is that what is taught must be peer-reviewed (and legal).
If you're going to give every non-peer-reviewed 'scientist' a crack at presenting his or her grand theory to children ... well, you're not, are you. So we put it all through a peer-review process. if you don't like it, suggest an alternative. What means should we adopt to filter what gets presented to our children in class?
Regards, Ian
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Criticisms of Evolution? - 7/9/2008 11:36:56 PM
|
|
|
Method
Posts: 1162
Joined: 9/19/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bettawrekonize
They know that they are unable to justify their position to reject criticisms and opposing views of evolution in their peer review process so they resort to the censorship of those criticisms and opposing views in public schools.
If they are not rejecting papers then where are the papers?
quote:
Students should be allowed to be exposed to criticisms and opposing views of evolution and if the secular community is correct in rejecting evolution from their peer review process then they should have no problems refuting those criticisms and opposing views.
As long as these criticisms pass peer review I agree. Where are these criticisms? 9th graders are not the arbiters of science. Scientists are. If you want criticisms taught then present them to scientists just like every other criticism taught in high school science classes must do.
quote:
If anything, doing this could help improve the education of students, if evolution is correct students would have a better understanding of why it stands up to criticisms and opposing views and why those criticisms and opposing views "fail peer review."
You just don't get it, do you? High schoolers do not have the knowledge to differentiate between valid and invalid criticisms of the theory of evolution. That is what peer review and science standard reviews are for, to make sure students are learning the best and most well supported theories. And again, you are running away from scientists to your preferred ignorant audience. Why is that?
quote:
Mr. Stern said a survey of Louisiana public school science teachers a few years ago showed that many felt uncomfortable teaching evolution, global warming and other topics that "tend to be taught from only one perspective."
Tough. If they don't like the theories then they need to do research and overturn those theories. They need to do SCIENCE.
quote:
It seems like many science teachers do want to be able to teach more perspectives on such issues, and they should be allowed to.
No, they shouldn't. Teachers should teach supported theories and not pseudoscience.
quote:
They certainly should not be fired or in any other way dishonestly discriminated against, science does not promote an alleged consensus that maintains itself by method of dishonestly discriminating against those that disagree with it.
Being fired for not doing your job is not discrimination.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Criticisms of Evolution? - 7/9/2008 11:45:46 PM
|
|
|
evry1needsgod
Posts: 500
Status: offline
|
quote:
Why don't we invite the local Nazis in and ask them to teach our kids about fascism and its benefits? How about the jihadists--let's wheel them in and promise boys 72 virgins if they follow their particular brand of religious fanaticism? (Heck, there's no HIV--why not!)
So this is what you compare a creationist to? Utterly despicable! You know that creationists have more of a foothold than the Nazis or Muslim Jihadists. Give me a break....
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Criticisms of Evolution? - 7/9/2008 11:58:26 PM
|
|
|
Method
Posts: 1162
Joined: 9/19/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: evry1needsgod
So this is what you compare a creationist to? Utterly despicable! You know that creationists have more of a foothold than the Nazis or Muslim Jihadists. Give me a break....
Such comparisons are unfair, but it does highlight how hollow the "teach both sides" argument really is. Sometimes there is only one side, and where science is concerend there is only one side where evolution is concerned. This can change in the future, but right now there is no competing scientific theory that challenges evolution.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Criticisms of Evolution? - 7/10/2008 12:23:51 AM
|
|
|
evry1needsgod
Posts: 500
Status: offline
|
quote:
Why don't we invite the local Nazis in and ask them to teach our kids about fascism and its benefits? How about the jihadists--let's wheel them in and promise boys 72 virgins if they follow their particular brand of religious fanaticism? (Heck, there's no HIV--why not!)
Well, this is just simply wrong. This is something every evolutionist believes, and there is nothing that they will ever accept that proves them wrong. Simply put, if evolution were as hard fact as you and every evolutionist claims it is, debate between millions of people would not exist. I know no one who debates the theory of gravity, so you can not compare evolution to gravity, or germs for that matter. Evolution is no where near as concrete as the theories you and others compare it to, and you are simply lying to the public. This is called social reinforcement, and this does not prove evolution is fact. I guess we will have to humbly agree to disagree. For those who are less learned on this subject - evolution IS NOT FACT and should not be treated as such, and don't let anyone tell you it is. It's a lie, period.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Criticisms of Evolution? - 7/10/2008 12:38:54 AM
|
|
|
Method
Posts: 1162
Joined: 9/19/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: evry1needsgod
Well, this is just simply wrong. This is something every evolutionist believes, and there is nothing that they will ever accept that proves them wrong. Simply put, if evolution were as hard fact as you and every evolutionist claims it is, debate between millions of people would not exist.
