Wednesday, August 24, 2005
Teaching the truth: Kevin Drum has a post about the politics surrounding the teaching of evolution and in addition to his own view, cites Yglesias on the topic. They both take the view that since evolution isn't very popular ( Yglesias: "less popular than gay marriage, less popular than the abolition of the death penalty"), that some sort of accomodation should be made with the anti-evolution crowd. Yglesias is wrong to put evolution in the same category as gay marriage and the death penalty. The latter two are matters of opinion. Evolution is not. It is "true" in the sense that it conforms to a rational analysis of empirical data. Compromise can be made on a number of issues of opinion (drug laws, sex laws, economic laws), but how does one compromise with a falsehood? One need not, as Yglesias puts it "point, sneer, and mock" those who don't accept evolution. Maybe some liberal bloggers do that, but that's hardly a reason to walk away from the debate. The best way to go about it is to remain calm and patiently explain (again and again) what science is, how it works, and why the theory of evolution is the result of the scientific method.
posted by Quiddity at 8/24/2005 07:31:00 AM
8 comments
As I pointed out at Bad Attitudes (http://badattitudes.com/MT), using the Yglesias standard means we should be teaching about UFOs in schools. Since 80 percent of Americans believe in UFOs, it would be wrong of us to either not teach UFOlogy, or to sneer and mock it.
The slow, repeated explanation of how evolution works and how ID/creationism isn't science is what has been going on for years.
The ID's new tactic is to attact science and a frontal attack on the scientific method.
They are using tried and true right-wing strategy --- if you repeat a falsehood enough times without relenting (or blinking your eyes) it becomes truth. They claim the scientific method is not a valid methodology.
I believe the seed of their anti-scientific leanings were planted by scientific threats to their religious beliefs. But is the past decade have been pushed by the global warming controversy.
A few weeks ago, radio station KPCC in Pasadena had a discussion on ID which turned into an attack on sceince. Go to this link: Intelligent Design
Note how the proponent of ID brags about his philosphical training
and his use of the socratic method in teaching but then he tries to shut-down all opposing arguments with ad hominem and ad popularum attacks or by changing the subject.
ID competes with many other religions and should ID be "taught" in school, all those other suppositions should also be taught.
Evolution is a theory, like gravity or relativity and unlike religions.
To "elevate" ID to a theory demonstrates clear misunderstandings about what the scientic method is all about.
It is bad enough that the ID/creationists do not understand evolution at all. Now they want to teach their favorite feelings as though those feelings are the same as a "theory"?
Boy, talk about taking society back to the "Dark Ages" where goblins were the accepted "explanation" for noises in the forest and the "solar system" was earth centric.
Patient explanations are of no avail in this debate. The Republican/right-wing strategy has been to mock and sneer, deride and pooh-pooh universally accepted facts. For example, the continued push of supply-side economics even in the face of its massive and evident failure under Reagan and its continued massive and evident failure under Bush. "Never mind those stupid budget numbers--lower taxes produces more tax revenue, I tell you!"
And so it is going with the Evolution/ID debate. The only reasonable response--indeed, the only response most Americans would truly understand--is to ridicule the ID crowd. Only by portraying this as the ignorance-encouraging, believe-in-fairies nonsense that it is will we get people deciding that fact-based reality is better than anything-goes faith-based education.
Derelict
OK, if we can teach ID in the schools, I'd rather see us teach it side-by-side with the Navaho story of creation and the Norse story of creation. ID has no more relevance to science than any other creation myth.
It's a real problem when most of the country believes myth over science, but it sure explains recent voting patterns. Maybe some of these genuises will wake up as we loose our competative edge to places like China, where religions like Communism are falling away in favor of rational thought..
I don't understand why fundamentalists want to take over the public schools. The vast majority of Christian fundamentalists do not send their children to public schools as it already stands. They go to private christian schools that teach them the kind of myths and lies that their parents want them to spout back.
is matty auditioning for dnc so called strategist? it's this kind of capitulative selling out of principle for political expediency that validates the rightwing critique that democrats don't stand for anything anymore. even more corrosive this type of giving in on everything paints the party as weak. if we are too cowtowed to stand up for our convictions, people will wonder if we are strong enough to stand up to al quaeda.
|