The debate exists because those millions believe that the theory conflicts with their religious views. More than 99% of biologists accept the theory.
quote:
I know no one who debates the theory of gravity, so you can not compare evolution to gravity, or germs for that matter.
Why not?
quote:
Evolution is no where near as concrete as the theories you and others compare it to, and you are simply lying to the public.
It is that concrete. Go to www.pubmed.com and search for "evolution". More than 200,000 papers will pop up.
quote:
This is called social reinforcement, and this does not prove evolution is fact. I guess we will have to humbly agree to disagree. For those who are less learned on this subject - evolution IS NOT FACT and should not be treated as such, and don't let anyone tell you it is. It's a lie, period.
For those who are not biologists they simply don't know how well supported, how well accepted, and how heavily the theory is used. Biologists USE the theory of evolution in their work, and with great results. It is no different than astronomers using the theory of relativity to explain gravitational lensing.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Criticisms of Evolution? - 7/10/2008 12:56:07 AM
|
|
|
ianz
Posts: 338
Joined: 12/22/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: evry1needsgod
quote:
Why don't we invite the local Nazis in and ask them to teach our kids about fascism and its benefits? How about the jihadists--let's wheel them in and promise boys 72 virgins if they follow their particular brand of religious fanaticism? (Heck, there's no HIV--why not!)
Well, this is just simply wrong. This is something every evolutionist believes, and there is nothing that they will ever accept that proves them wrong. Simply put, if evolution were as hard fact as you and every evolutionist claims it is, debate between millions of people would not exist. I know no one who debates the theory of gravity, so you can not compare evolution to gravity, or germs for that matter. Evolution is no where near as concrete as the theories you and others compare it to, and you are simply lying to the public. This is called social reinforcement, and this does not prove evolution is fact. I guess we will have to humbly agree to disagree. For those who are less learned on this subject - evolution IS NOT FACT and should not be treated as such, and don't let anyone tell you it is. It's a lie, period.
Hey take it easy--it was tongue-in-cheek. Betta suggested that we should include in the classroom teaching children that some people believe HIV doesn't exist. I wasn't making a comparison to creationists--I was making a comparison to teaching thatsome believe HIV doesn't exist.
Edit: PS Sorry it was not at all my intention to compare Nazis and jihadists to creationists. Believe me, atheists do not generally make that comparison. I hope you can see that I was not intending to do this but I can understand why you might have jumped to this conclusion.
< Message edited by ianz -- 7/10/2008 1:09:05 AM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Criticisms of Evolution? - 7/10/2008 1:17:32 AM
|
|
|
cih92
Posts: 95
Joined: 4/18/2005
Status: offline
|
One criticism of evolution I have heard is that certain structures such as the bacterial flagellum could not have come into existence by a step-by-step process, which evolution teaches. They came into existence all at once.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Criticisms of Evolution? - 7/10/2008 1:29:14 AM
|
|
|
Method
Posts: 1162
Joined: 9/19/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: cih92
One criticism of evolution I have heard is that certain structures such as the bacterial flagellum could not have come into existence by a step-by-step process, which evolution teaches. They came into existence all at once.
No one has shown that a bacterial flagellum came about in a single step. In fact, the proteins that make up the bac flag are important in other bacterial processes not related to the flagellum which means that the bacterial flagellum did not need to come about in a single step.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Criticisms of Evolution? - 7/10/2008 1:29:54 AM
|
|
|
gluadys
Posts: 1000
Joined: 4/26/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: cih92
One criticism of evolution I have heard is that certain structures such as the bacterial flagellum could not have come into existence by a step-by-step process, which evolution teaches. They came into existence all at once.
That is the ID critique. But the claim that it must have all come into existence as a whole is not well-supported. There is some evidence that parts of the flagellum did, or at least could have, existed before the flagellum and been co-opted into the flagellum when it was formed. It is not a clear case that this is how the flagellum formed, but it is enough to indicate that the claim the flagellum could not have formed incrementally is not solid either.
Some other structures have also been put forward with this claim, but various incremental pathways to their formation have also been proposed with evidence that these are probable. Another thread on this forum, for example, refers to new evidence of a transition in the formation of the vertebrate eye.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Criticisms of Evolution? - 7/10/2008 9:09:14 AM
|
|
|
Bettawrekonize
Posts: 1458
Joined: 4/17/2005
Status: offline
|
To further demonstrate that biology teachers should be allowed to teach criticisms and opposing views of evolution
quote:
Less than one-third of high school biology teachers believe that God had no part in evolution, nearly one-half believe God had a hand in evolution, and almost one in six believe that God created humans in their present form within the last 10,000 years.
Teaching Evolution? Many High School Biology Teachers Include Creationism In Their Curriculum
Many do think that criticisms and opposing views are valid and they should be allowed to express those criticisms and opposing views.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Criticisms of Evolution? - 7/10/2008 9:16:26 AM
|
|
|
Bettawrekonize
Posts: 1458
Joined: 4/17/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Method
If they are not rejecting papers then where are the papers?
If they are rejecting papers, the question is can they justify to students why those papers are being rejected. If they reject criticisms and opposing views of evolution then they should have a valid justification for doing so. Students should be exposed to criticisms and opposing views and then the secular community is free to explain to students why those criticisms and opposing views are rejected. Then the students can determine for themselves if the alleged reasons for rejection are valid. If the reasons are valid then this would be a beneficial experience for students to further their education.
quote:
As long as these criticisms pass peer review I agree. Where are these criticisms? 9th graders are not the arbiters of science. Scientists are. If you want criticisms taught then present them to scientists just like every other criticism taught in high school science classes must do.
I never said that 9th graders are the arbitrators of science, just that they should be exposed to criticisms and opposing views. If your beliefs are correct then exposing those students to criticisms and opposing views and then justifying why they are rejected would only further their education. The problem is that you know the reasons for rejection are invalid.
quote:
You just don't get it, do you? High schoolers do not have the knowledge to differentiate between valid and invalid criticisms of the theory of evolution.
I disagree. If you are correct in that they don't have such knowledge, then they should be taught those criticisms and opposing views and then they should be taught why they are allegedly invalid. The purpose of school is to give them such knowledge.
quote:
That is what peer review and science standard reviews are for, to make sure students are learning the best and most well supported theories. And again, you are running away from scientists to your preferred ignorant audience. Why is that?
I am not running away from scientists, I encourage them to read Darwins black box and other books criticizing evolution.
quote:
Tough. If they don't like the theories then they need to do research and overturn those theories. They need to do SCIENCE.
Again, science welcomes academic freedom and open inquiry. Maintaining evolution by method of brainwashing students with it and censoring criticisms and opposing views is not science, it's dishonest.
quote:
No, they shouldn't. Teachers should teach supported theories and not pseudoscience.
Teachers should be allowed to teach critical thinking and that includes critical thinking against evolution.
quote:
Being fired for not doing your job is not discrimination.
Doing their job includes teaching critical thinking skills and that includes critical thinking against evolution. Taxpayers are the ones paying for public schools so tax payers as a whole should decide what their jobs are, not a select few. I encourage taxpayers to decide that their jobs are to teach critical thinking skills, and if they are to teach evolution then that includes critical thinking skills for and against evolution, and to then ensure that teachers do their jobs.
< Message edited by Bettawrekonize -- 7/10/2008 9:24:34 AM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Criticisms of Evolution? - 7/10/2008 9:33:59 AM
|
|
|
hellohellohi
Posts: 538
Joined: 12/10/2007
From: North Carolina!
Status: offline
|
bettawrekonize and co.,
I think criticisms of evolution ought to be raised and ought also to be written into the science curriculum. It would be great, really, because it would give students a sense that there are many unanswered, seemingly posable questions in science -- that there is more work to be done, some of which will be left to their and further generations!
However, what would y'all say to the notion that criticisms need not at all represent another competing, coherent "theory;" they could just be that: criticism of that existing.
The religious component of criticism, furthermore, is completely superfluous if the criticism is valid on its own. And I think many criticms, even those raised by creationists or IDers are perfectly valid.
Make sense? Have I helped y'all see to a better approach to this matter?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Criticisms of Evolution? - 7/10/2008 9:48:20 AM
|
|
|
Bettawrekonize
Posts: 1458
Joined: 4/17/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: hellohellohi
I think criticisms of evolution ought to be raised and ought also to be written into the science curriculum.
They don't necessarily have to label those opposing views "science" (or even write them into the "science' curriculum) but I do think that students who are exposed to evolution should likewise be exposed to opposing views (like Creationism and Intelligent design). They can call it philosophy for all I care and teach it in a philosophy class, as long as they get a fair hearing (and I encourage them to criticize those opposing views as well).
quote:
Despite a court-ordered ban on the teaching of creationism in US schools, about one in eight high-school biology teachers still teach it as valid science, a survey reveals
16% of US science teachers are creationists
These people deserve the right to present their views to students without being fired or in any other way dishonestly discriminated against. Currently, UCD and other naturalistic philosophies maintain themselves by method of discriminating against scientists and teachers that may question them. This isn't science, it's dishonest.
< Message edited by Bettawrekonize -- 7/10/2008 10:16:39 AM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Criticisms of Evolution? - 7/10/2008 10:29:48 AM
|
|
|
drj11
Posts: 632
Joined: 3/29/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bettawrekonize
They don't necessarily have to label those opposing views "science" (or even write them into the "science' curriculum) but I do think that students who are exposed to evolution should likewise be exposed to opposing views (like Creationism and Intelligent design). They can call it philosophy for all I care and teach it in a philosophy class, as long as they get a fair hearing (and I encourage them to criticize those opposing views as well).
I don't think I've seen anyone argue that there can't be lessons in more philosophical type classes or comparative religion classes about creationism, or philosophical arguments like the 'argument from design'. I don't know how many high schools actually even offer classes like that though. Many creationists/ID'ists dont seem to want to compromise there though... they want ID/creation in the science class, and presented in a way to unfairly marginalize evolution.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Criticisms of Evolution? - 7/10/2008 10:38:39 AM
|
|
|
Bettawrekonize
Posts: 1458
Joined: 4/17/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: drj11
I don't think I've seen anyone argue that there can't be lessons in more philosophical type classes or comparative religion classes about creationism, or philosophical arguments like the 'argument from design'. I don't know how many high schools actually even offer classes like that though. Many creationists/ID'ists dont seem to want to compromise there though... they want ID/creation in the science class, and presented in a way to unfairly marginalize evolution.
Teaching criticisms and opposing views does not unfairly marginalize evolution. The only reason it should marginalize evolution is if evolution does not stand up to those criticisms and opposing views. If evolution does stand up to those criticisms and opposing views then teaching those criticisms and opposing views would only enhance evolution because it would show students that evolution is capable of defending itself in the face of scrutiny. If it does weaken evolution it's only because students are seeing that evolution is incapable of defending itself in the face of scrutiny.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Criticisms of Evolution? - 7/10/2008 10:43:48 AM
|
|
|
hellohellohi
Posts: 538
Joined: 12/10/2007
From: North Carolina!
Status: offline
|
quote:
They don't necessarily have to label those opposing views "science" (or even write them into the "science' curriculum) but I do think that students who are exposed to evolution should likewise be exposed to opposing views (like Creationism and Intelligent design). They can call it philosophy for all I care and teach it in a philosophy class, as long as they get a fair hearing (and I encourage them to criticize those opposing views as well).
Wow, this is very fair!
Also, however, I think fair criticisms of it, such as the questions that have been raised about the role of proteins in the causal chain of heredity, should be raised in science class itself.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Criticisms of Evolution? - 7/10/2008 11:00:01 AM
|
|
|
Method
Posts: 1162
Joined: 9/19/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bettawrekonize
Many do think that criticisms and opposing views are valid and they should be allowed to express those criticisms and opposing views.
They should be allowed to present these criticisms to scientists, and once those criticisms have passed peer review they can be taught at the high school level. Again, high schoolers are not equipped to understand these criticisms or the theory itself.
However, if university level professors have problems with the theory it would be appropriate for them to teach these criticisms in an upper division class where students have the proper understanding of the theory. This is the correct arena to discuss criticisms of the theory, regardless of their merit. However, the professors need to take responsibility for the quality of their class. If they teach poor science, regardless of the theories taught or criticized, then they should not gripe if they receive a poor review. Do you agree with this?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Criticisms of Evolution? - 7/10/2008 11:11:08 AM
|
|
|
Bettawrekonize
Posts: 1458
Joined: 4/17/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: hellohellohi
Wow, this is very fair!
Most creationists and intelligent design advocates are fair, the media portrays them otherwise. What you see in the media is not what we argue, it's mostly rhetoric designed to fool the public into thinking that critics of evolution (and other naturalistic philosophies) are unfair and crazy.
< Message edited by Bettawrekonize -- 7/10/2008 11:21:49 AM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Criticisms of Evolution? - 7/10/2008 11:13:43 AM
|
|
|
Bettawrekonize
Posts: 1458
Joined: 4/17/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Method
They should be allowed to present these criticisms to scientists, and once those criticisms have passed peer review they can be taught at the high school level. Again, high schoolers are not equipped to understand these criticisms or the theory itself.
The purpose of school is to equip them and in order to equip them, students who are exposed to evolution should likewise be exposed to criticisms and opposing views (and criticisms of those criticisms and opposing views, etc...). If those criticisms and opposing views don't "pass peer review" then certainly those "scientists" who decided that they fail should be able to adequately justify their position and students who are exposed to evolution should be exposed to criticisms and opposing views (and then the secular community is free to explain to students why criticisms and opposing views of evolution allegedly fail peer review).
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
